July 26, 2011 e-Packet

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.