Board of Zoning Appeals

1 REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 2 City Council Chambers 3 300 Park Avenue 4 Falls Church, Virginia 22046 5 February 13, 2020 6 7:30 p.m. 7 8 1. CALL TO ORDER 9 MR. JONES: Good evening. I'd like to call to 10 order the regular meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals 11 for February 13, 2020. 12 Could we have a roll call please. 13 14 2. ROLL CALL 15 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Calabrese. 16 Mr. Calabrese is absent. 17 Mr. Jones. 18 MR. JONES: Here. 19 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Misleh. 20 MR. MISLEH: Here. 21 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Bartlett. 22 MR. BARTLETT: Here. 23 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Kien. 24 MR. KIEN: Here. 25 RECORDING SECRETARY: Thank you. 26 MR. JONES: Before we get started for the 27 evening, the Board would like to recognize Peter Kien, 28 our newest member and thank him very much for 29 volunteering to join us, so welcome. 30 MR. BOYLE: Thank you. 31 32 4. OLD BUSINESS: 33 MR. JONES: Do we have any Old Business? 34 MR. BOYLE: No, sir. 35 We have a suggestion for New Business however, 36 regarding moving the third item, Item C on the agenda, 37 the appeal, upfront to entertain a motion from the 38 appellant's attorney. 39 MR. JONES: All right. Before we entertain 40 that motion, if anybody is going to speak here before 41 the Board tonight, I would like to take a moment to 42 swear you in. And if you've come to present before the 43 Board, you'll sign in up here. 44 (Witnesses sworn.) 45 46 NEW BUSINESS: 47 c. Appeal application A1612-20 by Rani Doyle, 48 appellant, to appear a determination by the Zoning 49 Administrator dated December 12, 2019, and amended and 50 corrected in a letter dated December 13, 2019, in 51 response to a request for determination regarding the 52 subdivision application for 807 Villa Ridge Road, RPC 53 #53-207-048 of the Falls Church Real Property Records, 54 zoned R-1A, Low Density Residential. 55 56 MR. JONES: As far as New Business, as Mr. 57 Boyle alluded to, we'd like to move the appeal, 58 Application A1612-20 by Rani Doyle to the first item of 59 Business that way the applicant doesn't have to sit 60 through the rest of the meeting. 61 So if you'd like to come up and sit and sign 62 in. 63 And, sir, if you wouldn't mind stating your 64 name for the record. 65 MR. WRIGHT: My name is Minturn Wright, that's 66 spelled M-I-N-T-U-R-N, Wright with a W. 67 MR. JONES: John, before we get started, I 68 understand there might be a motion to continue this but 69 if you wouldn't mind, just provide a little bit of 70 background for the record for the application. 71 MR. BOYLE: Yes. This involves an appeal of a 72 request for a determination that I received, responded 73 to, and then the appellant objects to some of the 74 responses they received. 75 Subsequently they filed an appeal to raise 76 their questions with this Board. You have a packet from 77 myself responding to those. And we've now received a 78 request from the appellants through their attorney to 79 continue. 80 And it is the, I'd say, the tradition of this 81 Board to grant one continuation, one continuance, and 82 staff wouldn't object to that. 83 MR. JONES: Thank you, sir. 84 Mr. Wright. 85 MR. WRIGHT: That is what I've come here to 86 request. I would request on behalf of my client, who is 87 unable to be here because of a prior commitment, that 88 there be a continuance to the next regular meeting. 89 MR. JONES: The next regular meeting is March 90 12, 2020. 91 MR. BOYLE: Yes, sir. 92 MR. JONES: Thank you. 93 I don't have any questions. 94 Is there a motion to vote? 95 MR. BARTLETT: I'll make a motion to approve 96 the continuance of this appeal request to the March 12, 97 2020, meeting. 98 MR. JONES: Is there a second? 99 MR. MISLEH: Second. 100 MR. JONES: Roll call please. 101 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Jones. 102 MR. JONES: Yes. 103 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Misleh. 104 MR. MISLEH: Yes. 105 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Bartlett. 106 MR. BARTLETT: Yes. 107 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Kien. 108 MR. KIEN: Yes. 109 RECORDING SECRETARY: Thank you. 110 MR. JONES: Thank you very much, sir. We'll 111 see you in March. 112 MR. WRIGHT: Thank you. 113 114 a. Variance application V1610-19 by David Ogden, 115 applicant and owner, for a variance to Section 116 48-238(3)a, to allow rear yard setback of 37 feet 117 instead of 40 feet, for the purpose of constructing a 118 1-story rear addition on premises known as 610 Oak Haven 119 Drive, RPC #51-121-053 of the Falls Church Real Property 120 Records, zoned R-1A, Low Density Residential. 121 122 MR. JONES: With that, we'll move to the next 123 item of New Business. This is Variance application 124 V1610-19, by David Ogden, applicant and owner, for a 125 variance of Section 48-238(3)a, to allow rear yard 126 setback of 37 feet instead of 40 feet, for the purpose 127 of constructing a 1-story rear addition on premises 128 known as 610 Oak Haven Drive, RPC #51-121-053 of the 129 Falls Church Real Property Records, zoned R-1A, Low 130 Density Residential. 131 MS. OGDEN: We're having a rough February. 132 MR. OGDEN: You'll have to bear with us. My 133 wife just had her appendix removed and I'm recovering 134 from the flu, so -- 135 MR. JONES: We appreciate you being here. 136 Mr. Boyle, if you wouldn't mind, sir, 137 providing a report. 