Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation Solar topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council upholds BHAR denial of rooftop solar at 313 Grama Street
Summary
Town Council denied an appeal of the Board of Historic and Architectural Review and upheld the board’s decision to deny rooftop solar on a contributing house at 313 Grama Street, citing visibility from the public right of way and historic-district guidelines.
Smithfield Town Council on Thursday denied an appeal of the Board of Historic and Architectural Review (BHAR) and thereby upheld the board’s February decision to reject a homeowner’s request to install 21 rooftop solar panels at 313 Grama Street.
Tammy Clary, town planner, summarized the appeal and the BHAR review: the board had concluded the proposed panels were not in conformance with the historic district guidelines. “The board believes that the proposed solar panels are not in conformance with the historic district guidelines,” Clary said in her staff report.
Homeowner Kelly Payne and her contractor ION Solar argued the array was sited primarily on side and rear roof surfaces and had been designed to minimize visual impact. “I’m asking to put black panels on a black roof, not front facing, but on the sides and back surfaces of the roof,” Payne said. Tom Detloff of ION Solar described the structural review his firm obtained and said the installation meets modern wind and attachment standards.
BHAR members who reviewed the application had been split; the board’s denial focused on the panels’ visibility from the street and whether allowing the installation would signal the board was willing to deviate from its recently adopted guidance. Several council members echoed that concern. Councilwoman Butler cited the design guideline language that solar panels “should be installed in a location not visible from the ground or the public right of way” and said the side roof where panels were proposed would be visible to pedestrians. “Our street is constantly, particularly in spring and summer, visited by foot traffic,” Butler said, urging protection of the historic character of downtown.
A motion to deny the appeal carried after discussion. The council’s reading of the town’s 2025 historic district design guidelines, coupled with concerns about visibility from Gray/Grama Street, led the majority to uphold the board’s decision.
Ending: The council’s ruling preserves BHAR’s interpretation of the guidelines in this instance; the applicant may revise the proposal or pursue other options consistent with BHAR guidance and the council’s interpretation of visibility standards.
