Board of Architectural Review

Town of Vienna 127 Center Street South Vienna, Virginia 22180 p: 703.255.6341 TTY 7111 Meeting Minutes Board of Architectural Review Thursday, May 21, 2020 7:30 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS-VIENNA TOWN HALL Online Meeting To participate in this meeting via Zoom please visit: https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_08syike-RM2o9P6s2xKYVg 1. Roll Call The Board of Architectural Review met in regular session in the Vienna Town Hall, 127 Center Street, South Vienna, Virginia, with Roy Baldwin presiding as Chair. The following members were present: Linda van Doorn, Paul Layer, Michael Cheselka and Patty Hanley. Andrea West, Planner, Kelly O’Brien Principle Planner, and Sharmaine Abaied, Board Clerk, were present. Ms. Abaied called roll with Linda van Doorn, Roy Baldwin, Paul Layer, Michael Cheselka, and Patty Hanley being present. BAR - Resolution for Continuity of Government Mr. Baldwin opened the meeting reading the Board of Architectural Reviews Resolution for Continuity of Government, he then proceeded with a roll call vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. Ayes: Ms. Van Doorn, Mr. Layer, Mr. Cheselka, Ms. Hanley, Mr. Baldwin. 2. Approval of Minutes Mr. Baldwin asked for any comments or additions to the minutes. There were none, Mr. Baldwin stated they would then be accepted. 3. Public Hearing 540 Maple Ave W - Flagship Carwash - Screening Request for approval of screening on the side façade of Flagship Carwash located at 540 Maple Ave W., Docket No. PF-03-20-BAR, in the MAC Maple Avenue Commercial district; filed by Guy Paolozzi of Flagship Carwash. Ms. West began by stating that the application would be a modification to the existing Flagship Carwash and Chick-Fil-A restaurant building. The side facades of the building are opened to allow ventilation to the 1st and 2nd floors. There are interior lights on those floors that can be viewed from a neighboring town house community. What the Board will see this evening is one of the solutions the building owner has presented to mitigate the light exposure from the façade. Mr. Palozzi was present to speak on the application. Mr. Palozzi was recommending Town of Vienna Page 1 Printed on 6/19/2020 Board of Architectural Review Meeting Minutes May 21, 2020 putting a walnut brown tweed mesh awning material framed out inside the building opening on the second floor to block out light. He continued stating he would not be able to use that application on the 1st floor due to building code requirements for circulation, but that he was working with his mechanical engineer on solutions that would meet 1st floor code requirements and suggested using the same material for the 2nd floor on the 1st floor, but projecting it out. Mr. Layer said if the projection was a viable solution to consider overlapping as there could be a halo effect. He asked if that was what the neighbors had been concerned about. Mr. Palozzi stated they would like both floors covered and that was his intent, but that the county code air flow requirements are preventing him from some of the solutions he has presented, but he is still working with his engineers for a solution. Mr. Layer stated that if the projected awning was the solution to possibly use it on both floors for a continuity of design. Mr. Layer asked if it was possible to temper the lights in the circular entrance. Mr. Palozzi stated he wasn’t sure if they could be dimmed, but if they could be dimmed he could put a dimmer on them. Enclosing everything is not as intuitive as it may seem so the intent was to light up the entrance so people could differentiate where the difference was. Mr. Palozzi also stated he wasn’t sure if the neighbors were as concerned about the entrance lights. Mr. Layer asked if Mr. Palozzi could explore the idea of dampening the entrance lights. There was continued discussion regarding lighting. Ms. van Doorn asked if the light mitigation could be done with landscaping or would there not be enough room to accomplish it with landscaping. Mr. Palozzi stated that they could look into that and a trellis on the building would reduce the air flow like other materials would, but planting evergreens could do that, but wasn’t sure it would solve the light mitigation issue. Ms. van Doorn stated she thought the landscaping may be more visually appealing over time. They continued discussing possible landscaping solutions while ensuring it did not interfere with the existing swale. Mr. Cheselka