| Projects |

Tupelo, Mississippi Design Guidelines for a Downtown Community (click here for the 103 page, 2.2mb PDF)  Background The Small Town Center of Mississippi State University was contacted by the Planning Department of the City of Tupelo and the Tupelo Downtown Neighborhood Association to develop a set of architectural design guidelines for a downtown historic district of Tupelo. The establishment of the design guidelines is an important step in the Downtown Neighborhood Association's plan to revitalize and conserve the visual character of the neighborhood. In the spring of 1998, a seminar class was held in the School of Architecture to study the current theories of design guidelines and to formulate guidelines for the downtown neighborhood. The seminar worked with neighborhood residents, city officials, developers, and state officials in its research. The class' work was broken down into four phases: gathering information, developing the guidelines, testing the guidelines and compiling the document. Development During phase one the students thoroughly observed the historic district by recording issues of concern. These observations began to reveal the patterns and conditions that give the neighborhood its unique character. All of the information collected in this phase was presented at the first neighborhood workshop meeting held in March of 1998. The seminar class also took a trip to Ocean Springs, Mississippi and Seaside, Florida to see how design guidelines shape new developments. This trip aided the students in the layout and organization of the guidelines for the Tupelo district. In the second and third phases, the class wrote the set of guidelines and tested them. The guidelines were then tested by the class with a 20' long physical model of North Madison Street and a computer model of Mill Village. Development proposals were inserted into these models to critique the guidelines. Through this process, the guidelines were modified to achieve the intended results. In the fourth phase, all of the information collected during the seminar course was compiled into an ninety-nine page document. This document is laid out with text, sketches, photographs, and diagram examples in an easy to follow format for use by developers and individual property owners.   Results Several discoveries were made regarding the neighborhood. The first was that the district should be divided into six smaller subdistricts based on the visual characteristics of streets, landscape, built landmarks, house types and natural or man-made boundaries. The second discovery was that while there are clear distinctions between the subdistricts, larger elements in the city tie the subdistrict together. A street that crossed two subdistricts was found to maintain its own character along its entire length, potentially becoming an important link. Landmark buildings or spaces were also found to create ties between subdistricts. A third discovery was that the styles of houses were less important to maintaining the character than were setbacks, density of buildings, and landscape elements. In some districts the style of the house was irrelevant and the key to the visual character was the landscaping. The guidelines reflect this discovery by promoting larger scale decisions for new development, such as the placement of the house, driveways and heights. House types in the district, however, were studied and suggested in the guidelines. Issues of proportion and major elements, such as porches, were found to be most important in distinguishing these types. The goals of the guidelines are to protect the visual assets of each subdistrict, but also to discover its potential. The very close proximity of one subdistrict to the downtown area, its wide streets and deep lots indicated great potential for developing multifamily housing. A railroad track, seen as a barrier to a subdistrict by some residents, is actually a segment of a strong boundary around the subdistrict. This distinction could be very positive, a neighborhood where children know their bounds, where parks or recreation areas are specifically for the subdistrict and under more control by the neighbors. The guidelines are thus not conceived as restrictions on the residents, but as common goals made by the residents. The guidelines become a document that is able to change with the changing vision of the neighborhood.

This project was funded by the Appalachian Regional Commission and the Mississippi Department of Economic and Community Development. Matching Funds were provided by Mississippi State University's Office of Research. This project was contracted by the Planning Department of the City of Tupelo and Community Enterprises Inc. The Mississippi State University students involved were JD Balzli, Jennifer Clynch, Jennifer Dobson, Ryan McQuade, Maggie Measells, Heather Moore, Ginger Pence, Newell Watkins, and Brent Williams. The teaching assistant of the project was Brian Bassett. The Principal Investigator of this project was John Poros and the Director was Shannon Criss. Shane Homan sketching where he felt the district boundaries should be drawn. Seminar class on research trip to Ocean Springs, Mississippi and Seaside, Florida.