138 MR. BOYLE: Yes, sir. 139 You have a packet of information providing 140 some background. And of the applications we get, I 141 commend these folks. I think this is one of our 142 textbook examples of how to respond to the issues that 143 this Board considers. 144 But in that packet they directly responded to 145 each of the points that are raised by the Code of why 146 should the variance be considered. You have a plat 147 showing the layout of the property as well as the 148 footprint of the addition. 149 On that plat it's worth pointing out the very 150 irregular shape. All sides of the plat are unusual, all 151 sides of the property are unusual as well as the street 152 frontage which even has a nice cul-de-sac effect there. 153 And then on the property itself are two very 154 large utility easements that complicate the use of the 155 property and placement of any addition such as what 156 we're considering tonight. 157 They've provided a concept of the floor plan 158 to show the scale and the scope and how it would be 159 perceived by the neighbors, and they've included an 160 aerial photo showing the footprint and commentary, 161 letters of support from the neighbors that abut the 162 property. 163 I think in the packet, particularly the plat, 164 is of interest, because it shows if it weren't for the 165 utility easements, I believe this addition could 166 actually be placed in a location that would not trip 167 into the rear setback. 168 Having said that, I think I'll defer to the 169 applicants and their presentation and we're available 170 for questions. 171 MR. JONES: Thank you. 172 Please. 173 MS. OGDEN: I think we're basically just 174 asking for a rear yard reduction of three feet in order 175 to produce a logical-looking addition on the top of our 176 house. 177 As John has pointed out, we have provided 178 statements of support from all of the surrounding 179 property owners. 180 I mean, the lot itself is really the hardship 181 because of the unique nature of it, plus the utility 182 easements. 183 So I think we're happy to answer any questions 184 you guys might have about what we intend to do. 185 MR. JONES: Thank you. 186 With that, we're going to my colleagues for 187 any questions. 188 MR. BARTLETT: I would just say thank you so 189 much for this extensive packet of information trying to 190 justify what you're looking for and the drawings and the 191 research you've done and the outreach to your neighbors 192 especially. 193 I have a question about these -- maybe you can 194 discuss your planning versus what you're restricted by, 195 specifically the various utility easements and your 196 conversations with the City, if you've had any, and how 197 that sort of directed where you felt you could actually 198 build on your property because of it, one, two, three 199 easements that are on your property. 200 MS. OGDEN: So I believe our architect reached 201 out to somebody at the City inquiring about those 202 utility easements and was basically told there's no 203 indication that the City's going to abandon those. 204 So what we're trying to do is reasonably 205 expand the natural footprint of the house. I think we 206 included an existing layout of the house in there. And 207 so we're just trying to build off the back of the house 208 and expand those spaces so that we can modernize it for 209 the way families live now, which is not obviously the 210 way families lived in 1950 when that house was built. 211 You know, not looking to do palatial additions 212 like some of these McMansions, just trying to do 213 something that's -- allows for a reasonable floor plan 214 that people can actually live in, instead of being 215 squished on top of each other. 216 MR. BARTLETT: Technically, you couldn't go, 217 if you're looking at the house, you couldn't go 218 left-right because of -- 219 MS. OGDEN: The utility easements. 220 MR. BARTLETT: The easement. 221 MS. OGDEN: Yeah. 222 MR. BARTLETT: But it prevented you from 223 drawing or coming up with a scenario that way but you 224 could go, to satisfy your planning, you need to go just 225 a little bit further back to fill in that needed space, 226 is that what you're saying? 227 MS. OGDEN: Yeah. So currently we do have a 228 sun porch back there that's a depth of 12 feet. 229 Unfortunately we've tried many different designs that 230 would work within the 12 feet and it just creates 231 basically either a galley kitchen or a seating area and 232 a living room where the couches would face each other 233 and it's just like basically on top of each other. 234 There's no real living space. It would just be a very 235 awkward addition. 236 I think anyone who would walk into it, would 237 be like, why did you spend all this money to have this 238 tiny little space on the back of your house. 239 So the architect determined that the least 240 amount of reduction we would need in order to make it 241 liveable would be three feet. That's why we're only 242 asking for the three feet. 243 MR. BARTLETT: Thank you. 244 MR. MISLEH: That expansion is only a single 245 story? 246 MS. OGDEN: Correct. 247 MR. OGDEN: Correct. 248 MR. MISLEH: For the aerial view for the 249 existing home and the addition, in that overhead view, 250 is the addition part sort of the white -- 251 MR. OGDEN: The light part. 252 MS. OGDEN: Yes. Sorry. It's not entirely 253 clear. 