asked if the 50% air flow is what does not pass code. Mr. Palozzi stated that with the back wall being closed it was required to have all of the openings on the sides of the 1st floor for air flow and the mesh would not provide enough air flow for the 1st floor of the building. Mr. Chesleka asked how the application would be approved if more needed to be added. Mr. Baldwin shared Mr. Cheselka’s concern and stated the Board would need to vote on the application they had in front of them with hopes that Mr. Palozzi would be back with a solution for the 1st floor. Voting down the application would leave the neighbors with nothing. Mr. Layer suggested deferring the application as there were multiple alternative suggestions made to mitigate the light coming from the 1st and 2nd floors. Mr. Palozzi stated he could not make any alternative decisions in the meeting as he would need to consult an engineer as to whether the suggestions would meet the county’s air flow building code requirements. Ms. Hanley asked if the railings would be on the inside of the shade. Mr. Palozzi stated they were currently located in the middle of a 10 inch concrete wall and would be on the inside of the screen. Ms. Hanley asked if the far right and left edges would have a 1” tube wrapping around them. Mr. Palozzi stated it was tube frame that would wrap around the perimeter. Ms. Hanley asked if the material was marine grade, Mr. Palozzi stated it was, and that it could get wet and is mildew proof. She also asked if an awning fabricator would be putting it together, Mr. Palozzi stated yes, Carols Awnings would be putting it together. Ms. Hanley stated she would support approving the current application and working on the additional light mitigation. Mr. Baldwin asked if the awning material was being asked to be approved for all openings of the 2nd floor. Mr. Palozzi stated it was just the two openings that can be seen upstairs Town of Vienna Page 2 Printed on 6/19/2020 Board of Architectural Review Meeting Minutes May 21, 2020 from the town homes. Mr. Baldwin asked how much light would be seen through the awnings. Mr. Palozzi stated that per Carols Awing’s it is a 85%-90% black out. Mr. Baldwin asked about louvers on the 1st floor. Mr. Palozzi stated it was their first suggestion, but they reduce air flow so the mechanical engineer would not approve the louvers. Mr. Layer stated that although the planting / landscaping idea was good, he felt that it may not be as consistent as utilizing awning with the uncertainty that the plantings would survive in the 5 foot strip of land. The plantings may also not provide the screening the neighbors are looking for. Ms. Diane Boone, 135 Roland Ct SW, president of the Townes of Vienna 3 and 4 HOA. Ms. Boone stated that when the lights first came on for the project they reached out to Mr. Palozzi and he immediately began to work on solutions to mitigate the light issue. Ms. Boone inquired about the following: the environmental effects from the awning, how resilient it will be vs. metal louvers, and how will the 1st floor be addressed. Ms. Boone stated they support the current application, but only as a partial solution to the light mitigation. There was continued discussion regarding the awning by the Board members regarding the material strength and resiliency. Mr. Cheselka made a motion that the request for approval of screening on the side façade of Flagship Carwash located at 540 Maple Ave W., Docket No. PF-03-20-BAR, be approved with the proviso that the 1st floor be considered in a future application. Mr. Layer seconded the motion. There was a roll call vote with with 5 ayes, and 0 nays. Ayes: Mr. Layer, Ms. van Doorn, Mr. Cheselka, Ms. Hanley, and Mr. Baldwin Motion: Cheselka Second: Layer Approved: 5-0 538 Maple Ave W - Chick-fil-A - Signage Item No. 2: Request for approval a façade signs for Chick-fil-A located at 538 Maple Avenue West, (Docket No. 06-20-BAR), in the MAC Maple Avenue Commercial zoning district; filed by Guy Paolozzi, building owner. Ms. Tracey Diehl was present to represent the application. Ms. Diehl stated the proposed sign is in addition to the current sign, a tag line to identify that it is a drive-through location as well as an icon emblem to be on the side elevation entryway. Ms. van Doorn and Mr. Cheselka had no questions. Ms. Hanley asked about the illumination details. Ms. Diehl stated it was internally illuminated with 3500 kelvins. Mr. Baldwin inquired about the location of the icon and Ms. Diehl stated its location was for