Submitted By: Charlita Whitehead
presenter
Presentation By: Charlita Whitehead
end
Department: Growth Management
FORMAL TITLE (Motion Ready):
title
Case File #68; COA26-0025; 906 E Fort King Street; Addition of two open-air pergola structures on the existing residence
end
body
BACKGROUND:
Petitioner/ Property Owner: Stacey Harris and Jon Harris
Project Planner: Charlita Whitehead
Applicant Request: To add two open-air pergola structures at the existing residence, including one ground-level pergola on the east side of the home and one upper-level pergola on the existing elevated deck above the carport, with a covered entryway providing access to the residence.
Parcel Information
Acres: ±0.50 acres
Parcel(s) #: 28362-039-01
Location: 906 E Fort King St.
Future Land Use: Neighborhood
Zoning District: R-3: Multi-Family Residential
Existing Use: Residential
Background:
The existing home, known as the William G. Marshall House, was constructed in 1908 using a Classical Revival architectural style. The home is a contributing structure within the Ocala Historic District. Recent activity on the property includes COA26-0003 for landscaping improvements and COA26-0017 for replacement of deteriorating siding and roofing on an outbuilding, both of which were approved administratively through the Staff Certificate of Appropriateness process. COA26-0012, approved by the board on April 2, 2026, included replacement of the existing wood fencing with ornamental black aluminum fencing; installation of stairs from the lower carport to the upper deck; enclosure and expansion of the existing screened porch for additional interior space; replacement of the upper deck railing; removal of exterior shutters and window screens for repair and restoration of window trim; and relocation of existing windows and doors as part of the addition and interior renovation.
Applicant Request:
To add two open-air pergola structures on the existing residence, including one ground-level pergola 18’ x 12’ located on the east side of the home and one upper-level pergola 26’8” x 45’6” located on the existing elevated deck above the carport with an additional 6’ x 6’11” covered entryway into the house.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS:
Staff Analysis
Certificate of Appropriateness Criteria for Decisions (Section 94-82(g)):
The Code states that the Board may issue a certificate of appropriateness for the reconstruction, alteration, new construction, non-permanent structures, demolition, partial demolition, or removal of any building or structure within a locally designated historic district or any designated local landmark, or any other activity for which a CA is required, if such action is not deemed contrary to the purposes of historic preservation and to the special character of districts, sites and resources as designated specifically. The board's decisions will be based on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, the city's Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, this chapter, and the following criteria:
1. Exterior alterations shall not diminish the architectural quality or historical character of the building or the building site.
Staff Comments: The proposed pergola structures are subordinate additions to the primary historic structure and are designed to complement the architectural character of the residence. The additions use compatible materials, proportions, trim detailing, and roof elements that reflect the existing structure without diminishing or removing character-defining historic features.
2. Sandblasting of any materials except for iron is prohibited.
Staff Comments: Not applicable.
3. Only through very controlled conditions can most historic building material be abrasively cleaned of soil or paint without measurable damage to the surface or profile of the substrate. Decisions regarding the proper cleaning process for historic structures can be made only after careful analysis of the building fabric, and testing. Generally, wet abrasive cleaning of a historic structure should be conducted within the range of 20 to 100 psi at a range of three to 12 inches.
Staff Comments: Not applicable.
4. Landscaping, signs, parking and site development should be sensitive to the individual building and should be visually compatible with the buildings and environment with which they are visually related.
Staff Comments: The proposed pergolas are located within previously developed portions of the site, including an existing concrete patio and elevated deck. The additions maintain compatibility with the existing residential setting and do not substantially alter the historic site layout or relationship between structures and open spaces.
5. New construction shall be visually compatible with the buildings and environment with which the new construction is visually related. When an application involves new construction, the applicant may present conceptual plans to the board for review and comment before the application for a certificate of appropriateness is submitted and before construction drawings of the project are prepared. Aspects to be considered include:
a. The height, volume, proportion between width and height of the facades, the proportions and relationship between doors and windows, the rhythm of solids and voids created by openings in the facades, the materials used in the facades, the texture inherent in the facades, the colors, pattern and trim used in the facades, and the design of the roof.
