Loading...
1701-Jan 26 Planning & Development Department 102 West Main Street  Prattville, Alabama 36067  334-595-0500  334-361-3677 Facsimile planning.prattvilleal.gov CITY OF PRATTVILLE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AGENDA January 26, 2017 4:30 p.m. Call to Order: Roll Call: Chairman Langley, Vice-Chairman Price, Mr. Barrett, Ms. Musgrove, Mrs. Davis, Ms. Kirkpatrick and Mr. Smith. Election of Officers: Minutes: December 15, 2016 Old Business: None New Business: 1. CA1701-02 Certificate of Appropriateness New Structure-Accessory Structure & Fence 203 North Chestnut Street Bryant Evans, Petitioner Public Hearing Miscellaneous: Staff Approvals: 1. 119 First Street-Sign Adjourn: CITY OF PRATTVILLE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES January 26, 2017 Call to order: The regular meeting of the Prattville Historic Preservation Commission was called to order on Thursday, January 26, 2017 at 4:32 p.m. Roll Call: The secretary called the roll. Members present were Chairman Thea Langley,Vice-Chairman Gray Price, Mr. Will Barrett,Ms. Lenore Kirkpatrick,Mrs. Kate Musgrove,and Mr. Larry Smith.Members Absent: Mrs. Jean Davis. Quorum present Also present was Mr. Joel Duke, City Planner and Ms.Alisa Morgan, Secretary. Minutes: Mr.Price moved to approve the minutes of the December 15, 2016 meeting.Ms.Musgrove seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Old Business: None New Business: Certificate of Appropriateness New Structure-Accessory Structure & Fence 203 North Chestnut Street Bryant Evans, Petitioner Bryant Evans, petitioner, presented the request for a fence and an accessory structure on property at 203 North Chestnut Street.He stated that he did not know a building permit was required for the fence which has begun construction and the metal storage building which has been placed for approximately six months. Mr. Duke provided the staff report for a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow a new fence and accessory structure at 203 North Chestnut Street. He stated that the structure is within the on the national register district,but is historically non-contributing.The request is for a prefabricated metal storage shed in the rear yard and installation of a 6’ privacy fence along the north and south property lines and 8’ privacy fence along south wall of the house. He recommended approval of the storage building due to limited visibility and non-contributing status of main structure. He noted that it is within the guidelines that allow outbuildings that are not visible from public vantage points, or have very limited visibility.He stated that the fence in the rear yard meets the guidelines,but the 8’ fence is inconsistent with the residential guidelines. Mr.Evans stated that the existing 8’ post would have to be removed because they are encroaching on his neighbor’s property. Mr. Smith asked if the city’s ordinance restricts fence height. Mr. Duke replied that the only restrictions on fence height would be in the R-5 zoning district. The only controlling regulations issue in this matter are the HPC Residential Guidelines. Chairman Langley opened the floor for public comments. Frankie McGalliard, 919 Coburn Lane,Marbury, AL, stated that she owns the adjacent property at 201 N. Chestnut Street. She stated that she had no problem with the request as long as the petitioner removes the post that are encroaching on her property. She stated that her house was built in 1980. Mr. Evans stated that he would not have a problem replacing the 8’ fence with a 3’ wooden picket fence. He stated that he had no plans to paint the fence but he could paint it white.He had no plans to paint the6’ fence. Mr.Smith moved to approve the request as submitted contingent that the proposed 8’ fence is replacedwith a 3’ wooden picket fence and painted. Ms.Musgrove seconded the motion. The motion to approve passed unanimously. Miscellaneous: Mr. Duke stated that the staff approved a sign at 119 First Street for the law office of Rob Riddle. Mr. Price asked about construction at the Lambert property (271 East Main St). Mr. Duke stated that the work is only maintenance. The property owners advised Chair Langley through email that they would be replacing rotten wood on the deck with like material. Adjourn: With no further business,the meeting was adjourned at 4:49 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Alisa Morgan,Secretary Historic Preservation Commission CITY OF PRATTVILLE Historic Preservation Commission Planning Department Staff Report CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS 203 N. Chestnut Street – CA1701-02 DATE January 26, 2017 PROPOSED DEVLOPMENT Petitioner: Bryant Evans Property Owner: Bo and Thelma Evans Agent: N/A Location: 203 N. Chestnut Street Review Status and History Submission Status: Initial request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for this address. Previous Approvals: N/A Conditions of Previous Approvals: N/A 1984/2007 Historic Properties Inventory Details 203 North Chestnut Street (circa 1960, non- contributing). This one-story frame building has asbestos siding. Proposed Alteration, Renovation or Addition The following changes have been requested by the applicant. See the application included as Attachment A for the owner’s description of each item. 1. Install prefabricated, metal storage shed in the NW corner of the property. 2. Install 6 foot tall wood privacy fence with gates along the north and south property lines from rear line of house to rear property line. Install 8 foot tall wood privacy fence along south wall of house – approximately 20’ long Page 2 of 3 PLANNING STAFF EVALUATION Reviewed by: Joel T. Duke, AICP Site Visits Conducted: Various times January 2017 Recommendation:  Item 1: Approval due to limited visibility and non- contributing status of main structure  Item 2: Approval for privacy fence in rear yard. Denial of 8’ fence due – inconsistent with guidelines. Evaluation: The requested alterations were reviewed against the standards contained in the Prattville Residential Design Review Guidelines Manual. The relevant sections of manual are included. Staff comments/evaluations are summarized at the end of each section. Item 1. Install prefabricated, metal storage shed in the NW corner of the property. Outbuildings (page 50) Outbuildings contribute to the historic and residential character of the district. Historic outbuildings should be retained and maintained. New outbuildings should use design, materials, and placement that support the district’s historic character. 2. New outbuildings should be smaller than the adjoining main building. 3. New outbuildings should be simple in appearance. 4. New outbuildings should use building and roof forms compatible to those used in the adjoining main building. 5. New outbuildings should use materials compatible to those used in the adjoining main buildings. Outbuildings that are not visible from public vantage points, or have very limited visibility, may use modern synthetic siding materials. Analysis: The proposed outbuilding generally meets Guidelines 2, 3, 4, and 5 for Outbuildings. Visibility of the proposed structure from the street will be limited by the proposed privacy fence. Page 3 of 3 Fences and Walls (Pages 46 and 47) Fences and walls have historically been used to define ownership or function and to separate public and private space. Historic fences and walls should be retained and maintained. New fences and walls should use design, materials, and placement that minimize their effect on the district’s historic character. 2. Wood and metal picket fences are appropriate new construction. If wooden, they should be painted using colors complementary to the adjacent house. They should be less than three feet tall, and the pickets should be set less than three inches apart and be less than four inches in width. 4. Wood board fences may be located in back yards and should be less than six feet tall. Flat tops, dog-ear tops, or pointed tops are all appropriate designs. Fences should be painted to blend with the building. They should not be located further forward than the house façade. Analysis: The proposed 6’ tall wood privacy fence around the rear yard is consistent with the Commission’s guidelines and provides screening for the proposed outbuilding. The proposed 8’ tall privacy fence along the south wall of the main structure is inconsistent with the residential guidelines. The 8’ tall fence should be omitted or modified to meet the guideline requirements for a low metal or wood picket fence in the proposed location. ATTACHMENTS A. Staff photos – main structure – January 26, 2017 Item 2 – Install 6 foot tall wood privacy fence with gates along the north and south property lines from rear line of house to rear property line. Install 8 foot tall wood privacy fence along south wall of house – approximately 20’