those who wondered if there was a drive-through at that location. Ms. Hanley made a motion that the request for approval a façade signs for Chick-fil-A located at 538 Maple Avenue West, (Docket No. 06-20-BAR), be approved as submitted. Ms. van Doorn seconded the motion with a roll call vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays Town of Vienna Page 3 Printed on 6/19/2020 Board of Architectural Review Meeting Minutes May 21, 2020 Ayes: Mr. Layer, Ms. van Doorn, Mr. Cheselka, Ms. Hanley, and Mr. Baldwin Motion: Hanley Second: van Doorn Approved: 5-0 200 Maple Ave E - Mobile Gas - Signage Item No. 3: Request for approval of a new signage for the Mobile service station located at 200 Maple Ave E, Docket No. PF-04-20-BAR, in the C-2 General Commercial district; filed by Pooja Rakesh, of The Plan Source, project engineers. Mr. Bhoopendra Prakash was present to represent the application. Ms. Hanley asked if there was branding on the pumps. Ms. West stated the signage on the pumps falls below the 1 ½ feet required to be a reviewable sign. Ms. van Doorn made a motion that the request for approval of a new signage for the Mobile service station located at 200 Maple Ave E, Docket No. PF-04-20-BAR,, be approved as submitted Mr. Layer seconded the motion with 5 ayes and 0 nays Ayes: Mr. Layer, Ms. van Doorn, Mr. Cheselka, Ms. Hanley, and Mr. Baldwin Motion: van Doorn Second: Layer Approved: 5-0 139 Church St NW - Sam;s Studio - Signage Item No. 4: Request for approval of new signs, one wall and one tenant panel replacement, for Sam’s Studio located at 139 Church Street NW, Docket No. PF-08-20-BAR, in the C-1B Pedestrian Commercial zoning district; filed by Sam Kazemi, business owner. Mr. Sam Kazemi was present to represent the application. Mr. Kazemi stated the purpose of his salon and the reason for the name change. Mr. Cheselka stated he didn’t see a sample of what the replacement panel for the monument sign. Ms. West stated there would be a panel that matched exactly with the other panels, just the text would change. Ms. Hanley stated the sign may look better if it was on center with the same dimensions as the House of Vape sign. Mr. Baldwin asked if they could make their sign the same dimensions as the House of Vape, Mr. Kazemi said yes. Mr. Baldwin asked about the logo design for the sign. Mr. Layer made a motion that the request for approval of new signs, one wall and one tenant panel replacement, for Sam’s Studio located at 139 Church Street NW, Docket No. PF-08-20-BAR, be approved with the proviso that it be dimensioned to that of House of Vape and be positioned centered between the window and the upper soffit. Mr. Cheselka seconded the motion with 5 ayes and 0 nays Ayes: Mr. Layer, Ms. van Doorn, Mr. Cheselka, Ms. Hanley, and Mr. Baldwin Town of Vienna Page 4 Printed on 6/19/2020 Board of Architectural Review Meeting Minutes May 21, 2020 Motion: Layer Second: Cheselka Approved: 5-0 207 Maple Ave E - South Block Juice - Signage Item No. 5: Request for approval of one façade sign for South Block Juice located at 207 Maple Ave. E., Docket No. PF-11-20-BAR, in the C-2 General Commercial district; filed by Rahmein Mostafavi, business owner. Adam Kramer was present to represent the application. Ms. Hanley asked about the awnings above the store and if they would be replaced and or cleaned. Mr. Kramer said they did not have plans for that as it was the property of the landlord. Mr. Layer, Ms. van Doorn, Mr. Cheselka, and Mr. Baldwin all stated they had no questions. Ms. van Doorn made a motion that the request for approval of one façade sign for South Block Juice located at 207 Maple Ave. E., Docket No. PF-11-20-BAR, be approved as submitted. Mr. Layer seconded the motion with 5 ayes and 0 nays. Ayes: Mr. Layer, Ms. van Doorn, Mr. Cheselka, Ms. Hanley, and Mr. Baldwin 124 Maple Ave W - Viva Sol Juice Co. - Signage Item No. 6: Request for approval of signage for Viva Sol Juice Co. located at 124 Maple Avenue W, Docket No. PF-12-20-BAR, in the C-2 General Commercial district; filed by Kathy Baker, of Concept Unlimited, sign agent. Matt Higgins was present to represent the application. Ms. West asked if the Board would be able to review the vinyl lettering window signage with the current application. Mr. Baldwin asked if it was part of the application. Ms. West stated it was added as staff was waiting on clarification per the code to have the window signs. Mr. Cheselka inquired about the 6500 kelvins that was listed for the light. Mr. Layer stated that the more