OFFICIAL AGENDA HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION CITY OF STARKVILLE, MISSISSIPPI REGULAR MEETING OF TUESDAY, JULY 26, 2011 CITY HALL COURTROOM, 101 E. LAMPKIN STREET, 5:30 PM I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND MOMENT OF SILENCE III. ROLL CALL IV. INTRODUCTION OF NEW COMMISSION MEMBER BRIAR JONES V. CONSIDERATION OF THE OFFICIAL AGENDA VI. CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF THE JUNE 28, 2011 MEETING MINUTES VII. CITIZEN COMMENTS VIII. OLD BUSINESS 1. UPDATES REGARDING STATUS OF CLG GRANT APPLICATIONS IX. NEW BUSINESS 1. REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF CONSULTANT PROPOSALS FOR OVERSTREET RE-SURVEY 2. REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF CONSULTANT PROPOSALS FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION DESIGN GUIDELINES X. PLANNER’S REPORT XI. ADJOURNMENT Persons with disabilities needing assistance to participate in any of these proceedings should contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting at (662) 323-8012, ext. 119. UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 28, 2011 THE CITY OF STARKVILLE, MISSISSIPPI The Historic Preservation Commission of the City of Starkville, Mississippi held its regularly scheduled meeting in the City Hall Courtroom at 101 E. Lampkin Street, Starkville, Mississippi, commencing at 5:30 PM. Present were Commissioners Michael Fazio, Cyndi Sullivan, Maxine Hamilton and Jason Barrett. Commissioners Tom Walker, Joy Day Greene and Patrick Nordin were absent. Attending the Commissioners were City Planner Ben Griffith and Recording Secretary Sara McHann. With only four members in attendance, the Chairman was required to vote on all items requiring action by the Commission. AN ORDER APPROVING THE WRITTEN AGENDA The Commission considered the matter of approval of the written agenda dated June 28, 2011. After discussion and upon the motion of Commissioner Sullivan, seconded by Commissioner Hamilton, the Commission voted unanimously to approve the written agenda as presented. AN ORDER APPROVING THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 24, 2011 MEETING MINUTES The Commission considered the matter of approval of the minutes of the May 24, 2011 meeting. After discussion, Commissioner Hamilton made a motion to approve the minutes as presented, the Commission voted unanimously to approve said minutes. CITIZENS COMMENTS Chairman Fazio asked if any member of the public cared to address the Commission. No citizen comments were received. UPDATE FROM THE CHAIRMAN REGARDING THE STATUS OF CLG GRANT APPLICATIONS Chairman Fazio reported that CLG grant applications had been signed by the Mayor and the State and that the Commission could move forward and seek quotes for the Overstreet Re-Survey and Design Guidelines. SUMMARY/REVIEW OF SUB-COMMITTEE REPORTS Chairman Fazio told Commission members to review the Philadelphia guidelines very closely over the next few weeks. He stated that this would be important to maintain consistency in the various subject areas and providing guidance to the consultant. Commissioner Sullivan suggested that the members might want to review the design guidelines for Oxford and Aberdeen since both were posted on-line. Page 1 of 2 REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF CONSULTANT PROPOSAL FOR OVERSTREET RE-SURVEY Chairman Fazio told the Commissioners that he had received a quote for the re-survey and design guidelines from one consultant and no others. City Planner Ben Griffith explained that due to the estimated dollar amount, the City was not required to advertise, but at least two quotes would need to be obtained before selecting a consultant. Chairman Fazio stated that he would contact some of the historic preservation consultants from the approved list provided by MDAH and seek quotes in order for the Commission to select and make a recommendation to the Mayor and Board of Aldermen. He stated that the Commission could review them at the July 26th meeting in order to move the process forward. PLANNER’S REPORT City Planner Ben Griffith provided a short summary of the MDAH Historic Preservation “Boot Camp” Training seminar he had attended in Jackson on June 16th and 17th. He stated that he would continue to pass along any training opportunities from MDAH as they come available. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Hamilton made a motion to adjourn the meeting at approximately 6:00 PM. The next meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission will be Tuesday, July 26, 2011 at 5:30 PM in the City Hall Courtroom. ________________________________ Michael Fazio, Chairman ________________________________ Ben Griffith, AICP, City Planner Page 2 of 2 Piedmont Preservation P.O. Box 528 • Madison, GA 30650 • 706.476.2284• [email protected] July 15, 2010 Michael Fazio, Chair Starkville, Mississippi Historic Preservation Commission Via email Dear Mr. Fazio: Thank you for the opportunity to bid on the Starkville Design Guidelines development project and the Overstreet School Historic District project. Up to date survey information is vitally important for the designation and preservation of any historic district. Likewise, design guidelines are an excellent tool for commissioners and property owners alike. They give guidance to citizens in planning changes to their historic buildings, thus making the review process less intimidating and more positive. With guidelines in hand, commissioners can reach informed and consistent decisions. We pride ourselves in creating custom documents tailored to the district for which they are created. Piedmont focuses on excellent illustration and identifying areas and resources which demand separate and distinct guidelines. Our work with the cities of Avondale Estates, Madison, and Monticello preparing monthly staff reports for their HPCs serves as an ongoing tutorial for design guidelines. This learning process informs each and every set of guidelines we help develop. