Decatur review board pauses decision on bright-green roof, asks homeowner to consult contractor

The Decatur Architectural Review Board on Sept. 11, 2025, declined to issue a final Certificate of Appropriateness for a proposed bright-green roof and asked the homeowner to consult the roofing contractor and return with additional information so staff can verify options.

The matter concerned a property in Decatur City located within a local historic district. Board members and staff that oversee Certificates of Appropriateness (COAs) discussed whether the proposed shingle color and type fit the property's historic character; no formal, recorded vote to approve the roof was taken during the meeting.

Board vice chair Patrick Rasco opened the meeting and staff preservation specialist Dr. Swope reviewed COA procedures, including that a COA must be issued before a building permit can be obtained and that denied COAs are mailed to the property owner address on file with the Morgan County Revenue Commissioner. The homeowner told the board the roof needs replacement because "it's a pretty old roof and we got several leaks right now. I got buckets up in the attic trying to catch it," and said the new shingles had already been ordered because of the leaks.

Board members debated historic appropriateness and visual impact. One board member said the proposed color was "so vibrant" and "does not really align with the architectural authenticity" of the property and district. Other members noted that green roofs did appear on some nearby houses and that some green shingle tones can be appropriate for certain houses and periods. The board also discussed roofing product type; a member observed that early-period roofs in the district would more likely have been a three-tab shingle rather than the dimensional/flecked product the homeowner had purchased.

The homeowner said the shingles were a special order and that exchanging them could be costly. The board suggested checking whether the supplier would accept a return or restocking; the homeowner told the board the contractor had already purchased the materials. Because the cost and return options were uncertain and the visual effect prompted concern, the board did not grant an immediate COA at the meeting.

Instead, board members recommended that the homeowner confirm return or exchange options with the supplier and contractor and then work with staff. A board member suggested that staff, specifically Dr. Swope or staff member Lehi, could review any revised submittal and potentially approve the project administratively if the changes met guidelines. The board did not set a follow-up hearing date for this application.

The meeting also approved minutes from the June 12, 2025, meeting and moved on to other agenda items. The board reiterated the appeal process for denied COAs as spelled out in the municipal ordinance and reminded applicants that COA decisions and conditions are communicated in writing.