a light is blocked behind a sign box, the less it is projected beyond the sign box, although the 6500 is high. Mr. Higgins stated it was typical of what they used and that is was to light the face of the sign, if the Board would like them to go below the 6500 they would do so. Mr. Cheselka stated he could not support the application as submitted, Mr. Higgins stated they could go down to 4500k. Ms. Hanley stated her concern about the kelvins but wanted to make sure there was no confusion about the light output (lumens) and the warmth (kelvins). Ms. Hanley asked if the lettering was to get cut off at the window pane or if that was an error. Mr. Higgins stated it would be in the same window pane. Mr. Baldwin asked if they would be trimming a tree shown in the rendering, Mr. Higgins stated they would not be trimming any of the trees. Mr. Cheselka made a motion that the request for approval of signage for Viva Sol Juice Co. located at 124 Maple Avenue W, Docket No. PF-12-20-BAR, be approved with the proviso that the store front window signage would be included in the application and that Town of Vienna Page 5 Printed on 6/19/2020 Board of Architectural Review Meeting Minutes May 21, 2020 the kelvins would be reduced to 4000-4500k. Mr. Layer seconded the motion, with 5 ayes and 0 nays Ayes: Mr. Layer, Ms. van Doorn, Mr. Cheselka, Ms. Hanley, and Mr. Baldwin Motion: Cheselka Second: Layer Approved: 5-0 203 Maple Ave E - Crumbl Cookies - Signage Item No. 7: Request for approval of one façade sign and one awning replacement for Crumbl Cookies located at 203 Maple Ave. E., Docket No. PF-14-20-BAR, in the C-2 General Commercial district; filed by Brigg Bunker, business owner. Mr. Brigg Bunker was present to represent the application; he explained that the wanted to change the awning from green to black, the new sign, but the window graphics they would bring before the Board at a later date. Mr. Cheselka asked about the 7100 kelvins on the application as it seems too much and he would not support the application as it stood. Ms. O’Brien stated they spoke with the sign company stated the light levels would be 5000 kelvins. Ms. West stated that if the motion would state the correct kelvin levels then staff would ensure the correct kelvins were used and approved for the building permit application. There was continued discussion regarding lumen and kelvin levels. Ms. Hanley spoke on the light and stated the difference and how the kelvin level makes a difference with the light output. She then asked if they had one or two awnings, Mr. Bunker stated they have one awning. Mr. Layer stated they typically land on 4000-4500 kelvins and that would be what they put in the motion. Mr. Layer did stated there were inconsistencies based on the 3 green awnings and 1 black awning. Mr. Baldwin commented that the awnings would be an architectural set and was troubled with a black awning in place of the green set. Mr. Baldwin asked if the landlord was okay with the black awning. Mr. Bunker stated the landlord supported the awning and the black was more consistent with the brand they are trying to portray. He understood the concern, but they had a strong preference for the black to stay consistent with the brand. Mr. Baldwin asked for a motion and reminded that it should be for the sign and canopy only and mention the kelvins. Ms. Hanley made a motion that the request for approval of one façade sign and one awning replacement for Crumbl Cookies located at 203 Maple Ave. E., Docket No. PF-14-20-BAR, be approved with the lumen levels be at 4000-4500 kelvins. Mr. Cheselka seconded the motion with 3 ayes, and 2 nays. Ayes: Ms. van Doorn, Mr. Cheselka, and Ms. Hanley Nays: Mr. Layer and Mr. Baldwin Motion: Hanley Second: Cheselka Approved: 3-2 Town of Vienna Page 6 Printed on 6/19/2020 Board of Architectural Review Meeting Minutes May 21, 2020 235 Maple Ave E - Pizzaroni - Signage Item No. 8: Request for approval a façade sign for Pizzaroni located at 235 Maple Avenue East, (Docket No. 18-20-BAR), in the C-2 General Commercial zoning district; filed by Kasim Kurd, business owner. Mr. Baldwin asked if anyone was present to represent the application and no one was present. Mr. Baldwin asked if any members wanted to speak. Mr. Cheselka pointed out that the application showed 7500 kelvins which is over what the Board wants. Ms. West stated that the levels had come in lower, but he application did not reflect that. Mr. Layer stated that if Ms.West had the actual numbers that the Board could decide if they