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact us. I look forward to speaking with you soon. Sincerely, Kenneth Kocher Partner Piedmont Preservation Starkville, Mississippi Overstreet School Historic District Resurvey Project Proposal P.O. Box 528 Madison, GA 30650 706.476.2284 [email protected] Piedmont Preservation Piedmont Preservation began as a partnership of three individuals in 1995 following their completion of the Historic Preservation Masters Program at the University of Georgia. The firm initially focused on performing historic resource surveys for communities in the State of Georgia. FIRM BACKGROUND From 1996 to 1998 the firm limited the number of projects undertaken as the partners each accepted full-time positions elsewhere: Ms. Callahan as City Planner for the City of Madison, Georgia; Mr. Kocher as Certified Local Government Coordinator for the Mississippi Department of Archives and History; and Mr. Messer as Programmatic Grants Coordinator for the Louisiana Department of Historic Preservation. Mr. Kocher returned to preservation consulting full-time in 1998. Ms. Callahan remains a limited partner while continuing as Madison’s city planner. Originally providing a wide range of services including historic resource surveys, tax credit assistance, section 106 review, National Register nominations, the firm now focuses on projects directly related to local historic preservation commissions: local designation reports, design review assistance, and design guidelines. A field survey of the Overstreet School Historic district will be conducted to document changes to historic resources. Data will be recorded in one of two manners: 1) directly on copies of the previous (1990) survey forms; or 2) on new survey forms. Hard copies of the forms will be assembled in a binder and PDFs of the form will be supplied on CD. Digital color photos of each property will be included. PROJECT APPROACH Starkville, Mississippi Overstreet School Historic District Resurvey Proposal 1 P.O. Box 528 Madison, GA 30650 706.476.2284 [email protected] Piedmont Preservation August 1, 2011 Project Start. August September 2011 Site visit and field work. October 2011 Data entry is completed. PROJECT SCHEDULE PROJECT BUDGET Travel 1 Visits @ $550.00 ................................................. $550.00 Overhead Computer supplies (paper, toner, software, etc.) ......... $50.00 Miscellaneous (postage, telephone, fax, etc.) .............. $50.00 Labor Field work ............................................................... $900.00 Data entry ............................................................... $450.00 $2,000.00 Resource Surveys Brunswick, Georgia Oglethorpe County, Georgia Elberton, Georgia City of Madison, Georgia City of Rosedale, Mississippi St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana Brookhaven, Mississippi Wichita, Kansas Atchison, Kansas National Register District Nominations Talmo National Register District, Talmo, Georgia Rosedale Historic District, Rosedale, Mississippi Brightwell Shotgun District, Athens, GA Local Designation Reports Dearing Street Historic District, Athens, Georgia Brightwell Shotgun District, Athens, Georgia Madison Historic District, Madison, Georgia Acworth Historic District, Acworth, Georgia South Park Street District, Dahlonega, Georgia RELATED PROJECTS Starkville, Mississippi Overstreet School Historic District Resurvey Proposal 2 P.O. Box 528 Madison, GA 30650 706.476.2284 [email protected] MONICA H. CALLAHAN City of Madison, Georgia: Planning Director [1998 to date] Manages municipal planning and community development functions and programs, including but not limited to comprehensive planning, zoning, historic preservation, corridor management, downtown development, and greenspace and conservation. Piedmont Preservation PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Piedmont Preservation: Preservation Consultant [1995 to date] Provides preservation services to public and private sector, including local and national designations, tax incentive projects, design guidelines, historic resource surveys, design assistance, advocacy and educational training, preservation planning, and environmental review. Southeastern Archeological Services: Architectural Historian [1995 to 2002] Provided preservation services for special projects, including but not limited to historic resource surveys and environmental review. __________________________________________________________________ University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia School of Environmental Design: Master of Historic Preservation [thesis incomplete] School of Law EDUCATION EXPERIENCE Mercer University, Macon, Georgia School of Liberal Arts: Bachelor of Arts - History/Psychology [1991, Magna Cum Laude] __________________________________________________________________ Public Speaking & Publications: Guest Speaker, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions CAMP Program, 2004 - to date. Guest Speaker, Georgia Historic Preservation Commission Training, 1997 - 2008. Guest Speaker, “Design Review Inside (Historic Districts) and Out”, Georgia Better Hometown Conference, 2001 Guest Speaker, “Local Government Decisions and Processes: Their Impact on the Community Landscape”, Southern Garden Heritage Conference: Personal Gardens and the Community, 2000 Guest Speaker, “The Tangible and Intangible Impacts of Preservation Policy”, Emory University Southern Economic Conference, 2000. Guest Speaker, “Reversing Sprawl: Model Success Stories”, Tennessee State Planning Conference: Smart Growth and Alternative to Sprawl, 1998 Guest Speaker, “Protecting Your Environment”, Mississippi State Historic Preservation Conference: Developing Heritage Tourism in Your Community, 1998 Guest Speaker, “Design Guidelines: Infill in Historic Districts”, Georgia Preservation & SE State Historic Preservation Offices Conference, 1997 Guest Speaker, “Model Design Guidelines”, Mississippi Heritage Trust and the Mississippi State Historic Preservation Office/Certified Local Government Program: Mississippi Design Guidelines Commission Training Tour, 1997. Co-author of Economic Benefits of Historic Preservation in Georgia, A Study of Three Communities: Athens, Rome, and Tifton. Athens-Clarke County Planning Department. Atlanta, Ga.: Historic Preservation Division of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources. 