254 MR. MISLEH: Thank you. 255 MR. OGDEN: And then you had an additional 256 statement of support, right? 257 MS. OGDEN: Yeah. 258 MR. BARTLETT: When you reached out to your 259 neighbors, did any of your neighbors provide any concern 260 or discontent with your plans? I see letters of 261 support, just making sure. 262 MS. OGDEN: No, so their only concern was that 263 you wouldn't grant the variance and somebody would come 264 in and knock our house down and build a McMansion. 265 We actually have an additional support. It's 266 not from an adjoining neighbor but everyone else was 267 very much in favor of this plan. 268 MR. BARTLETT: Thank you. 269 MR. JONES: Any other questions upon this? 270 (No response.) 271 MR. JONES: We'll have a motion on -- sorry. 272 If you are done with your presentation, we'll just 273 discuss it real quick. 274 MS. OGDEN: Yeah. 275 MR. JONES: John, real quick, a procedural 276 question for you. 277 MR. BARTLETT: Regarding conditioning a 278 variance to a particular property owner and structure, I 279 think to your point is one of the concerns of the 280 neighbors was the issue, this variance, does the 281 variance run with the land, and basically if you sold 282 your house, would that variance exist for that next 283 property owner to tear the house down and utilize that 284 variance. So can we -- 285 MS. OGDEN: Sorry, that wasn't their concern. 286 I maybe phrased that incorrectly. 287 I think their concern is that if we don't do 288 the addition, our house would be prime to just tear down 289 and build a McMansion. But if we did the addition, then 290 it's liveable for another family and no one would come 291 and build something taller or larger. 292 Does that make sense? 293 MR. MISLEH: It's the same question, can you 294 limit the variance to this expansion project? 295 MR. BOYLE: Yes, this Board has done that in the 296 past. And that is a concern. If a variance were 297 granted on a nonconforming lot and the house were 298 demolished, the variance would go away. 299 But for a lot of this size, it's conceivable a 300 future owner could use this variance to build to. 301 So, yes, you could condition it to these 302 applicants, this application number. Something of that 303 nature. 304 MR. BARTLETT: Thank you. 305 MR. BOYLE: Yes, sir. 306 (Discussion among Board members.) 307 MR. JONES: I think with that, we'll close our 308 discussion. 309 Is there a motion on the application for 310 variance V1610-19? 311 MR. BARTLETT: I'll make a motion to approve 312 variance application V1610-19 by David Ogden, applicant 313 and owner, for a variance to Section 48-238(3)a, to 314 allow a rear yard setback of 37 feet instead of 40 feet, 315 exclusively for the purpose of expansion of David 316 Ogden's property -- no. Strike that. 317 Exclusively for the purpose of expansion of 318 610 Oak Haven Drive, RPC 51-121-053 of the Falls Church 319 Real Property Records, zoned R-1A, Low Density 320 Residential. 321 MR. MISLEH: I'd like to amend that to add: 322 Consistent with the single story expansion as described 323 in the application. 324 MR. JONES: Do I have a second? 325 MR. KIEN: I'll second. 326 MR. JONES: Roll call please. 327 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Jones. 328 MR. JONES: Yes, in accordance with the 329 conditions outlined by Mr. Misleh. 330 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Misleh. 331 MR. MISLEH: Yes. 332 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Bartlett. 333 MR. BARTLETT: Yes. 334 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Kien. 335 MR. KIEN: Yes. 336 RECORDING SECRETARY: Thank you. 337 338 MS. OGDEN: Thank you. 339 MR. JONES: Congratulations and good luck with 340 your property. 341 MS. OGDEN: Thanks. 342 343 b. Variance application V1611-20 by Mill Creek 344 Residential Trust, applicant, for a variance to Section 345 48-1265 to allow the following: 346 1) Section 48-1265(1), to allow three (3) 347 wall signs instead of two (2); 348 2) Section 48-1265(1)a, to allow a total wall 349 sign area of 144 (rounded up) square feet instead of 50 350 square feet; 351 3) Section 48-1265(2), to allow two (2) 352 projecting signs instead of one (1); 353 4) Section 48-1265(2)a, to allow a total 354 projecting sign area of 303 (rounded up) square feet 355 instead of 20 square feet; 356 5) Section 48-1265(2)b, to allow placement of 357 projecting signs to extend above the lower sill line of 358 the second floor windows, and to project 16 feet from 359 the building instead of 4 feet. 360 6) Section 48-1265(10), to allow five (5) 361 building identification signs instead of one (1), with a 362 total sign area of 368 square feet instead of 80 square 363 feet, to be partially composed of non-individually 364 stylized lettering, and for two (2) of such signs to be 365 mounted on a non-street facing side of the building, on 366 premises known as 110 Founders Avenue, RPC #51-222-001 367 of the Falls Church Real Property Records, zoned B-1, 368 Limited Business. 369 Prior to the BZA public hearing, this item 370 will be reviewed at a public meeting by the 371 Architectural Advisory Board (AAB) on February 5, 2020, 372 for recommendation to the Board of Zoning Appeals. 