Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
BAR denies plan to paint historic 109 East Main; suggests targeted fixes and mural options
Summary
The BAR voted to deny an application to paint the entire masonry facade at 109 East Main, citing the building's status as a contributing historic structure and recommending narrower repairs, administrative approval for trim work, and the possibility of a limited mural to address moisture-affected areas.
The Purcellville Board of Architectural Review denied an applicant's request to paint the entire masonry facade at 109 East Main, concluding that full painting would compromise the building's historic character. Staff described the structure as a historic building with Flemish brick bond and warned that painting brick could irreversibly obscure architectural features; staff recommended disapproval of full painting while noting some maintenance work (trim, removal of iron bars, storefront repairs) could be handled administratively.
Applicant Tom Hartley (identified in the packet as representing Hartley Home Building) said he purchased the building about a year ago and described moisture intrusion and tenant mold issues; he said painting would address waterproofing and help attract tenants. In response, staff and board members proposed alternatives including targeted trim painting, power washing, removal of window bars, limited mural placement to address low areas with water intrusion, and administrative circulation of minor color or trim changes. Staff recommended denial on the basis that "painting the building would effectively destroy a significant architectural contribution," and the board voted to deny BAR 25-8; staff will provide written justification that the applicant may appeal to the town council.
Board members encouraged the applicant to submit narrower proposals—such as repainting trim, replacing the window unit, removing bars, restoring storefront cladding, or proposing a regulated mural area—many of which staff said could be circulated administratively to the chair and vice chair for interim approval. The applicant was told he can resubmit a revised application or pursue administrative approvals for limited work.