wanted to vote on the application. Ms. West stated that since the applicant was not present and she didn’t not have all the information she prefer the Board members defer. Mr. Baldwin asked for a motion to defer the application. Mr. Layer made a motion to defer the request for approval a façade sign for Pizzaroni located at 235 Maple Avenue East, (Docket No. 18-20-BAR). Ms. Hanley seconded the motion, with the vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays Ayes: Mr. Layer, Ms. van Doorn, Mr. Cheselka, Ms. Hanley and Mr. Baldwin Motion: Layer Second: Hanley Approved: 5-0 215 Center St S - New Police Station - Exterior Modifications Item No. 9: Request for approval of a new police station located at 215 Center Street S., Docket No. PF-20-20-BAR, in the RM-2 Multi-Family Residential zoning district; filed by Roderick Williams, Project Architect, Dewberry, and James "Jim" Morris, Chief of Police, Town of Vienna. Mr. Roderick Williams was present to represent the application. He pointed out that some of the renderings and materials had been viewed during work sessions. Mr. Williams began by showing the neighborhood context and stated that they took that into consideration for the police station project and how it would sit in the neighborhood. They also took into consideration the massing and scale in reference to the neighborhood and existing homes, the new townhomes, the school, and the Bowman House. The height of the building, just over 28 feet, with a parapet screen concealing mechanical equipment brings the total height from average grade a little over 35 feet. For the police station they took into consideration the materials in the neighborhood and surround facilities by means of a material study. The window sills will be high with the facility, 5 feet on the first floor and 4 feet on the second floor to obscure views in for security purposes. Mr. Williams continued by showing perspective views from the material study and then showing the latest renderings. The materials being almost the same with the upper level fiber cement panel changing from tan to light gray. After speaking with town staff and council members there was concern about maintenance of brick in the plaza so a pre-cast paver is replacing those bringing interest to the plaza. Mr. Williams discussed how they worked on tying in the Bowman House with the plaza and the best practices for a plaza while protecting it using CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design). The bandings where the benches were correspond with the vertical mullions. There are additional benches for support and ADA purposes. They have addressed storm water management concerns by adding a facility which will take it all on site. There will be Town of Vienna Page 7 Printed on 6/19/2020 Board of Architectural Review Meeting Minutes May 21, 2020 evergreens around as well as grass and plantings that will give seasonal colorations. The fence will be brick with pre-finished aluminum slats that will be installed with brick, maintain an 8 foot height around the exterior of the fence, and foot height on the interior for screening and security. There will be a high speed bi-fold security gates. For lighting they chose a led Selux Saturn 2 cutoff, utilized house side shielding to keep light from spilling onto other sites. All light fixtures have LED lighting and house side shielding with the color range at 3000 kelvin. . Lighting in the plaza will be generated by the soffit of the roof for the community room. Bollards with lights will also be used. Mr. Williams pointed out the pole mounted light fixtures on the architectural site plan. The current light fixtures in the Bowman lot will be replaced. The site photometric showed how the light would spill without the house side shielding on the lights. Ms. Hanley commented that some of the items that were to be included in the revisions were the drip edge below the windows to bulk up, the panel above the upper part of the larger building was to be gray and not beige, pilaster articulation in the wall. Ms. Hanley asked for the perspective showing the pilaster articulation could be shown; Mr. Williams showed the perspective and stated the pilaster steps out in four inch increments up to 8 inches as they felt it seemed more elegant. Ms. Hanley asked for some other views showing the breaking up of the long horizontal wall with the landscaping. Mr. Williams pointed out the slope where the ornamental grasses and plantings would be along with the evergreens to give the seasonal