373 374 MR. JONES: The next item under New Business 375 is Variance application V1611-20 by Mill Creek 376 Residential Trust, applicant, for a variance to Section 377 48-1265 to allow the following: 378 1) Section 48-1265(1), to allow three (3) 379 wall signs instead of two (2); 380 2) Section 48-1265(1)a, to allow a total wall 381 sign area of 144 (rounded up) square feet instead of 50 382 square feet; 383 3) Section 48-1265(2), to allow two (2) 384 projecting signs instead of one (1); 385 4) Section 48-1265(2)a, to allow a total 386 projecting sign area of 303 (rounded up) square feet 387 instead of 20 square feet; 388 5) Section 48-1265(2)b, to allow placement of 389 projecting signs to extend above the lower sill line of 390 the second floor windows, and to project 16 feet from 391 the building instead of 4. 392 And the last item is 6) Section 48-1265(10), 393 to allow five (5) building identification signs instead 394 of one (1), with a total sign area of 368 square feet 395 instead of 80 square feet, to be partially composed of 396 non-individually stylized lettering, and for two (2) of 397 such signs to be mounted on a non-street facing side of 398 the building, on premises known as 110 Founders Avenue, 399 RPC #51-222-001 of the Falls Church Real Property 400 Records, zoned B-1, Limited Business. 401 And just a note to that, John, did you confirm 402 that this was, in fact, reviewed at a public meeting by 403 the Architectural Advisory Board on February 5th? 404 MR. BOYLE: Yes, sir, and you should have a 405 recommendation from that Board. You should have that in 406 front of you. 407 MR. JONES: Yes, I'm see that. Thank you. 408 John, if you don't mind reading off of the 409 report. 410 MR. BOYLE: Yes, sir. 411 As this Board has seen in the past with the 412 recent construction of the larger buildings constructed 413 by way of special exceptions, we have found that the 414 sign ordinance which really arose in the 1950s and 60s 415 and amended in the 1980s, does not take into 416 consideration the mass of these buildings. 417 This particular site will be the largest 418 development in the City when it's completed. 419 That issue with Code, not taking into 420 consideration the size of these buildings, plus a 421 feature of the zoning ordinance that allows this Board 422 to consider variances for signs at a lesser threshold, 423 than the burden is placed on other commercial 424 residential variances, it's more of a conversation about 425 what fits, what works with the intent of the ordinance 426 in the neighborhood and what have you. 427 Those two factors I think are worth 428 considering as you hear this presentation from the 429 applicant tonight. 430 At first glance, it's a lot of variances 431 they're asking for, a lot of signs, but again, given the 432 scope of this building, it does not appear to be out of 433 scale or contrary to the intent of the ordinance as far 434 as impacts on the community and the neighborhood. 435 You should have quite a packet of information 436 in front of you that has some staff letterhead at the 437 beginning, recommendations from staff, from the Planning 438 Director, as well as Akida here, her function as a 439 planner and deputy zoning administrator. 440 You have a table that summarizes very nicely 441 the application that's being heard tonight. This was 442 443 put together by Akida which is I think a remarkable 444 summary of some very complicated information and 445 numbers. 446 Some of this has changed slightly in that one 447 of the wall signs is now becoming a building 448 identification sign. We can explain that very detail 449 when we get to that portion. 450 But this table lays out what the Code allows, 451 what's being asked for, and a description of the 452 variance. That's very helpful. 453 Then you've got a communication from the 454 applicant and a diagram of the property showing the 455 actual location, placement of each of these signs. 456 You can see the scope of this project which is 457 currently under construction and going up quickly at the 458 corner of West and Broad. 459 Then you've got several pages of color 460 renderings showing the signs themselves and where 461 they're being placed on the buildings and on the 462 property. And you'll note these signs range, everything 463 between simple vehicle directional signs all the way up 464 to very, very large building identification signs. So 465 quite a variety of signs being encompassed by this 466 application. 467 I think the applicant can explain better than 468 I just how much scrubbing this project has gone through 469 with public hearings and meetings with the neighbors, 470 and work sessions with Council and Planning Commission 471 and Architectural Advisory Board. 472 So what you have before you now is kind of the 473 icing on the cake. They've been through a hard road and 474 now they're just here to get the signage that they feel 475 is necessary for this building. 476 With that, we'll defer to the applicant's 477 presentation. 478 MR. JONES: Thank you, Mr. Boyle. Again, a 479 nice job on this. This was very thorough and well done. 480 With that, sir, if you wouldn't mind, stating 481 your name for the record and you may begin your 482 presentation. 483 MR. MUFFLER: Sure. Absolutely. My name is 484 Gerald Muffler. I'm with Mill Creek Residential Trust. 485 We are the project owner and developer of Founders Row. 486 And that's a hard act to follow. I really 487 appreciate the support and the introduction there. I 488 think they really set the stage for kind of what we're 489 requesting here tonight. 