Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Commission favors slate over charcoal for Hastings roof to preserve historic character
Loading...
Summary
The commission accepted staff’s recommendation that a slate‑toned shingle more closely matches the contributing 1922 property at 4300 Hastings Drive and discouraged a charcoal (near‑black) roof color; the applicant’s representative said the owner preferred charcoal but would accept staff’s lighter option to expedite repair.
The El Paso Historical Landmark Commission voted to follow staff recommendations and encourage a slate‑colored shingle instead of a charcoal (near‑black) option for a roof replacement at 4300 Hastings Drive, a contributing property in the Austin Terrace Historic District. The decision was made to better align the replacement with recorded neighborhood materials and the commission’s preservation standards.
Staff told the commission that documentary or physical evidence of an original charcoal roof was lacking and said charcoal is "a very strong black" that would be unusually prominent on the corner property. "Charcoal is a very strong color... It's gonna absorb a lot of heat, and it's pretty noticeable and pretty prominent," the staff member said.
Elizabeth, speaking for her son Joshua, the applicant, said the family had waited months to replace a failing roof and that Joshua preferred the darker color. When commissioners asked whether the applicant would accept the staff‑recommended slate for speed and administrative ease, Elizabeth said he would not be opposed. Staff noted a previously approved slate color that could be used administratively to expedite the reroofing.
Commissioners moved to accept staff's recommendation that the new roof match existing materials and adopt a slate‑toned option rather than charcoal. After the voice vote passed, staff said they would follow up with the applicant on next steps and administrative approvals so the work could proceed in time to avoid further weather damage.
The commission emphasized retaining the property's historic character, considering the building's age (1922) and its contributing status in the district.