colors. Ms. Hanley discussed wanting to capture views of color and size variations of plantings with Mr. Williams when coming up Locust St. Mr. Williams stated, when talking with the landscaper, there will always be foliage whether in bloom or not. Ms. Hanley also inquired tree root pruning. Ms. Hanley inquired about the bike rack in the rendering versus the bike rack that is specked out. Mr. Williams stated it was a graphical oversight as they are aware of what is approved by the town. Mr. Layer asked, regarding the paver change, if they were variable and larger units, Mr. Williams stated that was correct and that they were 1x2, 2x2, and 2x4. Where there is narrow banding they will be 1x1. Mr. Layer asked if they were pervious, Mr. Williams stated they were not. Mr. Layer asked how they would be laid; Mr. Williams stated they would have a concrete base with a layer of sand to dry lay them. Mr. Layer stated the holes must be 16 inches on center in the concrete under the sand to keep from creating problems for the fixed concrete. Mr. Layer pointed out that the concrete pavers could look stark in comparison to the warmth of a brick paver. Mr. Williams stated there would be three colors of the concrete pavers to create a pattern. Mr. Layer pointed out how dramatically different it was to go from the brick pavers to the concrete pavers. There was continued discussion regarding the pavers. Mr. Layer asked what was capping the walls adjacent to the plaza. Mr. Williams stated they were pre-cast caps with a LED strip under the edge of the cap. Mr. Layer stated the landscaping, from the site plan seemed denser and more varied than the perspective. Mr. Layer asked Mr. Williams to point out the gates. Mr. Williams showed the gates with the louvered slats that were slopped to prevent a person from climbing. Mr. Layer asked for the finish, Mr. Williams stated the finish on the slats were an aluminum powder coat in black. Mr. Williams explained how the arms of the bi-fold gate worked independently to fold going in opposite directions. Mr. Layer asked for the material of the bi-fold gates. Mr. Williams stated they were powder coated steel framed slated black aluminum panel. Ms. Hanley asked what structure was between EX02 and EX03 to keep a person from going through. Mr. Williams stated there would be the same fence between the gates, as that used that gives relief to the brick wall and ties back to the building. Ms. van Doorn asked if the fiber cement boards on the upper level were horizontal or if some were at an angle, Mr. Williams stated they were all horizontal. Town of Vienna Page 8 Printed on 6/19/2020 Board of Architectural Review Meeting Minutes May 21, 2020 Mr. Chesleka asked about the lighter contemporary color of the pavers was accurate, Mr. Williams stated that was correct they went with the lighter blend. Mr. Cheselkas spoke on the letter from Mr. and Mrs. Jacksons concerns the setback of the fence, the window site lines, the parking, the community room, and the shooting range. The Chief spoke on those concerns indicating he had spoken with the neighbors including the Jacksons. Ms. West reminded the Board of the purview of the Board being specific to those items in Chapter 4 (design aspects). Mr. Layer asked how far apart the slats were on the fence. Mr. Williams stated there would be a 3/8 inch gap between the slats. Mr. Baldwin stated he was concerned about, bollards, signs, lighting, and trees. He felt there were not enough bollards at the front entrance from a safety point of view and if more bollards would be possible. Mr. Williams agreed about the safety concern and stated the bollards were not crash rated bollards which is why they are utilizing the site walls with their substantial foundations. He also stated that K-rated bollards are very costly, but they are doing what they can to protect the wall. Mr. Baldwin continued stating the police building is unique as it doesn’t look like a police station and he was concerned that someone new to town may not know how to find the police station. Mr. Williams stated the sign would be put on the building lit by the soffit lights to be seen from Locust. On the other side a sign similar to the other sign it would be on the canopy. Mr. Baldwin encouraged an application if there was a choice to have a monument sign. The lighting was the next concern for Mr. Baldwin in reference to those living on Locust. Mr. Williams stated that the soffit lights were at 3000 kelvin and lumens were at 2000, but they could look into