This page uses extracted PDF text. Text can misread numbers, dates or table columns. Check the PDF before quoting or interpreting it. Redacted areas remain redacted.
Honorable Patrick A. Hope
December 5, 2025
Page 4
provisions allowed by Subdivision 2. 19 Any proper party has a 30-day period after the governing body
renders that decision to file an appeal with the circuit court. 20 Upon filing the appeal, a final decision
approving the demolition application is stayed pending the outcome of the appeal. With respect to an
owner's rights, the term "final decision" is clearly linked with a request to demolish a historic structure. In
short, "final decision" as used in the statute prior to the 2024 Amendment referred to the final decision of a
locality whether to approve an application to demolish a historic structure when such approval is required
by the locality's historic preservation ordinance.
Considering the context and meaning of "final decision" elsewhere in搂 15.2-2306, I conclude that
the term "final decision" in the 2024 Amendment refers to the final decision of a governing body whether
to approve an application to demolish a historic structure that is subject to the approval requirement in
Subdivision 2. Significantly, in contrast to the construction and demolition approvals contemplated by
Subdivisions 1 and 2, Code 搂 15.2-2306 is silent on what role, if any, a review board might play in the
initial historic designation process; unlike the approval of a construction or demolition application, which
can be made by the review board, the designation of a particular district or structure requires the local
governing body to pass an ordinance to effect the designation. 21 The decision to adopt an ordinance is
distinct from a decision to take any particular action pursuant to an ordinance, once adopted. Because
Subdivision 3 affords eligible parties judicial review of the locality's "specific act under the [historic
preservation] ordinance," not the ordinance provisions themselves, 22 the designation of a structure as
historic via ordinance is not a "final decision" as used in Subdivision 3.
In addition, requiring a delay between approval of the demolition application and the issuance of
the demolition permit fits within the existing appeal procedures of Subdivision 3, which allow an appeal
"from any final decision of the governing body pursuant to [S]ubdivisions 1 and 2" to be made "within 30
days after the final decision is rendered .... " 23 To safeguard the structure during that 30-day window, the
2024 Amendment provides a party seeking to appeal a demolition approval a concurrent 30-day stay period
before the actual demolition permit is issued.
19
As noted above, Subdivision 3 also makes appealable those decisions that are made under ordinance provisions
authorized under Subdivision 1 regarding applications to reconstruct, alter, or restore a building or structure within
any designated historic district. See 搂 15.2-2306(A)(l) & (A)(3).
20
Section 15.2-2306(A)(3).
21 In other words, there is a distinction between how a locality "set[s] forth" a historic structure and how a locality
considers an application to demolish a historic structure. In 搂 15.2-2306(A), the General Assembly empowered
localities to "adopt an ordinance setting forth ... any ... structures within the locality having an important historic .
. . interest[,]"搂 15.2-2306(A)(l) (emphasis added), but it separately permitted localities to prohibit, in such ordinance,
certain construction activities in historic districts or the demolition of historic structures until applications to do so
are" approved by the review board or, on appeal, by the governing body." Section 15 .2-2306(A)( 1) & (A)(2) (emphasis
added). Although I offer no opinion on purely local procedure or practice, I note that, even if a locality accepts
applications for the designation of historic structures or allows the review board to make recommendations, it is not
the "approval" of an application that confers status as a historic district or structure under 搂 15.2-2306, but rather the
local governing body's adoption of"an ordinance setting forth ... [the] structures ... having an important historic ..
. interest." Section 15.2-2306(A)(l ). Cf 搂 l 5.2-2306(E) (defining "historic structure" as either "a structure designated
as having an important historic, architectural, archaeological, or cultural interest or designated as a contributing
structure by an ordinance passed pursuant to subsection (A)."
22
Norton v. City of Danville, 268 Va. 402,408 (2004).
23
Section l 5.2-2306(A)(3).Jump to an indexed page (5 of 5)