1996. Guest Lecturer, University of Georgia, Georgia State University, Georgia University of Technology: Preservation Planning and Design courses, 1996 to date RELATED EXPERIENCE Starkville, Mississippi Overstreet School Historic District Resurvey Proposal 3 P.O. Box 528 Madison, GA 30650 706.476.2284 [email protected] KENNETH L. KOCHER Piedmont Preservation: Preservation Consultant [1995 to date] Provides preservation services to local governments, including local designations, design guidelines, historic resource surveys, design assistance, advocacy and educational training. Piedmont Preservation PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Southeastern Archeological Services: Architectural Historian [1995 to 2002] Provided preservation services for special projects, including but not limited to historic resource surveys and environmental review. Mississippi Department of Archives & History: CLG Coordinator [1998 to 1999] Coordinated Certified Local Government Program for Historic Preservation Commissions including grant management, training, and technical advice. Louisiana Division of Historic Preservation: Design Coordinator [1997 to 1998] Coordinated Main Street facade grant program including grant management, design assistance, and technical advice. Janus Research: Architectural Historian [1995 to 1996] Provided preservation services for special projects, including but not limited to historic resource surveys and environmental review. __________________________________________________________________ University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia School of Environmental Design: Master of Historic Preservation [thesis incomplete] EDUCATION EXPERIENCE University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois School of Liberal Arts: Bachelor of Arts - History [1990] __________________________________________________________________ Public Speaking: Team Member, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions CAMP Program, 2008-2011. Guest Speaker, Louisiana “Creating Design Guidelines” CLG Workshops, 2009 Speaker, Georgia Historic Preservation Commission Training, 1997, 1999, 2000, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007. Speaker, “The What, Why, and How of Design Guidelines”, NAPC Forum, 2008 Speaker, “Design Review Inside (Historic Districts) and Out”, Georgia Better Hometown Conference, 2001 Instructor, “Design Guidelines Course”, University of Georgia Historic Preservation Masters Program, Fall Semester, 1999 & 2000 Speaker, “Heritage Education”, Mississippi State Historic Preservation Conference, 1999 Speaker, “Statewide Historic Resource Surveys”, Georgia Preservation & SE State Historic Preservation Offices Conference, 1997 Speaker, “Model Design Guidelines”, Mississippi Heritage Trust and the MDAH Certified Local Government Program: Commission Training Tour, 1997. Lecturer, “Design Guidelines Colloquium” University of Georgia Historic Preservation Masters Program, Fall Quarter, 1996 Speaker, “Historic Preservation and the ADA”, National Trust for Historic Preservation National Conference, 1995 Speaker, “Design Guidelines Workshops”, Georgia Office of Preservation Services, 1994 - 1995 RELATED EXPERIENCE Starkville, Mississippi Overstreet School Historic District Resurvey Proposal 4 P.O. Box 528 Madison, GA 30650 706.476.2284 [email protected] Piedmont Preservation Proposal City of Starkville, Mississippi Design Guidelines P.O. Box 528 Madison, GA 30650 706.476.2284 [email protected] Piedmont Preservation Piedmont Preservation began as a partnership of three individuals in 1995 following their completion of the Historic Preservation Masters Program at the University of Georgia. The firm initially focused on performing historic resource surveys for communities in the State of Georgia. FIRM BACKGROUND From 1996 to 1998 the firm limited the number of projects undertaken as the partners each accepted full-time positions elsewhere: Ms. Callahan as City Planner for the City of Madison, Georgia; Mr. Kocher as Certified Local Government Coordinator for the Mississippi Department of Archives and History; and Mr. Messer as Programmatic Grants Coordinator for the Louisiana Department of Historic Preservation. Mr. Kocher returned to preservation consulting full-time in 1998. Ms. Callahan remains a limited partner while continuing as Madison’s city planner. Originally providing a wide range of services including historic resource surveys, tax credit assistance, section 106 review, National Register nominations, the firm now focuses on projects directly related to local historic preservation commissions: local designation reports, design review assistance, and design guidelines. Starkville, Mississippi Design Guidelines Proposal 1 P.O. Box 528 Madison, GA 30650 706.476.2284 [email protected] Piedmont Preservation Design guidelines are a powerful tool that both citizens and preservation commissions use to maintain the integrity of their historic areas. To be an effective tool, design guidelines must relate directly to the character of the neighborhood, be easy to use, and convey their intent through concise verbiage and illustrations. PROJECT APPROACH Piedmont Preservation develops design guidelines through a four step process, where each step builds upon the previous to create a document that is both user-friendly and tailor-made for the community. Our method uses the following steps: 1) the collection of information necessary for creating the guidelines, 2) the assessment and organization of the information, 3) the creation of written