490 I do have a presentation that we can go 491 through fairly quickly. I think it's fairly 492 493 self-explanatory, especially given that everything is 494 right there. 495 Really what this presentation is, is a 496 comparison of what we're proposing today versus what 497 was, as Mr. Boyle pointed out, disgust ad nauseam 498 throughout the public process and the three years it 499 took to go through all the approvals for this. 500 Signage specifically was debated and 501 questioned and negotiated over and over again with 502 neighbors, with Councils, with commissions. Quantities, 503 location, some people wanted more, some people wanted 504 less, here, there. 505 So again, we'll go through it. You'll see 506 that what we're proposing today, with the exception of a 507 few small ones, is very much in line with what was 508 approved with the site plan, having gone through Council 509 and Planning Commission. 510 If you look at the screen right now, what 511 you're seeing right now, this is kind of our best 512 rendering if you're standing on Broad Street looking at 513 where the entrance to the project will be, at the main 514 entrance of Founders Avenue. 515 You can see a lot of the signage I'm talking 516 about in kind of a 3D form, with the blade signs, you've 517 got the logos on the buildings that identify what the 518 buildings are, and we'll go through and talk about that 519 a little bit more in detail. 520 So if you don't mind, Akida. 521 It would be a page down. 522 So the signage map you've already seen so you 523 can go to the next one. 524 MR. BARTLETT: Can you go back one. I want to 525 ask questions. 526 MR. MUFFLER: Sure. 527 MR. BARTLETT: These are comparative to 528 Attachment 1 that you put together, Akida. 529 MS. ROUZI: Yeah. 530 MR. BARTLETT: So these are labeled, the 531 signs, where they are, what ones are actually going to 532 request a variance and which ones are by-right. Is that 533 correct? 534 MR. MUFFLER: Yes. I think so. 535 MR. BARTLETT: We need to go back and forth, I 536 know this might be annoying. 537 MR. MUFFLER: Whatever you need. 538 MR. BARTLETT: But A is that big Founders Row. 539 MR. MUFFLER: Yeah, the two As are vertical 540 blade signs, one internal and one external. 541 MR. BARTLETT: There's two. 542 MR. MUFFLER: Yeah, there's two. There's one 543 on the bottom left corner, if you will, along Broad 544 Street, and there's one internal on the Founders Avenue 545 itself. 546 MR. BARTLETT: I see. It's the actually sign 547 on these drawings in here. 548 MR. MUFFLER: Correct. 549 We'll go through all the allegations. 550 MR. BARTLETT: Right, I wanted to understand 551 what I'm looking at. 552 MR. MUFFLER: Absolutely. Happy to go through 553 them. 554 MR. BARTLETT: Thank you. 555 MR. MUFFLER: No, of course. 556 This elevation right here is if we're standing 557 on Broad Street to the right of Founders Avenue, so this 558 is the southeast, if you will, portion of the project. 559 Again, remember there's essentially three 560 buildings. Two of the three are connected, the other 561 one is stand alone which is the active adult building. 562 So what this building is looking at right 563 here, is there's two entrances to parking, one is off of 564 Broad Street, so we've got a parking sign there. We've 565 got a Founders Row blade sign which is internal on the 566 project on the Founder's Row side, so as you enter the 567 project or as you're coming down Broad, you're able to 568 see where you're pulling into, and the third sign here 569 is the Mill Creek, our brand for our apartment 570 communities is the Modera brand. This is our logo. 571 If you go to Mosaic, Avenue Place, any number 572 of communities in the area that we've developed, you'll 573 see the Modera M. 574 So the Modera M is the only sign -- actually 575 if you flip to the next elevation, the only sign that 576 we're proposing that's new from the Planning Commission 577 and that's just because otherwise it's very difficult to 578 understand maybe what the relationship of these 579 buildings are as you're coming down Broad. It's 322 580 apartments and we want to make sure people understand 581 what they're looking at. 582 So as you can see the original elevations, 583 you're got the Founders Row blade sign and you've got 584 the parking sign. 585 MR. MISLEH: May I stop you? 586 MR. MUFFLER: Yeah, of course. 587 MR. MISLEH: You said the Modera M is the only 588 new sign? 589 MR. MUFFLER: On that elevation, sorry. 590 MR. BARTLETT: Is that the same view? 591 MR. MUFFLER: Same view. 592 MR. BARTLETT: Is the updated view going to be 593 -- this is not a BZA question. If you go back to your 594 updated view. 595 MR. MUFFLER: We do not have the retail. 596 MR. BARTLETT: Is it going to look like that? 597 MR. MUFFLER: No. I would not assume that 598 those would be the colors anyone chose. 599 So we do have retail storefront design 600 guidelines. 601 MR. BARTLETT: I didn't want to begrouse, 602 saying, we're going to see Blade Runner walls on Broad 603 Street. 604 MR. MUFFLER: No, it will active -- if you've 605 been to Mosaic District -- 606 MR. BARTLETT: Yeah, yeah. 607 MR. MUFFLER: Same guidelines. Same 608 guidelines as Mosaic. So you'll have those kind of 609 active, unique storefronts, but not looking like they're 610 out of Blade Runner or something. 611 MR. BARTLETT: Thank you. 612 MR. MUFFLER: Of course. 