Waynesboro staff outlines gaps in local historic-preservation ordinance; commission discusses design guidelines and enforcement

Planning staff gave the Waynesboro Planning Commission a detailed briefing on historic registers, design guidelines and the city’s current historic-preservation ordinance at the Oct. 22 meeting.

Allison, planning staff, reviewed federal and state frameworks, including the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and Virginia’s Department of Historic Resources (DHR). Allison said listing on the National Register or the Virginia Landmarks Register is largely honorary and “does not impose any additional restrictions on property owners,” but can make owners eligible for federal and state tax credits and other grant programs.

Staff described the steps commonly used in historic preservation planning—inventorying resources, writing preservation policy in the comprehensive plan, creating a preservation ordinance, and conducting public outreach—and outlined typical ordinance elements such as purpose statements, a process for designating landmarks and districts, creation of an historic review board (or architectural review board), a certificate of appropriateness (COA) process, and separate district design guidelines.

Waynesboro currently has three historic districts listed on the Virginia Landmarks Register and the National Register: the Port Republic Road Historic District, the Downtown Historic District and the Tree Streets Historic District. Staff gave these figures: Port Republic Road (established 02/2001) has 85 contributing structures (built roughly 1870–1951); the Downtown Historic District has 42 contributing structures (circa 1806–1951); and the Tree Streets Historic District has 454 contributing structures (majority built 1890–1950).

Staff compared Waynesboro’s ordinance to best practices and state code. They said the city’s ordinance includes purpose statements, a designation process and a COA process for demolition and relocation, but lacks several elements commonly used to give historic districts legal force: explicit review for exterior renovations or additions to contributing structures, maintenance standards and exceptions, a requirement to create and appoint an historic review board, and adoption of district-specific design guidelines. Staff also noted the ordinance as written does not include the circuit-court appeal described in state code for owners denied a COA; the ordinance currently allows an appeal to city council within 30 days and contains the state-required provision about offering a property for sale for a preservation-minded buyer, but it omits the separate right to appeal to the circuit court within 30 days.

Commissioners raised several practical concerns during the discussion: how an ordinance would affect property owners’ rights, the risk of demolition-by-neglect (owners allowing buildings to deteriorate until demolition becomes justified), and enforcement limits because the city’s current maintenance statement would generally rely on property-maintenance complaints and building official inspections. One commissioner asked whether the commission could review renovations and additions without formal guidelines; staff said the commission technically could review such work but recommended creating design guidelines—typically developed by a consultant—to ensure consistent, transparent decision-making.

Staff described options for moving forward: include policy language in the comprehensive plan recommending the city hire a consultant to prepare design guidelines and establish a historic review commission; then amend the ordinance to adopt those guidelines and procedures with legal review. Staff estimated developing design guidelines would likely take about six months to a year after selecting a consultant and that the ordinance-amendment process typically adds three to six months; the timeline could be integrated into the broader comprehensive-plan update staff is conducting.

Staff also noted current public-engagement work tied to the comprehensive plan: more than 500 survey responses had been collected and an open-house meeting is scheduled for Nov. 19 at the high school from 5:00 to 7:30 p.m. Staff said they plan targeted stakeholder meetings and neighborhood sessions as part of any design-guideline development.

The commission did not take formal action on ordinance changes at the meeting. Staff said any ordinance amendments would be recommendations to city council, which would hold the required public hearings and enact any zoning or ordinance revisions.

Commissioners and staff discussed enforcement penalties in general terms; staff did not identify a specific penalty amount in the historic-district section of the ordinance but noted state law sets maximum penalties for local ordinance violations. Staff recommended further legal review as part of any ordinance update.

The presentation materials included references and example documents (including design guidelines from other Virginia localities) and staff offered to return for a follow-up session on specific items if the commission wanted more detail.