Model checklist for historic district commissions, from the Historic Preservation Master Plan, Appendix B, City of Prescott, Arizona, December 1997.

HISTORIC PRESERVATION MASTER PLAN
Prescott Preservation Commission
December 1997

HISTORIC PROPERTY PROJECTS
COMMISSIONER'S CHECKLIST

This checklist is to assist Prescott Preservation Commission members in the review of proposed projects. It is intended to ensure that, to the great degree possible, a full review is conducted and to minimize the possibility of something "slipping through the cracks."

It should be noted that the Secretary of Interior's Standards discourage new construction that is a copy of a historical style. That is, new construction can be built in a contemporary manner provided it is consistent with the character of the neighborhood and respects historical styles without strictly emulating them.

To judge whether an application meets the design guidelines for the district, commission members must determine if the project supports and maintains the stated goals of the district and respects the design elements that characterize the district. The commission should first evaluate the project in terms of the larger issues of context, scale, massing, and height, followed by the details. The Commission should also consider the long-term effects of the project on the district.

1. SITE PLANNING

SITING OF THE BUILDING

Is the setback, facade width, and spacing between buildings consistent with the historic pattern in the district?

Delineation of Street Space

Is the continuity of the street edge maintained? Is the separation of public, semi-public, and private areas consistent with the historic pattern? Do fences obscure historic the resource? Are fence materials historically consistent?

Garage

Is any carport or garage located appropriately? For example, is the garage placed even with, or in front of, the house in a neighborhood that historically has garages in the rear?

Site improvements

Are walkways consistent with the historic location and pattern? Are driveways cut in such a way that they do not hamper historic resources (located at the property edge instead of the middle)? Are retaining walls of the same or similar material and height as the historic pattern?

2. BULK PROPORTION AND SIZE

Is the building height consistent with other buildings in the neighborbood (despite what the current zoning allow? Are the facade proportions consistent with the neighborhood (are the horizontal and vertical emphases compatible)? Is the overall scale of the project consistent (neither too large and imposing nor underscaled and inappropriate)?

3. MASSING

Building Shape

Is the form of the building compatible with the neighborhood? Is the roof shape consistent? For example, are flat roofs proposed in an area of hips and gables? Is the orientation of the building consistent?

Additions

Is the placement, form, and bulk of any addition consistent with the neighborhood and other buildings on the lot?

4. ROOF

Is the roof shape consistent with the neighorhood? Is the roof shape of any additions consistent or complementary to the existing building? Is the roof pitch (slope) compatible? Is the overhang consistent? Do dormers, skylights and other appurtenances exist elsewhere in the district? Are they sensitively designed for this project? Are chimneys designed to be consistent with others in the district?

5. WINDOWS

Is the window type or style consistent (double-hung, casement, etc.)? Are the shape and proportions of the windows compatible? Is the rhythm and balance of the window pattern complementary to the district? Are there any awnings or other shade structures consistent with the district?

6. DOORWAYS

Is the placement and orientation of the door consistent with the disrict? For example, is the door placed to the side of the building when the historic pattern is on the front? Is the type of door consistent?

7. EXTERIOR ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS

Are door platforms and steps consistent with the district? Is the use of stem walls compatible? Are porches and decks used and treated in a manner consistent with the area? Do any architectural elements block or obscure historic resources?

8. MATERIALS

Consistency and compatibility of materials is critical. Be sure to review all elements, including walls surfaces, foundations, and roofs. Other less obvious, but still important items include trim, gutter and downspouts, louvers and vents, lighting, and public utilities.

9. COLOR

Has a color palette been established for this public? Is so, do proposed colors conform? Would any other proposed colors be compatible with the historic district?

10. LANDSCAPE

Is there an effort to preserve mature trees? Is the pattern of any street plantings maintained? Is the proposed landscape consistent with the district?

NOTES AND COMMENTS
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

This checklist has been excerpted from the City of Prescott Arizona's Historic Preservation Master Plan, December, 1997. The Plan was prepared by Adams Architecture & Planning, Inc. The project manager for the City of Prescott was Nancy Burgess. The project manager for Adams Architecture & Planning was Steven C. Adams, AIA.