613 If you flip to the next elevation, I think 614 this is the second side of Broad Street. This is now 615 the stand alone building to the left of Founders Avenue, 616 so southwest corner. Again, you've got the one blade 617 sign here, so as you're coming east-west on Broad 618 Street, again it's indicating what you're looking at. 619 And then very, very small. 620 The entrance to that age-restricted building 621 is actually internal to the project. So, a lot going on 622 in that space. You've got the Market Square, you've got 623 all the retail, you've got 400 apartments. We're just 624 asking for a sign that indicates where to go to enter 625 into that building. 626 If you flip to the next elevation, this is 627 what was approved. Again, blade sign, and you're going 628 to have that little hanging sign but that's more of a 629 directional. 630 This is the east elevation, so this is if 631 you're standing at St. James looking east on the 632 building or coming west on Broad Street. It's a tower 633 logo. 634 What you see in that big blank box right 635 there, kind of to the right where it's the checkerboard 636 pattern, that's actually a mural that will be going in. 637 That is a whole separate conversation and separate 638 process that we'll be going through after we go through 639 the signage process. So that's just checkerboard for 640 placeholder. 641 MR. BOYLE: And that's the projection of a 642 movie theater, correct? 643 MR. MUFFLER: Correct. The movie theater 644 cantilevers like 12 feet I think. 645 So this Board heard a variance request 646 regarding that. So now you see the work from that 647 process actually being put into plans. 648 Correct. And then that's the original 649 approved. Which was again, placeholder for the art on 650 the movie theater and the logo up on the tower. 651 These are now all internal to the site, and 652 frankly we went through the site plan, we didn't really 653 have a ton of elevations internal. So this is all on 654 Founders Avenue. Here you can see we've got a loading 655 dock. This is facing west, if you're on Founders 656 Avenue, facing west. You've got a loading dock. You've 657 got one tower logo. 658 You can go to the next one. This is now 659 facing east towards the main building, the main 660 residential building. We have a canopy sign that we're 661 proposing, again Modera Founders Row will be the name of 662 the main apartment building. You have another parking 663 entrance. 664 The blade sign that we first showed on the 665 first side is also there, but it's just not 666 highlighted. It's where we showed it. 667 And then the third angle from the interior, 668 this is now facing south, this is the age-restricted 669 sign and then the directional that was proposed earlier. 670 It should be noted, that unlike -- this would 671 be Mill Creek's first active adult property. We are 672 creating a brand for that similar to what we've created 673 for Modera. So that's why this is a placeholder, in 674 terms of the sign will say age-restricted sign, it will 675 say whatever the brand is on that sign, but that 676 location, dimensions, etcetera. 677 Literal is better in marketing but maybe not 678 that literal. 679 And then last elevation again, second part of 680 the tower logo facing north from the Market Square. 681 One more, this was the only approved 682 elevation, internal, which again just shows that logo on 683 the tower. 684 And that might be it. If you go down another 685 one. This is just showing another rendering internal to 686 Market Square. The building, the kind of clear 687 storefronts on the corner, that's the entrance to the 688 age-restricted building. And then Market Square. 689 So again, a lot of information, a lot of 690 signage. This is a four and a half acre site. Signage 691 is crucial in a development like this to make sure that 692 you have people coming from out of the City to see this. 693 Again, neighbors, signs were eliminated. Some 694 neighbors wanted movie theater signage everywhere. Some 695 neighbors wanted signage around the back but ultimately 696 this was kind of the package as determined through all 697 the Council's, Commissions, meetings that would be 698 appropriate for a project of this size. 699 I'll be happy to answer any questions you guys 700 have. 701 MR. KIEN: I have a question. If I'm reading 702 the plan right, there are no signs on North West Street 703 and Park Avenue, is that right? 704 MR. MUFFLER: That's correct. These are 705 facing the neighborhood. We had signage and it was 706 ultimately reduced. 707 Now Founders Avenue connects essentially 708 north-south with North West Street as it turns the 709 corner. So as you're coming south on North West Street, 710 say from McLean or from North Falls Church, you will see 711 that Founders Row blade sign. 712 Well, actually that's not true. You won't see 713 that because there's a bridge going there. I'm just 714 715 thinking out loud. So there's not really much signage 716 there, coming from that way. You won't be able to 717 mistake the project in front of you though. 718 MR. MISLEH: So, Mr. Muffler, you made a few 719 comments that this has already been approved or this was 720 what was contemplated through the Planning Commission. 721 MR. MUFFLER: Correct. 722 MR. MISLEH: What here specifically is 723 different that they didn't contemplate in that package? 