lessening the lumen output. Other lights have the shield to reduce light spilling on to other properties, and there was discussion about the lights on motion sensors but after much discussion it was deemed it would be a potential nuisance to the neighbors. Mr. Baldwin stated he wanted to address the trees on Locust and how many will be taken down during the construction. Mr. Williams showed the Board the tree preservation plan and that the trees with the “X” are slated to be removed. Mr. Baldwin stated it appeared all the trees on Locust at the proposed construction site would be removed, but they would be replanting, Mr. Williams stated that was correct. Ms. van Doorn asked if planters had been considered for use rather the bollards if they were a higher crash resistance. Mr. Williams stated those systems are manufactured and tested for that. Ms. van Doorn asked about the planters’ equivalent to federal building and if the thinking for the bollards was for safety purposes or not. Mr. Williams stated the site foundational walls will provide security as well as the fact that it is up on a hill. Ms. Hanley stated a possibility to make the front entrance stronger would be to bring a railing with a post or pillar for the railing to attach to while extending the wall around. Ms. Hanley asked if it was possible to consider an outlet to be pre-wired into the community space for charging stations or other devices to be used. Mr. Williams said that was a good idea, but there was nothing in the drawing to reflect that, but perhaps in the planter beds there may be able to be secured receptacles to utilize for an event. Charging stations would need to be a conversation with town staff. Ms. Hanley asked if there would be any changes to the existing generator building. Mr. Williams stated the plan for the existing generator would be to leave it as is, but swap out parts to accommodate the building. The enclosure would be left as is with a brick facing added to match with the new building brick, while leaving space for the trash enclosure. Ms. Hanley asked if the evening entrance of the Police Station for residents off the parking lot, Chief Morris stated that was correct. Ms. Hanley mentioned resident’s comments that fall outside of the Town of Vienna Page 9 Printed on 6/19/2020 Board of Architectural Review Meeting Minutes May 21, 2020 purview of the Board, pertaining to the safety on Locust with a wider sidewalk. Charlie Strunk, 905 Meadow Ln SW (BAC). Mr. Strunk stated that his issue may have been addressed pertaining to the style of bicycle rack being used. Originally the serpentine style was shown as being used, but it was discovered the inverted U, which is recommend by the BAC (Bicycle Advisory Committee) will be used. Mr. Baldwin asked if someone was ready to make a motion. Mr. Layer suggested adding to the proposed motion a change in the walls for added security. Ms. Hanley also mentioned seeing more detail on the gates as she stated there were a couple options for panels. Ms. West reminded the Board that the need to see additional details will require the applicant coming back to the Board. Staff would not have the authority to make to approve anything that is very specific from the Board. The motion could pull those specific items out to be brought back to the Board at a later date. Mr. Cheselka made a motion that the request for approval of a new police station located at 215 Center Street S., Docket No. PF-20-20-BAR, be approved with the proviso that security around the entry points will be addressed as identified by Mr. Williams, the portion of the wall to the left will be extended down the radius, to the line of the step, and the details of the security gates be forwarded to the Board. Mr. Layer seconded the motion with 5 ayes, and 0 nays. Ayes: Mr. Layer, Ms. van Doorn, Mr. Cheselka, Ms. Hanley, and Mr. Baldwin Motion: Cheselka Second: Layer Approved: 5-0 127 Center St S - Town Hall - Exterior Modification Item No. 10: Request for approval of a new generator enclosure located at 127 Center Street S., Docket No. PF-21-20-BAR, in the RM-2 Multi-Family Residential zoning district; filed by David Donahue, Deputy Director of Public Works, Town of Vienna. Mr. David Donahue, Deputy Director Department of Public Works was present to represent the application. Mr. Donahue stated the current generator does not have enough power to take care of the entire building and it is failing. The proposal is to put in a generator that will power the entire building surrounded by