Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Galveston Landmark Commission approves composite shingles for historic house despite staff recommendation
Summary
The Landmark Commission approved case 26LC001, allowing a homeowner to replace an existing metal roof with composition shingles at the subject property; staff had recommended denial and urged use of replica metal shingles to preserve the historic appearance. The approval included conditions such as seamless gutters.
The Galveston Landmark Commission voted to approve case 26LC001, permitting replacement of an existing metal roof with composition shingles at the subject property, after a contested discussion between staff and commissioners.
Daniel, a commission staff member, told the panel that staff recommended denial of the applicant’s request, saying, “the staff recommendation, it should be denial as opposed to approval of the conditions,” and cited design standards and historic records indicating a metal shingle roof existed when the house was built. Daniel noted the 1925 insurance board records and a 1947 Sanborn map as supporting evidence and recommended modern replica metal shingles if replacement was required to preserve the historic appearance.
The applicant, Louis Catalia, general partner of Catalia Family Partnership, said he bought the house on Oct. 31, 2025, described active leaks and interior damage, and argued composition shingles are common on the block. “Six of the properties on that same side block all have composition roofs,” Catalia said, adding that he will install seamless gutters and complete interior repairs.
Vice Chairperson Bushel asked whether staff opposed all non-metal roofs or only those that do not replicate a metal appearance, saying, “Just to make sure I fully understand, staff isn't against a non metal roof. They just wanted to look like the metal roof?” Daniel replied that the commission has in past cases recommended replica metal shingles where original metal was documented.
During discussion, commissioners weighed preservation against practicality. One commissioner said the roof was “pretty well degraded” and likely needs replacement, while another argued it would be regrettable to remove an original metal roof. Another commissioner said the visual difference between aged metal and composition would be minor and that allowing a composite roof paired with seamless gutters would enable the owner to rehabilitate the house without prolonged delay: “the combination of just roofing material that meets the conditions, whether it be metal or composite, along with the seamless gutters, is gonna really give the owner the opportunity to redo an historic home,” the commissioner said.
Chairperson Click moved to approve the case “with the specific conditions,” including the specific condition that the roof be replaced with a composite roofing material; a colleague seconded the motion. The commission voted in favor, and Click announced, “The motion passes.”
The approval departs from staff’s recommendation and conditions the replacement on measures discussed at the meeting, including the applicant’s plan to install seamless gutters and to repair interior damage caused by leaks. The commission did not identify a requirement to use replica metal shingles in this instance.
The commission had received four mailed public notices for the application, with one returned in favor. No members of the public spoke against the project during the hearing. The commission adjourned after noting the next meeting date and that a previously scheduled February 16 meeting was canceled.
