NCPC approves staff comments, asks for more testing and costs before any decision on EEOB painting

The National Capital Planning Commission on May 7 approved staff comments on the Eisenhower Executive Office Building (EEOB) exterior beautification concept, but stopped short of endorsing a proposal to paint the building, asking the applicant for further testing, reversibility data and maintenance‑cost comparisons before any later approvals.

Commission staff recommended cleaning, repointing and other masonry preservation measures but said additional information is required to evaluate two paint options submitted by the Office of Administration: painting the building above its base, or painting all exterior walls to align the EEOB visually with nearby neoclassical buildings. Mike Weil, presenting the concept, said staff supports cleaning and restoration measures while seeking photo simulations, stone‑sample mockups and technical data about how paint would bond to the granite.

The Office of Administration’s construction operations manager, Ryan Erb, told the commission that third‑party testing is underway and that a preliminary estimate for painting alone is about $7.5 million, with an expected paint life of roughly 25 years, but he repeatedly emphasized the tests are not complete. "Preliminary results have been positive as far as the ability for the silicate to bond and then also for the silicate to be removed," Erb said, adding the agency is "working with a third party vendor to do all the appropriate testing." Josh Fisher, also with the Office of Administration, said the Section 106 process "is under process and should be available shortly."

Dozens of preservation professionals, former agency preservation officers and residents urged the commission to reject the painting concept at the concept stage. "Painting is a terrible idea," said Greg Werkheiser, counsel to the DC Preservation League, arguing the administration’s routing of the project through the White House risks undermining mandatory review. "Voluntary compliance is not legal compliance," Werkheiser said, adding that experts who reviewed the plan concluded mineral silicate paint "will not bond to granite" and could trap moisture and accelerate deterioration.

Marian Werkheiser, a founding partner of Cultural Heritage Partners, said painting the EEOB would "fundamentally alter one of the most important civic compositions in the United States" and urged the commission to require independent condition assessments and treatment plans prepared by credentialed conservators. The National Trust for Historic Preservation warned the change would be irreversible and expensive for taxpayers, and multiple witnesses pointed to alternatives such as conservation‑grade cleaning, repointing and lighting adjustments.

Commissioners expressed concern about the project’s unusual procedural posture — the submission came from the Office of Administration rather than the General Services Administration — and asked for clarity about legal and review responsibilities. Vice Chairman Levinbach moved to approve the staff comments; Commissioner Ingrassia seconded. The commission approved the motion by roll call (11 yes; motion passes) and requested that the applicant provide the requested testing data, comparative maintenance‑cost information, documentation on reversibility, and independent preservation consultations prior to further review.

The commission’s action was limited to approving staff comments on the concept submission; it did not approve painting or a final design. Commissioners and staff said they expect to review additional information and that further NCPC review will be required before any preliminary or final approvals.