guidelines for the district, and 4) the composition and illustration of the guidelines. Step I During the initial phase of the project, information is gathered through direct observation and contextual research. This process provides a general understanding of the area’s historic resources, specifically within locally designated historic districts or those likely to be designated in the future. • A visual assessment of the area is conducted to identify the defining historic and visual characteristics of the district. In addition to field notes, district character is photo-documented for use in Step 2 (assessment) and Step 4 (illustration); • The guidelines team will meet with the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) and the public to gain insight on past review issues, and to ascertain concerns and objectives; and • Research of the area’s development is completed. Special emphasis will be paid to the past appearance of the area, including building design, landscaping, and town planning. Starkville, Mississippi Design Guidelines Proposal 2 P.O. Box 528 Madison, GA 30650 706.476.2284 [email protected] Piedmont Preservation Step 2 Step 2 involves an analysis of all assembled information, providing a basic framework for the design guidelines. To be usable and reliable, design guidelines must be presented in a format which is readily understood and consistent throughout. The layout will make guidelines on specific issues easy to find and easy to understand. PROJECT APPROACH continued • The observed character defining features of the area are grouped into broad design topics and then distilled specific guideline subjects; • The input of the HPC and the public from the initial meeting is used to further define and refine guideline topics; and • A sample layout with section headings and guideline titles is prepared for conceptual approval by the HPC. Step 3* This phase involves preparation of the guideline text, addressing issues such as rehabilitation, renovation, repair, site changes, new construction, additions, demolition, and relocation. The text of the guidelines are submitted to the HPC in draft form for comment and revision. In addition to the actual guidelines, the following sections are included: • A definition of design guidelines and their purpose; • A brief developmental history; • A description of the area’s visual character including architectural styles; and • A description of the historic preservation ordinance, the HPC’s role, and the COA process. • A glossary and a list of resources and references. Starkville, Mississippi Design Guidelines Proposal 3 P.O. Box 528 Madison, GA 30650 706.476.2284 [email protected] Piedmont Preservation Step 4 * Design guidelines deal primarily with visual concepts. In order to make these concepts more readily understood, the document will use illustrations and graphics to convey the guidelines’ verbal intent. Methods of illustration will include depicting correct examples, illustrating changes considered inappropriate, and juxtaposing good and bad cases. These illustrations may be drawings, photographs, or a combination thereof. Quality illustrations make design guidelines a complete and useful tool. PROJECT APPROACH continued • The draft text is revised to incorporate HPC’s comments; • Graphics are created to illustrate the guidelines; • A comprehensive draft is submitted for review at a meeting with the HPC; and • The final product is submitted to the HPC. * For efficiency, portions of Steps 3 and 4 are performed concurrently. Starkville, Mississippi Design Guidelines Proposal 4 P.O. Box 528 Madison, GA 30650 706.476.2284 [email protected] Piedmont Preservation PROJECT BUDGET Travel 2 visits @ $450.00 .................................................. $900.00 Overhead Computer supplies (paper, toner, software, etc.) ....... $200.00 Miscellaneous (postage, telephone, fax, etc.) ............ $100.00 Labor - Design Guidelines (hourly rate = $70/hr) Fieldwork & Meetings .......................................... $1,500.00 Layout design & text: ............................................ $2,800.00 Illustration ............................................................. $2,500.00 ____________________________________________________ $8,000.00 Piedmont Preservation will provide the following products: PROJECT DELIVERABLES • Two CD ROMs containing digital copies of the Design Guidelines in: Portable Document Files (Adobe Acrobat PDFs): Press optimized – for printing Screen optimized – for internet distribution Starkville, Mississippi Design Guidelines Proposal 5 P.O. Box 528 Madison, GA 30650 706.476.2284 [email protected] Piedmont Preservation The following represents a suggested timeline for the completion of tasks delineated in the Project Approach. The team remains flexible to make changes contingent upon the needs of the Historic Preservation Commission. August 1, 2011 Project Start. August 2011 Site visit and field work. Team to meet with the HPC and public to obtain input and to clarify conceptual issues for design guidelines (Step 1). September 2011 Team will present organizational outline and concept format of the design guidelines for HPC approval (Step 2). October 2011 Team will present draft text of design guidelines with sample illustrations to HPC (Step 3). December 2011 Team will present draft of complete design guidelines with illustrations completed to the HPC (Step 4). January 2012 Revised product printed after final revisions and presented to the HPC and City Council. PROJECT SCHEDULE Starkville, Mississippi Design Guidelines Proposal 6 P.O. Box 528 Madison, GA 30650 706.476.2284 [email protected] MONICA H. CALLAHAN City of Madison, Georgia: Planning Director [1998 to date] Manages municipal planning and community development functions and programs, including but not limited to comprehensive planning, zoning, historic preservation, corridor management, downtown development, and greenspace and conservation. Piedmont Preservation PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Piedmont Preservation: Preservation Consultant [1995 to date] Provides preservation services to public and private sector, including local and national designations, tax incentive projects, design guidelines, historic resource surveys, design assistance, advocacy and educational training, preservation planning, and environmental review. Southeastern Archeological Services: Architectural Historian [1995 to 2002] Provided preservation services for special projects, including but not limited to historic resource surveys and environmental review. __________________________________________________________________ University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia School of Environmental Design: Master of Historic Preservation [thesis incomplete] School of Law EDUCATION EXPERIENCE Mercer University, Macon, Georgia School of Liberal Arts: Bachelor of Arts - History/Psychology [1991, Magna Cum Laude] __________________________________________________________________ Public Speaking & Publications: Guest Speaker, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions CAMP Program, 2004 - to date. Guest Speaker, Georgia Historic Preservation Commission Training, 1997 - 2008. Guest Speaker, “Design Review Inside (Historic Districts) and Out”, Georgia Better Hometown Conference, 2001 Guest Speaker, “Local Government Decisions and Processes: Their Impact on the Community Landscape”, Southern Garden Heritage Conference: Personal Gardens and the Community, 2000 Guest Speaker, “The Tangible and Intangible Impacts of Preservation Policy”, Emory University Southern Economic Conference, 2000. Guest Speaker, “Reversing Sprawl: Model Success Stories”, Tennessee State Planning Conference: Smart Growth and Alternative to Sprawl, 1998 Guest Speaker, “Protecting Your Environment”, Mississippi State Historic Preservation Conference: Developing Heritage Tourism in Your Community, 1998 Guest Speaker, “Design Guidelines: Infill in Historic Districts”, Georgia Preservation & SE State Historic Preservation Offices Conference, 1997 Guest Speaker, “Model Design Guidelines”, Mississippi Heritage Trust and the Mississippi State Historic Preservation Office/Certified Local Government Program: Mississippi Design Guidelines Commission Training Tour, 1997. Co-author of Economic Benefits of Historic Preservation in Georgia, A Study of Three Communities: Athens, Rome, and Tifton. Athens-Clarke County Planning Department. Atlanta, Ga.: Historic Preservation Division of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources. 1996. Guest Lecturer, University of Georgia, Georgia State University, Georgia University of Technology: Preservation Planning and Design courses, 1996 to date RELATED EXPERIENCE Starkville, Mississippi Design Guidelines Proposal 7 P.O. Box 528 Madison, GA 30650 706.476.2284 [email protected] KENNETH L. KOCHER Piedmont Preservation: Preservation Consultant [1995 to date] Provides preservation services to local governments, including local designations, design guidelines, historic resource surveys, design assistance, advocacy and educational training. Piedmont Preservation PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Southeastern Archeological Services: Architectural Historian [1995 to 2002] Provided preservation services for special projects, including but not limited to historic resource surveys and environmental review. Mississippi Department of Archives & History: CLG Coordinator [1998 to 1999] Coordinated Certified Local Government Program for Historic Preservation Commissions including grant management, training, and technical advice. Louisiana Division of Historic Preservation: Design Coordinator [1997 to 1998] Coordinated Main Street facade grant program including grant management, design assistance, and technical advice. Janus Research: Architectural Historian [1995 to 1996] Provided preservation services for special projects, including but not limited to historic resource surveys and environmental review. __________________________________________________________________ University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia School of Environmental Design: Master of Historic Preservation [thesis incomplete] EDUCATION EXPERIENCE University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois School of Liberal Arts: Bachelor of Arts - History [1990] __________________________________________________________________ Public Speaking: Team Member, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions CAMP Program, 2008-2011. Guest Speaker, Louisiana “Creating Design Guidelines” CLG Workshops, 2009 Speaker, Georgia Historic Preservation Commission Training, 1997, 1999, 2000, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007. Speaker, “The What, Why, and How of Design Guidelines”, NAPC Forum, 2008 Speaker, “Design Review Inside (Historic Districts) and Out”, Georgia Better Hometown Conference, 2001 Instructor, “Design Guidelines Course”, University of Georgia Historic Preservation Masters Program, Fall Semester, 1999 & 2000 Speaker, “Heritage Education”, Mississippi State Historic Preservation Conference, 1999 Speaker, “Statewide Historic Resource Surveys”, Georgia Preservation & SE State Historic Preservation Offices Conference, 1997 Speaker, “Model Design Guidelines”, Mississippi Heritage Trust and the MDAH Certified Local Government Program: Commission Training Tour, 1997. Lecturer, “Design Guidelines Colloquium” University of Georgia Historic Preservation Masters Program, Fall Quarter, 1996 Speaker, “Historic Preservation and the ADA”, National Trust for Historic Preservation National Conference, 1995 Speaker, “Design Guidelines Workshops”, Georgia Office of Preservation Services, 1994 - 1995 RELATED EXPERIENCE Starkville, Mississippi Design Guidelines Proposal 8 P.O. Box 528 Madison, GA 30650 706.476.2284 [email protected] Piedmont Preservation Eatonton Historic District Design Guidelines Funding: City of Eatonton Type of Districts: