Color Confusion

The Windover Heights Board of Review voted unanimously to deny a new fence on April 1, 2003. The Board determined that while NO mention of color or landscaping is in the Windover Heights Historic District ordinance, they could still ask the property owner for such information. The property owner refused and the Board voted against the application. The Council upheld their review board's decision and now the case is pending in court.

If the property owner had given a color and had received approval he could have changed the fence color the next day WITHOUT Board approval. While the Board was very opinionated about their right to ask for color for the new fence, they REFUSED comment when asked if the owner could paint the fence a new color the next day without approval.

Interestingly, as far back as 1981, color was not an issue:

“I would like to clarify what is meant by the requirement that you consult regarding colors. The Board has no real authority to disapprove your color choices…”
Charles Sloan, 1981

The Town Zoning Administrator offers a different tune in 2003:

"It may not make sense to have a house with purple polka dots and a chartreuse base."
Vienna Director of Planning and Zoning, 2003

If this statement was true, then why legally was this house in the Historic District painted chartreuse in 2005?

Click to See Large Image

To top it all off consider this Spring 2005 gem from Maud Robinson:

"…we might consider what Mr. Haight could have done and no one could have stopped him. If he had on a whim or flight of whimsy decided to paint that house in red and orange stripes, he could have done it and there is nothing in the code that says he could not have done it."

Does any of this make any sense? None of it makes any sense. It is illegal.