Architectural Advisory Board

Architectural Advisory Board Council Chambers May 6, 2015 7:45 p.m. 1. Roll Call: Mrs. Friedlander, Mr. Fritsch, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Wong, and Mr. Way were present. 2. Petitions: There were no petitions. 3. Consent Calendar: a. AAB #2015-0336 – installation of a freestanding sign for Eco Nize Closets at 703 Park Avenue. Mr. Way made a motion to approve as submitted. The motion was seconded by Mr. Anderson and unanimously approved. b. AAB #2015-0399 – installation of a wall sign for Teletron at 6787-A Wilson Blvd. Mr. Way made a motion to approve as submitted with recommendation that the lettering of the sign should be red to match existing and adjacent shopping center signage. The motion was seconded by Mr. Anderson and unanimously approved. c. AAB #2015-0136 – installation of a monument sign and a wall sign for EZ Title Loans at 1103 W. Broad. Mr. Way made a motion to approve as submitted with recommendation to eliminate monument sign or, at a minimum, reduce the sign to a lower monument sign or smaller pole mounted sign so as to reduce visual clutter and better fit in with the context of existing, approved business sign packages. If applicant opts for a monument sign, it should not extend over the sidewalk. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Friedlander and unanimously approved. 4. Other Business: There was no other business. 5. Old Business: There was no old business. 6. New Business: a. AAB first review of initial comprehensive sign package proposal by Ad Vice Studios, LLC and Lincoln Property Company for the mixed-use development known as Lincoln at Tinner Hill, currently under construction on premises known as 455 South Maple Ave, RPC# 52-308-009, zoned B-3 General Business, said property owned by LINCOLN FCHURCH VA LLC. After presentation of the proposed sign package by the applicant, the board and applicant discussed the project. Based on board questions and input from the applicant, the board recommended the applicant consider smaller wall mounted signs at parking and loading areas, as there will be multiple signs at each area. The proposed high tenant sign (T1.01)  will need further consideration and review as this is typically a location for a building identification sign, not a tenant sign – building identification signs are proposed at other locations. The manner in which the area of the Exterior Building ID signs is calculated should be consistent with other signage and a determination should be made as to if the logo is to be included in the calculated signage area. b. AAB #2015-0164 – by the Protestant Episcopal Church, review of a building permit application to install two exterior doors and egress updates at the Falls Church Day School, for premises known as 115 E. Fairfax Street, RPC 53-107-058 of the Falls Church Real Property records, zoned OD, Official Design. After presentation by the applicant and board discussion, Mr. Way made a motion to approve as submitted with the recommendation that door mullions are designed to best match the dimensions of the existing windows on the same façade. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Friedlander and unanimously approved. c. AAB #2013-1165 – City Council Official Referral to Boards, Commissions and Community Organizations of Resolution TR14-29 (Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment); Ordinance TO14-28 (Official Zoning Map Amendment); Resolution TR14-28 (Special Exceptions) for a proposed Mixed Use Development, named Mason Row, by Spectrum Development, LLC (Applicant/Developer). After presentation by the applicant, input from multiple citizens, the board discussed the project with the applicant. After review of the available materials the board felt that there was not enough information presented to fully visualize and understand the impact of proposed project, specifically the impact of the Special Exceptions height bonus. The board commended the applicant for recent design changes that incorporate state and local building traditions but noted a number of elements where further work was called for. Specifically, the board noted that the added breezeway could be a safety concern for pedestrians; that screening on garage levels should extend around the entirety of the exposed levels; there needs to be consideration of the east elevation at the south corner; the applicant should consider alternative locations for the hotel within the property, as its current location seems to put too many constraints on the overall massing of the project; the punched-out windows should be detailed with headers and/or soldier courses for visual appeal; develop the parking garage façade to be less “clunky” and disjointed; the entire Park Avenue elevation should be stepped back further to better fit into the residential aspect of the community directly adjacent and across the street; the bridge element at the entrance of Mason Lane off of Broad Street needs further development / design and, the corner tower at the Grove Street intersection might be less prominent and better address the residential neighborhood and park that it faces to take advantage of the opportunity that is there to create a sense of neighborhood and reinforce the project as a “meeting space” by inviting the users of the West End Park, W&OD trail (and associated “pocket park” space) and neighbors into the market space, rather than to further separate them with a wall of hotel rooms. The use of punched openings and open colonnades could start to break down this façade so-as not to be perceived as a solid wall closing off the adjacent spaces and neighborhoods. Most importantly, the board stated that more  information including perspectives, shadow studies, site plan and that the project be shown in context with adjacent and local buildings, homes and features is needed before any approval or recommendations can be made. A motion to table the item until adequate information is presented for review and comment was made by Mr. Way, seconded by Mrs. Friedlander, and passed unanimously. 7. Minutes from the March 4, 2015 AAB meeting were reviewed. Mr. Way made a motion that they be accepted as submitted, seconded by Mr. Anderson, and passed unanimously. 8. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 11:26 p.m.