Residential and Commercial Final Products: 97 page document, Acrobat PDFs Contact: Shelagh Fagan Eatonton HPC Chairman REFERENCES 706.923.0031 [email protected] Inman Park Design Guidelines (Atlanta) Funding: Inman Park Neighborhood Association, Certified Local Government Grant Type of Districts: Residential Final Products: 109 page PDFs Contact: Richard Laub Director, Master of Heritage Preservation Program Georgia State University 404.413.6365 [email protected] Downtown Hawkinsville Design Guidelines Funding: City of Hawkinsville, Certified Local Government Grant Type of Districts: Commercial Final Products: 58 page document, Acrobat PDFs Contact: Karen Bailey Better Hometown Director 478.783.9294 [email protected] Similar Projects Americus Historic District – Americus, Georgia Athens Historic Districts (New Construction) – Athens, Georgia Madison Design Criteria, Madison, Georgia Crosstie Historic District – Cleveland, Mississippi Columbus Historic District – Columbus, Mississippi Ocean Springs Design Guidelines (1999 & 2010) – Ocean Springs, Mississippi Monticello Historic Districts Design Guidelines – Monticello, Georgia Harlem Downtown Historic District – Harlem, Georgia Harlem Residential Guidelines – Harlem, Georgia Vernon Square District – Darien, Georgia Avondale Estates Historic District (Phase 1: Text) – Avondale Estates, Georgia Fort Oglethorpe Historic District – Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia Cedartown Guidelines – Cedartown, Georgia O’Neal Historic District Guidelines – Cordele, Georgia Avondale Estates ARB Guidelines – Avondale Estates, Georgia Forsyth Downtown Design Guidelines – Forsyth, Georgia Starkville, Mississippi Design Guidelines Proposal 9 P.O. Box 528 Madison, GA 30650 706.476.2284 [email protected] O’Neal Neighborhood Design Guidelines Rehabilitation Roofs - 1.1 Roofs are a major factor in the overall shape of a house. The simplicity or complexity of a roof reflects the construction technology and architectural tastes of the building’s historical era. Secondary elements such as dormers and chimneys are also character defining as are roofing materials and decorative details. B a s i c s a. Preserve historic primary roof shape and pitch Application Materials b. Preserve historic secondary roof elements especially on visible elevations c. Preserve historic secondary roof features especially on visible elevations For change in roofing materials: Manufacturer’s spec sheet; color d. Preserve historic significant roof materials when possible For addition of new dormers: Elevation drawing showing placement, dimensions, and elements - including materials, trim, windows, and vents e. Limit the addition of secondary roof elements to side and rear elevations f. Use replacement roof materials appropriate to the structure For addition of new chimneys: Elevation drawing showing placement and dimensions; material sample of brick and mortar or manufacturer’s spec sheet For skylights, attic ventilators, etc.: Roof plan or elevation showing placement; description; manufacturer’s spec sheet (encouraged) * see examples in appendix ~24~ S p e c i f i c s a.1 Roofs should not be raised to gain upstairs space a.2 Additions should leave the primary roof form preserved a.2 Inappropriate alteration of the primary roof form by an addition b.1 Historic cross gables, cross hips, dormers, etc. should not be removed or altered c.1 Primary chimneys should be repaired or rebuilt not removed c.2 Missing chimneys may be reconstructed c.1 Inappropriate removal of primary chimneys c.3 Small, kitchen, stove pipe chimneys in rear locations may be removed, though their preservation is encouraged c.4 Decorative roof features should be preserved e.1 New dormers of an appropriate scale and form and skylights are allowed on rear (preferable) and side (less preferable) elevations c.2 Appropriate restoration of primary chimneys e.2 Skylights should have a flat profile not a bubble design e.3 New chimneys should be placed to the rear and use traditional design and materials e.2 Appropriate skylight shape (sides and rear only) f.1 Modern raised rib metal roofing is not appropriate for many architectural styles (e.g. high style Queen Ann) or house types (e.g. bungalows) e.2 Inappropriate skylight shape Rehabilitation ~25~ VISUAL CHARACTER Greek Revival - 1825-1860 4roof: hipped with a low pitch 4detail/materials: clapboard, classical columns, heavy entablature 4door: symmetrically oriented, framed by sidelights and transom 4windows: double-sashed, 9/9 4porch: full-height, full-facade Gothic Revival - 1825-1860 4roof: gabled with a steep pitch 4detail/materials: clapboard, vergeboards, decorative trusses 4door: elaborate panels, framed by sidelights and transom 4windows: double-sashed, 2/2 common 4porch: one story, full-facade Italianate- 1840-1885 4roof: hipped 4detail/materials: clapboard, paneled boxed columns, detailed cornices with brackets, heavy window crowns 4door: paneled surrounded by transom and sidelights 4windows: double-sashed, 6/6 4porch: one-story, full-width 9 Queen Anne - 1880-1910 4roof: multiple gables 4detail/materials: clapboard, turned posts, sawnwork 4door: 4windows: double-sashed 4porch: one story wrap, balcony ARCHITECTURAL STYLES Style, the external decoration of a building, is another classification method for describing structures. When all the defining aspects of a particular style are present, a building may be labeled as high style. If only a few stylistic details are present, the building is referred to as influenced by a style or as having elements of a style. High style buildings are few in number and are often designed by an architect; whereas, buildings with elements of a style are quite common as local interpretations of an architectural style. District. Colonial Revival- 1880-1955 4roof: gable, hip, or gambrel with a steep pitch, dormers 4detail/materials: clapboard, brick, classical columns 4door: symmetrically oriented, classical door surround 4windows: double-sashed, 