Leesburg BAR Work Session Summary – September 9, 2026
Leesburg Board of Architectural Review Work Session – September 9, 2026
The Leesburg Board of Architectural Review (BAR) met on Wednesday, September 9, 2026, at 7:00 PM in Council Chambers. The meeting focused on a deferred case for 9 Royal Street SE (TLHPBR2026-0019) and a discussion of proposed federal changes to the Section 106 historic preservation process. Chair Helen Aikman recused herself from the 9 Royal case due to prior contact with the applicant. The agenda was adopted by a vote of 6-0-1 (one absent).
Public Comments & Testimony
- Kathleen Poles (11 Royal Street SE) opposed raising the historic roof, stating that even a nine-inch increase is a permanent change to a historic structure. She urged the board to preserve the historic roof line and character of Royal Street.
- Suzanne Larkins (3 Royal Street SE) argued that the aggregate of all proposed alterations — including a 19-foot side addition, large accessory structure, balcony, hardscaping, and parking — would drastically alter the property and neighborhood. She emphasized that preservation must impose limits and that the project should be shaped by the historic house and street, not vice versa.
- William Townsend (Liverpool Street SE) expressed concern that Leesburg is losing its historic character, noting that examples of roof height increases from other streets are not applicable to Royal Street.
Discussion Items
-
TLHPBR2026-0019 – 9 Royal Street SE Addition
- Staff presented the proposal for a rear addition, large accessory structure, and site improvements. The key issue was a proposed nine-inch increase in the historic roof ridge height (from 18'6" to 19'7" at the ridge, with a five-inch increase at the fascia). Staff recommended denial, stating that the roof height increase is an irreversible change to a historic structure. The applicant argued that the increase is necessary to sister larger rafters for structural integrity per building code, but the board reiterated that any exterior height change is unacceptable.
- Board members expressed that the roof height increase is contrary to preservation guidelines. Some members suggested alternative interior structural solutions (e.g., flitch plates, transfer beams) that would not alter the exterior. The applicant did not present a revised plan that avoids raising the roof.
- After a straw poll showed no board member would approve the current application, the board voted to defer the case to allow the applicant to explore alternative designs.
-
Section 106 Process Changes Proposed
- Staff informed the board about proposed federal changes to the National Historic Preservation Act's Section 106 review process. The changes would eliminate requirements to avoid harm to historic resources, make public participation optional, and end protections for historic landscapes. Staff described these changes as "disastrous" and requested the board consider asking Town Council to respond.
- The board discussed the implications and voted to authorize the chair to draft a letter to Town Council requesting consideration.
Key Outcomes
- Deferral of TLHPBR2026-0019: The board voted 4-1 (1 absent, 1 recused) to defer the case to the October 7, 2026 work session. The applicant must submit revised plans by September 21, 2026, that do not raise the roof height. The critical action date was extended to October 7, 2026.
- Section 106 Letter: The board unanimously voted (with one absence) to authorize Chair Helen Aikman to draft a memorandum to Town Council requesting consideration of a response to the proposed Section 106 changes.
- The chair also noted that the next BAR business meeting is September 23, 2026, and the next work session is October 7, 2026.
Meeting Transcript
Have present all members except the vice chair uh Tom O'Neill who is in France. Um we have Julie Pasteur, our parliamentarian, uh we have Rick Brown, we have Don Shoreman, JP Andrews, and Lucas Mason, and I'm Helen Aikman, the chair for 2026. Um this evening uh we would we need to begin by adopting the meeting agenda. Does anyone have any questions about the agenda or change changes that need to be made? Otherwise, we can have a motion to adopt the agenda, please. So moved. Second. Okay, we have a motion from JP Andrews and a second from Don Scheuerman. All in favor? Aye. Opposed. Okay, so the uh meeting agenda is adopted by a vote of six in favor and one absent, none opposed. All right, the next item on the agenda is BAR member disclosures. This is an opportunity for members of the BAR to disclose conflicts of interest or other conversations or items of information that they feel are relevant to the issues being presented this evening. Uh I will recuse myself from TLHPBR 2026-0019 as I had a meeting with the applicant about a potential project, which I would have an interest. Okay, thank you very much. Anyone else have anything to disclose? No, excellent. Let's go forward. The next item is petitioners and presentations. This is an opportunity for folks who are here from the public to address items that are not on the agenda tonight. As you know, we have one item on the agenda tonight, or at least in the way of cases, we have one item on the agenda, which is TLH PBR 2026-00199 Royal Street. If there's anyone here who wishes to discuss for the board anything other than that, please come forward. No one. Excellent. Okay. So the next item is discussion of deferred cases. The case we have, as I just said, is TLHPBR 2026-0019, which is the case of the House at 9 Royal Street Southeast. And before the staff begins, I just want to lay a couple of things out tonight. So first we're gonna hear from the staff, then we're gonna hear from the applicant, then we're gonna hear from the public because we have the public hearing still open. Um, and then we'll have the board's deliberations, and I have we'll have some guidelines for the deliberations when we get there. Um, and we'll see where, you know, we'll see where we end up. One thing we're not going to have tonight is any back and forth conversation between the applicant and members of the public. Everyone will when who comes forward to speak, the applicant and the public, you will be addressing the board or the staff as appropriate, but you're not to address the other side, if you will. There are a lot of strong feelings in this case, and I just don't think it does any good to have back and forth at all between the applicant and and the public. So the staff. First, uh before you begin, I would like to congratulate you all on an exceptionally uh well-done staff report. I think it was really extremely helpful, so thank you. Thank you very much. It was uh fun and stressful at the same time. Um and a team effort. So uh yes, as uh Madam Chair is saying, we're here for TLHPR 2026 0019 again for an addition, large accessory structure and site improvements at 9 Royal Street Southeast. Subject property was constructed circa 1850-ish. Um it is obviously a contributing structure to the old and historic district. There's only one previously approved uh case that's never been completed of this size uh on the property. It was to turn this single residential structure into um a slightly higher style duplex. So the current proposal is to raise the historic roof height, a large two-story addition on the rear, wrapping the uh from the rear around to the part uh of the rear part of the left uh from porch alterations to bring that back into its historical accuracy, historic accuracy, a large accessory structure in the rear, and some site improvements. Um again, I've been through this on a few times now because it's my favorite thing to do with a house. Uh this is the history of its alterations, beginning in 1850 with its construction and all the way through 2026 as it is today. Each of the alterations and additions are historic in their own right.
openpublica.com