724 MR. MUFFLER: The Modera M is the only 725 external logo that was not shown, as you can see on the 726 elevations. It was never discussed. Again, nothing was 727 shown internal so like our canopy signage was never -- 728 it was just assumed. So it's really that Modera M is 729 the only thing. 730 Speaking with the AAB, I think from an 731 architectural perspective, they were fine with it, given 732 the height. 733 But it's an opportunity to show, like, hey, 734 this is where the apartment buildings are. 735 MR. MISLEH: And the lit blade signs were in 736 the original packet? 737 MR. MUFFLER: Correct. 738 MR. BOYLE: A question if I could. Are the 739 large blade signs internally lit or are lights shining 740 on them? 741 MR. MUFFLER: No, everything is internally 742 lit. In fact, I think these drawings, if not they're in 743 the -- yeah, so the shop drawings do kind of show, blade 744 sign, push through acrylic, internal LED lighting. So 745 if you flip through it, it'll show you how they're doing 746 it. 747 MR. BARTLETT: I just have one question about 748 the New Modera sign. Is it lit or is it just a black M? 749 MR. MUFFLER: No, it's lit. 750 MR. JONES: Can you speak a little bit about 751 the Modera signage logo, on how the size of it was 752 determined in relation to the building. 753 MR. MUFFLER: There's no real science behind 754 it, it's more art. Engaging a signage designer to say 755 what would fit in this space without being ostentatious 756 or overwhelming. Relationally, that's what it would 757 look like. So it's more just how it felt. 758 MR. MISLEH: John, did you say there was a 759 letter from the AAB in this packet or just a 760 recommendation to them? 761 MR. BOYLE: Just the recommendation. Their 762 letter back to this Board. 763 MS. ROUZI: Their recommendation on the 764 variance. And they recommended approval of the variance 765 to the Board of Zoning Appeals. 766 MR. BOYLE: Do you have that? 767 MR. MISLEH: I think I'm missing that page. 768 MS. ROUZI: Here, I have a copy. 769 MR. MISLEH: Oh, I got it. 770 MS. ROUZI: Mr. Misleh, there's also a letter 771 from the Planning Director supporting the application. 772 Do you have that? 773 MR. MISLEH: I saw that. Thank you. 774 MR. JONES: All right. Do we have anymore 775 questions from the Board? 776 With that, we'll close the presentation and 777 we'll discuss internally. Thank you for your 778 presentation. 779 MR. MUFFLER: Thank you. 780 MR. MISLEH: So I'd just like to say I think 781 it's pretty straightforward and I don't see anything 782 that would limit us from approving this package. 783 MR. JONES: I tend to agree and I appreciate 784 the fact that there's no lighted signage on the west and 785 closer to the residential area side. I appreciate that. 786 But I don't have any comments or questions. 787 MR. BARTLETT: I would second all those 788 statements as well, but I would also like to thank you 789 for the cleanliness and the appropriateness of the use 790 of signage. I know there's a lot of interpretations 791 about what's appropriate but I feel like you've done a 792 great job of creating an appropriate blend of size and 793 space with the signage. 794 MR. MUFFLER: Thanks. 795 MR. BOYLE: Mr. Chair, if I could ask a 796 question of the Board. Does the Board have a preference 797 as far as limiting these variances to what's proposed 798 tonight or is there flexibility in allowing, say, a 799 swap-out for future tenants? 800 It doesn't happen often but buildings get 801 purchased and the names get changed. Do you want to see 802 that those future owners and applicants come back before 803 you or can we use -- can staff have discretion to 804 replace them as they're mounted in the dimensions that 805 they're presented tonight? 806 Does the Board have a preference on that? 807 MR. JONES: I think we can just take a moment 808 and discuss. 809 MR. KIEN: I don't really think it's 810 consistent with what we approve tonight. 811 MR. BARTLETT: We're going to deal with 812 swap-out design here, the colors they choose. 813 MR. MISLEH: It's more of a logo. They're 814 talking about the canopy name, you're not going to 815 replace. The blade sign, that brand is not going to 816 change. I wouldn't assume down the road it would change, 817 even though you changed ownership. Where there's 818 exposure is in the canopy and the logo, the Modera logo. 819 MR. MUFFLER: One wouldn't think so but, yeah. 820 MR. MISLEH: So I'll do whatever you guys 821 think. 822 MR. BARTLETT: I'm not sure if that's a 823 consistent path for the BZA to provide future protection 824 from requests for variance in the future for new owners. 825 826 So, if there's a new request that comes in for 827 a change in sign or a new sign, it won't be a burden to 828 the BZA in the future. So I'd rather not have to add 829 that layer of complexity, even though it's not that 830 complex. 831 MR. JONES: I agree with Mr. Bartlett. I 832 don't think it would be too difficult to look at any 833 different signage that would be proposed in the future. 834 MR. BOYLE: Okay. It would be helpful to 835 staff if you would condition this approval on this 836 presentation for this evening though. 837 MR. JONES: We can do that. 838 MR. MISLEH: So when we make the motion, John, 839 do we have to read all six of these items or are we just 840 making the motion on the variance application number? 841 MR. BOYLE: On something that's this lengthy, 842 you usually make a motion to have staff add the item to 843 the record, having quoted in the record. So, as listed 844 in this application, that text will be added to the 845 record. 