Appearance Commission

MEMORANDUM Community Development Department To: Michael Lynk, Chairman and Appearance Commission Members From: Peter Peyer, Community Development Director Carrie Haberstich, Planner Nathan Kriska, Building and Zoning Supervisor Brian Augustine, Zoning Administrator Date: November 8, 2013 SUBJECT: APPEARANCE COMMISSION/CASE SUBMITTAL – STAFF REPORT Staff offers the following comments on the cases scheduled for the November 13th Appearance Commission meeting: RESIDENTIAL REQUESTS 2013-050A (3322 Crain) Staff has no objections with the overall design; however, faux mullions are recommended to make the casement windows complement the existing window configuration. Casement windows are necessary to meet exiting requirements. 2013-051A (4140 Lee) Staff has no objections with the overall design; however, the petitioner must verify that the roof plan ensures proper drainage for all roof segments. 2013-029A (9200 Kildare) Staff has no objections with the overall design, dated Revised October 3, 2013, as the revised elevations keep more of the existing brick and use less of the proposed stone. Improvements have been made to the proposed windows and doors. Staff recommends that the petitioner consider the use of faux mullions in the casement windows to complement the proportions of the awning windows, and verify the proposed materials for the double doors on the back elevation. 2012-066A (9536 Keeler) Staff has no objections with the overall design; however, since the proposed Certainteed material is not masonry, a waiver from the 50% masonry requirement would be necessary. 2013-054A (9541 Keystone) Changes to the design are necessary to comply with zoning requirements. Staff has contacted the contractor. Changes are pending. VOSDOCS-#439441-v3-November_13_2013_Appearance_Commission_Meeting_Report 1 2013-055A (8731 Hamlin) Staff defers to the Appearance Commission to address the design details. It is recommended that brick be used for all facades. Technical issues to be addressed include removing the bedroom from the basement, as it is not allowed by code, and removing the second stairway from the basement floor plan drawing, as it doesn’t correlate with the first floor plan. 2013-056A (8310 Ridgeway) Staff recommends that changes be made to the overall design, including shifting the ridgeline of the roof toward the back of the house to reduce the distance between the tops of the front second floor windows and the eave line, adjusting the front elevation design to have the proposed second floor window configuration correspond and complement the existing first floor windows, and adjusting the gable to be a larger proportion of the front elevation. New New New New Proposed Side Profile Recommended Side Profile 2013-057A (9521 Springfield) Staff has no objections with the overall design. COMMERCIAL REQUESTS 2013-048A (3358 Touhy) Staff has no objections with the request. An outdoor dining area with 9 tables (36 seats) and 2 outdoor sales areas are proposed for the east side of the Mariano’s building. The outdoor dining will be delineated with an iron fence with gates, and the outdoor sales will be demarcated with decorative planters. 2013-052A (4849-4853 Oakton) Staff has no objections with the overall design. 2013-053A (4101 Main) Staff has no objections with the overall design; however, the proposed columns may encroach into the parking lot. It is recommended that a balance between the use of existing brick and proposed EIFS is utilized in the façade design. VOSDOCS-#439441-v3-November_13_2013_Appearance_Commission_Meeting_Report 2 2013-058A (7919 Lincoln) Staff has no objections with the overall design; however, if there are existing transom windows behind the existing first floor mansard roof, staff requests that they be retained, repaired, or replaced in-kind. 2013-059A (3300 Oakton) Staff has no objections with the overall building design, but defers to the Appearance Commission to address the design details. Signage 1. The “Floor & Décor” and “Tile/Wood/Stone” wall signs facing McCormick Boulevard should be reduced 5-10% to fit in proportionally with the façade it’s affixed to. 2. The “Floor & Décor” and “Tile/Wood/Stone” wall signs facing the parking lot help identify the customer entrance. Since the property has street frontage, this signage is not allowed per the Sign Code; however, relief can be requested from §82-28(b)(1)a. to allow a wall sign facing a side yard/parking lot in addition to the wall signs facing street frontages, after the Appearance Commission recommends its approval. 3. Two (2) ground signs are proposed, with 1 sign at the Oakton driveway and 1 sign at the McCormick driveway. Landscaping 4. A general landscape plan is located in Tab 6. The petitioner requests that the landscaping requirements be addressed under separate cover, and will be reviewed by staff with the assistance of Commissioner Klein. VOSDOCS-#439441-v3-November_13_2013_Appearance_Commission_Meeting_Report 3