Staff Comments: The pergolas are designed to reflect the proportions and architectural rhythm of the existing structure using compatible columns, trim profiles, siding exposure, and roofing materials. The structures remain secondary in scale and do not visually overpower the primary historic residence.
b. The existing rhythm created by existing building masses and spaces between them should be preserved.
Staff Comments: The proposed pergolas are located on existing patio and deck areas and do not substantially alter the spacing or relationship between structures on the property. The proposed additions do not obscure primary character-defining architectural features visible from the public right-of-way.
c. Landscape plans should be visually compatible with the buildings and environment with which the landscaping is visually related.
Staff Comments: Not applicable.
d. Proportions of existing facades which are visually related shall be maintained when neighboring buildings have a dominant horizontal or vertical expression, that expression should be carried over in the new facade.
Staff Comments: The proposed pergolas maintain the horizontal and vertical proportions established by the existing residence through compatible column spacing, roof forms, and trim detailing.
e. Architectural details should be incorporated as necessary to relate the new with the old and to preserve and enhance the inherent architectural characteristics of the area.
Staff Comments: The proposal incorporates architectural elements compatible with the existing structure, including compatible column proportions, trim details, roofing materials, and painted finishes.
f. Accessory structures shall be compatible with the scale, shape, roof form, materials, and detailing of the main structure to protect the historic integrity of the neighborhood. The accessory structure shall not exceed the maximum height allowed by the applicable zoning or the height of the existing primary structure.
Staff Comments: The proposed pergola structures are compatible with the primary residence in scale, materials, detailing, and roof form. The additions remain subordinate to the primary structure and do not exceed the height of the existing residence or applicable zoning requirements.
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties
Standards for Rehabilitation
9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic
materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work
will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features,
size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and
its environment. (page 76)
Staff Comments: The proposed pergolas are additive and reversible in nature and do not require removal of character-defining historic features. The structures are designed to be compatible with the historic residence while remaining identifiable as new construction.
10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will 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. (page 76)
Staff Comments: The proposed pergola structures are designed as reversible additions constructed primarily within existing developed areas of the property. Removal of the structures in the future would not impair the essential integrity of the historic resource.
New Exterior Additions to Historic Buildings and Related New Construction
Recommended: Constructing a new addition on a secondary or non-character defining
elevation and limiting its size and scale in relationship to the historic building. (page 156)
Staff Comments: The proposed pergola additions are located on secondary elevations and existing outdoor living areas associated with the residence. The additions remain subordinate in scale to the primary historic structure and do not visually dominate the structure.
Recommended: Constructing a new addition that results in the least possible loss of historic materials so that character-defining features are not obscured, damaged, or destroyed. (page 156)
Staff Comments: The proposed pergola structures are designed to minimize impacts to historic materials and character-defining features.
Recommended: Designing a new addition that is compatible with the historic building. (page 156)
Staff Comments: The pergolas incorporate compatible architectural elements, including proportional columns, trim detailing, roofing materials, and painted finishes that relate to the existing Classical Revival residence while remaining identifiable as new construction.
Ensuring that the addition is subordinate and secondary to the historic building and is compatible in massing, scale, materials, relationship of solids to voids, and color. (page 156)
Staff Comments: The proposed additions remain visually subordinate to the primary structure through their open-air design, secondary placement, compatible materials, and proportional relationship to the existing residence.
Limiting a rooftop addition to one story in height to minimize its visibility and its impact on the historic character of the building. (page 160)
Staff Comments: The proposed upper-level pergola is limited in height and maintains an open-air design that minimizes visual impact on the historic structure.
Ensuring that new construction is secondary to the historic building and does not detract from its significance. (page 162)
Staff Comments: The proposed pergola structures are secondary accessory features that complement the historic residence without detracting from the significance of the property.
Staff Recommendation:
Approval
ALTERNATIVE:
• Approve
• Approve with Conditions
• Table
• Deny