a concrete wall on three sides, and the concrete wall will be faced with brick to match the town hall exterior. The front will be enclosed by a gate painted to match the enclosure to match the facility. Mr. Layer asked for the details of the gate. Mr. Donahue showed the details on the structural plan and stated they would be attempting to match the HVAC enclosure as best as possible in color and style. Mr. Layer asked if the gate would be wood. Ms. O’Brien pointed out that it stated it was a JC gate. Mr. Layer then asked what supported the wood gate and also state he recommended wood not be used as composite materials are vastly superior and would not require a finish. The gate structure should be galvanized or some material not subject to degradation. Mr. Donahue said that would be fine as the gate would be utilized to get into the enclosure with spacing between the slats to provide air circulation to cool the generator. Mr. Layer asked if the gate was to be able to swing entirely to the left and right to be able take the generator out or only for maintenance. Mr. Donahue said just for maintenance access and the posts would be sleeved so the entire gate could come out if need be. There was additional discussion regarding the posts and sleeves for the gate. Town of Vienna Page 10 Printed on 6/19/2020 Board of Architectural Review Meeting Minutes May 21, 2020 Mr. Cheselka and Ms. Hanley had similar concerns as Mr. Layer. Ms. Hanley asked if the middle part of the fixed panel would move, two middle parts would move, or if the one part swings open. Mr. Donahue stated there would be a gate on the second piece from the left with bollards sleeved into the concrete and any material can be placed between the bollards. Ms. Hanley asked if there was another post at the three foot clearance level. Mr. Donahue said it appeared to be left off in the schematic. Ms. Hanley asked if the gate would be entirely in front of the brick, Mr. Donahue said that was correct. Ms. Hanley asked how the brick would be capped. Mr. Layer pointed out that the section showed no cap. Mr. Layer stated there wasn’t enough information to review the gate or the section detail at the moment. The cap and materials aren’t shown, there are no weep holes, and there is no information as to how it’s built. Mr. Donahue said the plans could be modified and they would like to be able to move forward with the project. He suggested with building the concrete enclosure, installing the generator, and come back to the Board for the gate details. Mr. Baldwin stated they could make the approval conditional with further detail as to the location of the gate, the material, the cap on the brick, and where the weep holes would be. Ms. West stated if the Board required further review, it would have to be in a meeting. Mr. Baldwin suggested deferring the portion that was in question. Mr. Layer stated that in the motion, the items not present should be identified. Mr. Layer made a motion that the request for approval of a new generator enclosure located at 127 Center Street S., Docket No. PF-21-20-BAR, be approved with the proviso that weep holes installed per the requirements of an architectural brick wall, cap material be concrete with slope to the exterior projected ¾ inch beyond the brick with a drip edge, and a follow up in the next meeting with the details for the gate structure, metal, ant-corrosion finish, material of the gate, and attachment of slats to the structure. Mr. Cheselka seconded the motion, with 4 ayes, 1 nay Ayes: Mr. Layer, Mr. Cheselka, Ms. Hanley, Mr. Baldwin Nay: Ms. van Doorn Motion: Layer Second: Cheselka Approved: 4-1 4. New Business Ms. Hanley inquired about whether the Board needs a secretary, and the Board discussed this further. 5. Meeting Adjournment Mr. Cheselka made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Ms. Hanley seconded the motion. The meeting adjourned at 11:17 PM. Respectfully submitted by, Sharmaine Abaied Board Clerk Town of Vienna Page 11 Printed on 6/19/2020 Board of Architectural Review Meeting Minutes May 21, 2020 THE TOWN OF VIENNA IS COMMITTED TO FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT STANDARDS. TRANSLATION SERVICES, ASSISTANCE OR ACCOMMODATION REQUESTS FROM PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES ARE TO BE REQUESTED NOT LESS THAN 3 WORKING DAYS BEFORE THE DAY OF THE EVENT. PLEASE CALL (703) 255-6304, OR 711 VIRGINIA RELAY SERVICE FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED. Town of Vienna Page 12 Printed on 6/19/2020