Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Architectural Review Board updates guidelines, seeks education, grants and penalties to protect Roanoke historic districts
Summary
City planner Catherine Gray reported revisions to the H‑1/H‑2 design guidelines, said staff handled most minor approvals, and described next steps including education, an awards program, a pilot grant in Gainsborough and consideration of penalties and compliance checks to deter unapproved work in local historic districts.
The Architectural Review Board reported this morning that it revised design guidelines to clarify replacement standards for windows and roofing and to create clearer rules for placement of alternative energy systems in Roanoke’s local historic districts.
“Preserving culturally, historically, and architecturally significant buildings through preservation and context sensitive design is one of the policies that is within City Plan 2040,” said Catherine Gray, principal planner and acting agent to the ARB. Gray presented the board’s annual work, statistics for 2024, and proposed next steps.
The update matters because the ARB’s rules govern changes to properties in the city’s local historic overlay districts (H‑1 and H‑2). Gray told council and the ARB that staff and the board used City Plan 2040 and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation as the basis for the revisions, and focused revisions on windows, doors, roofing and rules for alternative energy.
Gray said staff reviewed 88 applications administratively in 2024 (30 of those were labeled in‑kind repairs and replacements), while the full ARB reviewed 24 applications: 21 approved, two denied and one withdrawn — a total of 112 applications. The change to the guidelines loosened an earlier, high standard for window replacement (from “beyond repair” to a less restrictive test), expanded acceptable roof and gutter materials, and clarified where solar and other alternative energy installations may be sited on buildings or on accessory structures.
Board members and councilors pressed staff on several practical matters raised repeatedly by residents: how to notify new property owners that they are in a historic district, how to help low‑income or first‑time homeowners absorb the often higher cost of historically appropriate repairs, and how to detect and deter unpermitted or after‑the‑fact alterations.
Gray said staff can and does flag building permits that fall in H‑2 districts and typically sends the applicant a link to the guidelines and the certificate of appropriateness application. She also said staff performs an initial review when an application is filed and a final historic district review when the project is complete; staff may therefore discover discrepancies only at the end of a project.
Several council members and ARB members urged stronger outreach to realtors and title agents so buyers learn about overlay restrictions earlier in the purchase process. Gray said Old Southwest neighborhood groups plan to send new‑owner notices and that the city has online guides; she also suggested returning to in‑person “material‑focused” education events such as roof or window workshops.
Council members and ARB participants discussed a pilot grant program for the Gainsborough neighborhood funded with ARPA dollars; Gray said that grant is currently limited to that area while the city evaluates results. Council members also discussed an existing tax abatement program for qualifying historic‑district repairs; Gray said the length of the abatement has changed from earlier programs but remains available for qualifying work.
Enforcement and penalties drew sustained attention. "I'm tired of seeing those things happen where we're losing historic properties because people are just saying, 'Oh, I'm sorry,' and that's it," said Council member Balton, urging a deterrent that is fair but meaningful. Others noted the city does not yet have a regular, proactive compliance inspection mechanism between permit approval and final building inspection and that penalties without a reliable compliance review process could be difficult to administer.
Gray and municipal staff said they will continue to pursue a combination of measures: more outreach and education for homeowners and realtors, a potential awards program to publicly recognize successful, compliant projects, continued refinement of the design guidelines, and discussion about creating a penalty structure coupled with a feasible compliance‑review workflow.
The ARB’s immediate next steps include public education events, continued review of alternative materials and technologies as they evolve, and monitoring the Gainsborough grant pilot to determine whether a broader grant program would be appropriate.