9/9 4porch: porticos, stoops, full width examples Tudor - 1890-1940 4roof: cross gables, steep pitch 4detail/materials: brick, crenulations, stonework, elaborate chimney 4door: asymmetrically oriented, Tudor arch 4windows: double-sashed, casement, arched 4porch: entry porch, integrated NeoClassical - 1895-1950 6 4roof: hipped with a low pitch 4detail/materials: clapboard, classical columns, heavy entablature 4door: symmetrically oriented, framed by sidelights and transom 4windows: double-sashed 4porch: full-height, full-facade Mission- 1890-1920 4roof: gabled or hipped with tiles 4detail/materials: brick, stucco, shaped parapets 4door: symetric or asymetric placement 4windows: double-sashed 4porch: one story, porticos, arcades 10 Beaux Arts - 1885-1930 6 4roof: flat or low pitched hip 4detail/materials: brick, stone, classical columns, garlands 4door: symmetrically oriented, framed by sidelights and transom 4windows: double-sashed, some arched 4porch: porticos, arcades Craftsman - 1905-1930 4roof: gabled with a low pitch 4detail/materials: novelty board, knee braces, half-timbering 4door: framed by sidelights 4windows: double-sashed, 12/1 4porch: square columns on piers, porte-cochere Spanish Eclectic - 1915-1940 4roof: gabled or hipped with tiles 4detail/materials: brick, stucco, decorative tiles 4door: framed with elaborate surrounds 4windows: double-sashed, balconets 4porch: porticos, arcades Shown above are a few of the many examples of buildings in Eatonton which exhibit a particular architectural style. Noted are the general dates and features of each style. When proposing work to properties, owners should take care to preserve those aspects of the building that define its style. INTRODUCTION 14 intr oduction introduction review design review process Property owners within the Downtown Historic District enjoy the advantages of increased economic value and a built environment protected from unsympathetic changes. The Forsyth Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) protects the rights and investments of property owners and business establishments through the design review process. By preserving and maintaining visual character, the HPC ensures that citizens and visitors alike will enjoy the benefits of Forsyth’s historic built environment. what is design review? The Historic Preservation Ordinance provides for a design review process. Design review consists of the evaluation of any proposed exterior work upon a designated property. Both minor and extensive projects must be reviewed and approved prior to beginning work. The design review process is often triggered by a building permit application. Building permits can not be issued until design review is complete. Although some types of work projects, such as installation of a fence or parking, may not require a building permit, design review is still required. which properties require design review? All locally designated properties require design review. Designated properties include all properties within historic districts and any individually designated sites. Please note that design review covers both historic and non-historic properties in the historic district. The city’s zoning map, available at City Hall, indicates all designated landmarks and historic districts. what type of work requires design review? All work involving a change to an exterior feature of a designated property requires design review. Projects that physically alter the property include but are not limited to: 1) renovation and rehabilitation, 2) new construction and additions, 3) relocation or demolition, and 4) changes in site or setting (such as walls, fences, lighting, steps, pavement, signs, or other appurtenant features). However, interior alterations or changes in the use of the property (e.g. residential to commercial) do not require design review because the Historic Preservation Ordinance applies only to the external appearance of the property. Ordinary maintenance does not require design review. 15 what is a certificate of appropriateness (coa)? When planning a work project, an owner must submit a completed application for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA). Applications are available from and should be submitted to the City Hall. Public notice requires applications to be submitted in advance of the meeting, contact City Hall for deadlines. Utilizing design guidelines and the general standards for the preservation of historic properties, the HPC must decide to approve or deny the application. If the application is approved, a Certificate of Appropriateness is issued and design review is complete. what should an application include? In order that the Commission may make an informed decision, completed applications must be accompanied by support materials. Illustrations may include site plans, elevations, and floor plans drawn to a standard architectural scale, e.g. 1/4” = 1’. Photographs of the building, site, and neighboring properties are also helpful. Support materials may differ according to the type and size of the project. The application and support materials must be submitted at the same time. what could happen if work begins before design review? If work is initiated prior to approval of a COA application or to obtaining a building permit, a stop work order may be issued. If these requirements are not met, the property owner may face fines or an order to restore the original condition of the property as require by state and local law. where can additional assistance be found? This booklet outlines design guidelines which are useful for project planning; however, the HPC does not actually develop plans or designs. Property owners are encouraged to review the design guidelines set forth in the booklet prior to planning any rehabilitation work or new construction. Familiarity with the design guidelines will facilitate design review. are there any other review procedures? Review of projects by the HPC may not be the only review required