Title
Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider/Discuss/Act on Request by Debbie Steele to Appeal Staff’s Conditional Approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness for a Fence at 308 North Waddill Street
Summary
COUNCIL GOAL: Enhance the Quality of Life in Downtown McKinney
MEETING DATE: April 7, 2022
DEPARTMENT: Development Services - Planning Department
CONTACT: Paula Jarrett Nasta, AIA, Planning Manager
Jennifer Arnold, AICP, Director of Planning
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION:
• Staff recommends denial of the appeal.
ITEM SUMMARY:
• This item is to consider an appeal to Staff’s conditional approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for a fence located at 308 North Waddill Street.
• In May of 2020, the owner of the property at 308 North Waddill Street applied for a permit to construct a front yard fence on the property without first obtaining the necessary COA.
• The permit was issued without a COA in August of 2021 and the fence was subsequently constructed.
• In October of 2021, staff identified that the new front yard fence had been constructed without an approved COA and notified the owner of the need for an approved COA for the fence.
• Subsequently, the owner submitted a COA for review by the Planning Department, which was approved by Staff with the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall build in strict compliance with the drawings attached to this approval letter.
2. The applicant will be responsible for meeting all applicable City ordinances and obtaining all necessary building permits.
3. Remove the low stone wall between the 42” tall stone columns and comply with Section 122-176(b) of the City of McKinney Ordinances.
4. Modify the horizontal wood slat 4’ tall gate and fence at the south and west property line of the front yard to comply with the 50% through vision requirement of Section 122-176(b) of the City of McKinney Ordinances.
5. Any changes to the property beyond the scope included with this approval may require a new Certificate of Appropriateness.
• The applicant/owner is requesting an appeal of Staff’s conditional approval, specifically relating to the conditions regarding the low masonry wall sections of the fence and the need to make the gate and south portion of the front yard gate 50% transparent.
• Staff’s assessment is below for your reference.
• It should be noted that consideration of this appeal is only to address the provisions and requirements found in Section 146-97 (H- Historic Overlay District) related to the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness. All other development and permitting requirements for the construction of a fence still apply.
• In particular, it should be noted that the low masonry wall and transparency of the constructed front yard fence and gate does not currently comply with Section 122-176(b)(2)(b) “All fences shall have a minimum 50 percent through vision in any front yard.” Should the HPAB approve the appeal to deem the low masonry wall and lack of transparency appropriate for the historic district, the owner/applicant would still need to request a variance to the requirements of Section 122-180 Appeals as part of the Board of Adjustment (BOA) process.
ASSESMENT:
• In Staff’s professional judgment, the low masonry wall, solid gate, and solid fence portion at the front side yards are not in keeping with Standard 9 of the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings.
o Standard 9 States: “New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment.”
o This low wall presents an image similar to those of several low masonry walls in the historic district. However, typical low walls in the historic district are retaining walls used to hold back front yard soils not purely fencing.
o The retaining wall image creates a false sense of topography within the historic environment. The similarly styled low walls in the district are character defining features of properties topographical conditions where the finish grade of yards lies above the sidewalk and the finished floor elevation of the house sits above the height of the wall.
o The grade at this particular front yard is even with the base of the low wall and thus the low wall functions only as a fence not to retain dirt and facilitate a change of grade.
o This low masonry wall also hides the finish floor line of the house.
o This architectural feature presents a conjectural grade change typical of differently situated sites and therefore negatively impacts the site integrity of the streetscape along Waddill Street.
o Historic and new front yard fences in the McKinney Historic District are characterized by their transparency from top to bottom. Nontransparent fencing in front yards is not compatible with the massing of other front yard fencing in the historic district.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
• Properties located within the historic district are subject to the requirement to obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness for construction, reconstruction, alterations, changes, restorations, expansions, or demolitions of an exterior architectural feature visible from the public right-of-way prior to commencing said work or being issued a building permit.
• Prior to commencing any work requiring a certificate of appropriateness, the applicant shall file an application for such certificate with the HPO.
• In reviewing and making determinations of appropriateness for such work, the Historic Preservation staff follows the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation; reviews a checklist of design elements; and considers the preservation priority rating assigned to the property in question.
• Per Section 146-97(e)(4) of the City of McKinney Zoning Ordinance, “if the applicant/owner is not in agreement with the conditions of approval imposed by the HPO, the applicant may, within 21 days of HPO action, request in writing to the director of planning that the COA be reconsidered by the Historic Preservation Advisory Board (HPAB).