Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee backs COA for painting or staining masonry and murals on landmarks; council resists broader aesthetic regulation
Summary
Staff proposed and the committee supported a zoning amendment requiring certificates of appropriateness for painting, staining or altering masonry surfaces and for murals on landmark or historic‑district buildings; commissioners emphasized COA would review materials and methods but would not regulate color or design.
City staff presented a proposed general amendment to the zoning ordinance to require a certificate of appropriateness (COA) for painting, staining or otherwise modifying masonry surfaces on landmark buildings and in historic districts, and to require COA review for murals. The proposal aims to protect masonry from damage caused by impermeable coatings and to ensure appropriate materials are used.
Emma, who introduced the item, described technical risks of painting masonry: masonry is porous and painting can trap moisture, which may cause cracking, peeling or mold and make later removal risky. She told the committee that other nearby communities have similar protections and that staff would review proposed materials and recommend higher‑permeability treatments, limewash or panels where appropriate. “This amendment would change the process of our certificate of appropriateness… because there's no building permit required for painting or staining,” Emma said.
Council discussion split the item into two parts: formal COA requirements for masonry surfaces (the group favored moving forward) and a broader proposal to regulate murals and design choices across the community (several members raised First Amendment and property‑rights concerns and opposed extending COAs to regulate art or taste). Multiple members said they support the masonry COA to protect historic fabric but do not want the city to act as a taste regulator for public art.
The committee voted to recommend approval of the masonry COA amendment and related code cleanup language; staff will proceed with the recommended amendment language and continue discussions on any broader mural guidance that respects legal limits and property‑owner rights.
No fines or enforcement process beyond COA review were enacted in the discussion; staff described the typical process: when a property owner makes a change that requires a COA, staff would notify the owner and the owner would present the proposal to the Historic Preservation Commission for approval or further work.