before work may proceed. Other city departments and commissions may be required to examine a project for compliance with existing zoning regulations, building codes, and sign or landscape ordinances. outline for design rreview eview Step 1:Identify property status & proposed work Is the property within a locally designated historic district? No Yes Will the work involve a change to an exterior feature? • site changes • rehabilitation • additions • new construction • demolition or relocation No Yes Step 2: Apply for a CO A COA Certificate of Appropriateness applications are available at City Hall and should be returned by the specified deadline before the Historic Preservation Commission's scheduled monthly meeting. Step 3: HPC meeting Applicants should attend. Denial. Applicants are encouraged to reapply with applications meeting the design guidelines. However, applicants may appeal to the City Council in the manner provided by law. Approval or Approval with Conditions Step 4: Start W ork Work Apply for a Building Permit. Proposed work must also comply with all applicable zoning, building, sign, and landscape ordinances, etc. 16 intr oduction introduction criteria standards and guidelines The Secretary of the Interior ’s Standards for Rehabilitation (see right) outline the general standards of preservation practice. These standards are specified as design criteria in local historic preservation ordinances throughout the nation because they set forth the principles of historic preservation in a succinct and clear manner. In addition to these general preservation standards, historic preservation commissions develop and produce design guidelines based specifically upon the visual character of local districts. This booklet offers additional information on Forsyth’s unique historic character and provide further design assistance. The guidelines that follow are divided into two sections - Rehabilitation and New Construction – and further arranged topically. Tift College Drive and the section of Lee Street north of Adams Street also lie with in the Corridor Overlay District (see map, p.5). The preservation commission will review projects in these areas using both the Historic District Design Guidelines as well as the design standards created for the Corridor Overlay District. 17 secr etary of the interior ’s standards for rrehabilitation ehabilitation secretary interior’s The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards present the general principles of historic preservation in a succinct and clear manner. These standards are also available in annotated and illustrated versions. The following standards are to be applied to specific rehabilitation projects in a reasonable manner, taking into consideration economic and technical feasibility. 1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property shall be avoided. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, shall not be undertaken. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. 8. Archeological resources shall be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. 18 intr oduction introduction criteria historic pr eservation continuum preservation Historic districts and properties continue to contribute to the social and economic vitality of a community through historic preservation. Historic preservation - planning for the protection and maintenance of historic properties - includes a variety of approaches. Preservation Preservation is the act or process of applying measures to sustain the existing form, integrity, and materials of a building or structure, and the existing form and vegetative cover of a site. It may include stabilization work, where necessary, as well as the ongoing maintenance of historic building materials. Restoration Restoration is the act or process of accurately recovering the form and details of a property and its setting as it appeared at a particular period of time by means of the removal of non-historic work or by the replacement of missing earlier work. Rehabilitation Rehabilitation is the act or process of returning a property to a state of utility through repair or alteration that makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions or features of the property important to its historical, architectural, and cultural value. Renovation Renovation is the act or process of modernization of a historic building to update its appearance that may produce inappropriate alterations or eliminate significant features and details. Such treatment is discouraged. 19 other issues Existing Non-Historic Buildings Changes to existing non-historic buildings should, at the very least, not cause the building to become more intrusive and, at best, increase the building’s compatibility in the district. Such projects should follow the New Construction Guidelines to the extent possible. Demolition The demolition of historic buildings diminishes the entire district and creates unnecessary waste. Demolition of a historic structure is only approved in very rare, specific, and narrowly defined circumstances, and no demolition occurs without approval of post-demolition plans. Aspects the commission will take into consideration include but are not limited to: age, integrity, significance, condition, alternatives, and overall effect. Relocation Relocation falls into one of three categories: 1) removing a structure from the historic district, 2) moving a structure into the historic district, or 3) moving a structure to a different location within the historic district. Different criteria are applied to each. Proposed relocation out of the historic district constitutes a loss and therefore, demolition guidelines apply. New construction guidelines apply for proposed relocations into a historic district. For proposed relocations within a historic district, the following considerations apply: age, previous relocation, compatibility of the new site, significance, condition, alternatives, and overall effect.
© Copyright 2026 Paperzz