846 And we can also -- we do it already but you 847 can refer directly to the presentation, the application 848 that was made tonight. 849 So, As described in the agenda and as 850 presented in the applicant's materials, something like 851 that. 852 MR. MISLEH: Okay. I make a motion to approve 853 variance application V1611-20 by Mill Creek Residential 854 Trust, applicant, for variance to Section 48-1265 to 855 allow the following six items as described in the agenda 856 for the regular meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals 857 on February 13, 2020, at 7:30 p.m. 858 And further, consistent with the package 859 provided by the applicant in a letter dated January 16, 860 2020, to John Boyle, zoning administrator. 861 MR. JONES: Do I have a second? 862 MR. BARTLETT: I'll second that motion. 863 MR. JONES: Roll call please. 864 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Jones. 865 MR. JONES: Yes. 866 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Misleh. 867 MR. MISLEH: Yes. 868 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Bartlett. 869 MR. BARTLETT: Yes. 870 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Kien. 871 MR. KIEN: Yes. 872 RECORDING SECRETARY: Thank you. 873 MR. JONES: Thank you very much. Good luck 874 with your project. 875 MR. MUFFLER: Thank you. 876 877 d. Election of Officers 878 MR. JONES: Based on my colleagues' 879 anxiousness, if there are no objections I think we have 880 to have a motion on deferring election of officers. I 881 think it might be helpful to have Mr. Calabrese present 882 for any election of officers. 883 So I would speak with my colleagues and see if 884 there's any recommendation as to postpone the election 885 of officers to the March 12th meeting of the Board of 886 Zoning Appeals. 887 MR. MISLEH: I agree. 888 MR. KIEN: I agree. 889 MR. JONES: We have a proposal to move the 890 election of officers for the Board of Zoning Appeals to 891 the March 12, 2020, meeting. 892 Akida, can we have a roll call please. 893 RECORDING SECRETARY: Sure. 894 Mr. Jones. 895 MR. JONES: Yes. 896 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Misleh. 897 MR. MISLEH: Yes. 898 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Bartlett. 899 MR. BARTLETT: Yes. 900 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Kien. 901 MR. KIEN: Yes. 902 RECORDING SECRETARY: Thank you. 903 904 e. 2020 BZA Annual Calendar 905 MR. JONES: I think the last two items are the 906 Annual Calendar which everybody has been provided. I 907 don't know if we need to do anything with that. 908 909 6. Approval of Minutes 910 a. Approval of the October 17, 2019 Meeting Minutes. 911 MR. JONES: With that, we'll approve the 912 minutes of October 17, 2019. 913 We can take five minutes to read through it 914 and then we can move to approve it. 915 (Minutes reviewed.) 916 MR. BARTLETT: I move to approve the minutes 917 of the October 17, 2019, minutes of the Board of Zoning 918 Appeals. 919 MR. JONES: Do I have a second? 920 MR. MISLEH: I second. 921 MR. JONES: Roll call please 922 RECORDING SECRETARY: Sure. 923 Mr. Jones. 924 MR. JONES: Yes. 925 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Misleh. 926 MR. MISLEH: Yes. 927 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Bartlett. 928 MR. BARTLETT: Yes. 929 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Kien. 930 MR. KIEN: Yes. 931 RECORDING SECRETARY: Thank you. 932 933 7. OTHER BUSINESS 934 MR. JONES: I don't believe we have any Other 935 Business. 936 MR. BOYLE: If the Board wanted to consider, 937 we usually also approve the Rules of Procedure for the 938 BZA and we'd offer that under Other Business for the 939 Board to either review and approve or continue that also 940 to the next meeting. 941 MR. JONES: Have there been any substantial 942 changes since the last? 943 MR. BOYLE: No. 944 MR. JONES: I'll speak to my colleagues but I 945 don't have any objections to approving the Rules of 946 Procedure. 947 MR. MISLEH: I move to approve the Rules of 948 Procedure for the Board of Zoning Appeals for Falls 949 Church, Virginia, based on the draft dated February 13, 950 2020. 951 MR. KIEN: Second. 952 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Jones. 953 MR. JONES: Yes. 954 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Misleh. 955 MR. MISLEH: Yes. 956 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Bartlett. 957 MR. BARTLETT: Yes. 958 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Kien. 959 MR. KIEN: Yes. 960 RECORDING SECRETARY: Thank you. 961 MR. JONES: Gentlemen and Akida, I don't 962 believe we have any Other Business. We moved the 963 election of officers to the March 12th meeting. I'm not 964 aware of any Other Business. 965 MR. BOYLE: No, sir. Motion to adjourn. 966 967 8. ADJOURNMENT 968 MR. JONES: Do I have a motion to adjourn? 969 MR. KIEN: Motion to adjourn. 970 MR. BARTLETT: I'll second that motion. 971 MR. JONES: Roll call. 972 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Jones. 973 MR. JONES: Yes. 974 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Misleh. 975 MR. MISLEH: Yes. 976 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Bartlett. 977 MR. BARTLETT: Yes. 978 RECORDING SECRETARY: Mr. Kien. 979 MR. KIEN: Yes. 980 RECORDING SECRETARY: Thank you. 981 982 MR. JONES: With that we will conclude the 983 February 13, 2020, Board of Zoning Appeals. 984