Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
BAR approves demolition of 200 West Main (Violet Crown site) with documentation conditions
Summary
Charlottesville’s BAR voted to allow demolition of the structure that currently houses the Violet Crown Theater, conditioning the Certificate of Appropriateness on documentation (point‑cloud or existing drawings, photographs), and requiring an approved COA and building permit for a replacement before demolition may proceed.
The Charlottesville Board of Architectural Review voted to approve demolition of the contributing structure at 200 West Main Street — the parcel currently occupied by the Violet Crown Theater — but attached conditions requiring detailed documentation and assurances about replacement construction.
Why it matters: 200 West Main is listed as a contributing resource in the Downtown ADC historic district and is within the municipal review area for demolitions. The BAR’s decision balances preserving historic record and permitting redevelopment of a site several speakers described as altered by previous facade changes.
The demolition application drew public comment from preservation advocates. Genevieve Keller, president of Preservation Piedmont, told the BAR her group was “not necessarily opposed to the project, but we’re very concerned about demolition,” and urged thorough documentation and interpretation of the site’s history, including possible archaeological investigation.
Staff described the existing structure as a late‑19th/early‑20th‑century brick commercial block whose primary historic facades had been substantially altered over time; the most recent notable changes were a 1996 rehabilitation of the Water Street side and earlier mid‑20th‑century storefront renovations. The staff report noted the building is a contributing element in the downtown district but that much of the visible street‑front character‑defining fabric had been removed in previous alterations.
Applicant representative Michael Levine (applicant name per staff and public comment) and the design team said the narrative and supporting materials explain the redevelopment rationale and that the project team is prepared to provide documentation of the existing building.
Action: After discussion, a member moved to approve demolition with conditions; the motion passed. The BAR’s conditions require the applicant to submit to the record either a 3‑D point‑cloud scan or existing construction drawings that document the current condition, to provide comprehensive photographic documentation, and to secure BAR approval for the COA of a replacement and an approved building permit for that replacement before demolition can proceed. The BAR also recommended consultation with a local archaeologist to assess whether any subsurface investigation is warranted.
A roll‑call voice vote was recorded in favor. Board members voiced support for requiring documentation measures — including modern point‑cloud capture — so future researchers and the public retain a record of the structure and the site.
What’s next: The applicant may submit required documentation and pursue design and permitting for the replacement building. Any aggrieved party may appeal the BAR decision to City Council within the municipal appeal period; staff noted that appeal rights apply to approvals as well as denials.
