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, February 25, 2021 5:00 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS-VIENNA TOWN HALL Rescheduled from February 18, 2021 BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW February 25, 2021 The Board of Architectural Review met at a rescheduled time, due to inclement weather, Thursday, February 25, 2021 at 5:00 pm in the Vienna Town Hall at 127 Center St S. and Via Zoom Webinar. Chairman Roy Baldwin, Vice-Chair Michael Cheselka, Patty Hanley, Paul Layer, and Linda van Doorn were present participating via Zoom. Planner Andrea West and Principal Planner Kelly O’Brien also participated via Zoom, and Board Clerk Sharmaine Abaied was present in Town Hall. Resolution for Continuity of Government - Board of Architectural Review Resolution for Continuity of Government: Second: Mr. Layer Roll call vote: 5-0 Ayes: Ms. van Doorn, Mr. Layer, Mr. Baldwin, Mr. Cheselka, and Ms. Hanley Roll Call Roll Call: Ms. van Doorn, Mr. Layer, Mr. Baldwin, Mr. Cheselka, and Ms. Hanley were present. Approval of Minutes Meeting Minutes: Mr. Cheselka stated he felt there were changes needed to the lumen levels in paragraph 5 from 75% to a cap 2435 lumens. Minutes were accepted with correction Regular Business 332 Maple Ave E - Burke & Herbert Bank - Exterior Modification Mr. Bob Brandt was present to represent the application. He stated they had returned after direction from the board to studying the metallic panel material proposed for the front of the bank. The study was to see if there were better colors or finishes that would compliment the previously approved colors and materials for the building. After extensive research it was determined that the originally proposed metallic silver color was the desired color to match the approved colors and materials. The package submitted for the meeting included pictures of the materials and colors at the property to give evidence that Town of Vienna Page 1 Printed on 3/19/2021 Board of Architectural Review Meeting Minutes February 25, 2021 the metallic silver was best suited for the approved materials and colors. Mr. Andrew Schieffer was also present to represent the application. He explained some of the detail of the research done to ensure the metallic silver was the best color and material to compliment the previously approved materials and colors. Mr. Layer stated he too had used the same research, on his own, of taking the samples outside to ensure the colors complimented and stated he was in agreeance that the colors to work well together. Mr. Baldwin agreed with Mr. Layers statement. Motion to approve as submitted (preferred: BSX Metallic Silver): Mr. Layer Second: Ms. Hanley Ayes: Ms. van Doorn, Mr. Layer, Mr. Baldwin, Mr. Cheselka, and Ms. Hanley 5 Ayes, 0 Nays 415 Church St NE - Carient Heart & Vascular - Exterior Modificaiton Wendy Atkins was present to represent the application along with John Afable. Mr. Layer, asked if the size brick and pattern would be the same as existing. Mr. Afable stated yes. Ms. Hanley asked if the planter shown on the north elevation was new and if it would be capped, Mr. Afable said yes and it would be capped to match the rest of the building and that it was a decorative planter. Ms. Hanley asked what the material would be used to cap it. Mr. Afable stated it would be concrete and would match the EIFS stucco material band going across the building. Mr. Cheselka commented on the material used for the band although he understood they were needing to match the existing band. Mr. Baldwin asked if the addition would extend a few feet above the roof line and asked if it would be a flat roof. Mr. Afable said it would be a flat roof and was a few feet above the roof line. He then asked if the addition could match the rest of the building. Mr. Afable stated they looked doing that, but the existing roof had some issues so they did not want to replicate the roof. Mr. Baldwin stated he thought it looked a little uneven. Ms. Hanley asked if it would be possible to make it a little taller and more prominent rather than just adding it on for function. Mr. Layer stated the upper portion of the EIFS was a little heavy. Bringing the brick up a little higher and reducing the size of the cap might make the elevator tower look more connected to the rest of the building and look more like a cornice. Mr. Afable showed on the existing elevation the band at the roof of the second-floor balcony and that they were putting on the elevator. Mr. Layer asked if the elevator was tied into the existing piece. Mr. Afable stated yes. Mr. Layer stated they could bring the brick up and let one terminate on the other going up to a cornice to not bond the two together. Other board members agreed with Mr. Layers comments. Motion to approve with the proviso that, per new elevation east, take the EIFS of the elevator tower up disconnecting it from the cap on the elevator new portion to the right, bringing it up to appear to be more of a cornice-like cap rather than mimicking the band below. It will be brought up to 23’6 to give it dimension: Mr. Layer Second: Ms. Hanley Ayes: Ms. van Doorn, Mr. Layer, Mr. Baldwin, Mr. Cheselka, and Ms. Hanley. 5 Ayes, 0 Nays Town of Vienna Page 2 Printed on 3/19/2021 Board of Architectural Review Meeting Minutes February 25, 2021 201 Park St SE - Cadence on Park - Exterior Modification Collin Sekas was present to represent the application. He stated that the proposed project would mirror that of the project on Center with a few minor changes. Ms. Hanley inquired about the material specs as there were some discrepancies. Mr. Sekas said their final submission was a spec sheet that was in excel format showing the supplier, material type, and the colors. She then asked for clarification regarding the townhomes and then asked about unit 5, as it slopes significantly, asking if there was a knee wall or retaining wall that came in front of the unit. Mr. Sekas stated there was one at unit 5 and can be seen on sheet 4 of 24 and would be relative to the window well but would not be 5’ or 6’. Ms. Hanley commented that there was opportunity to spruce up the corner with landscaping as it was harsh. Mr. Sekas stated it would be mulched, but that they could add shrubbery to make it less harsh. Ms. Hanley what materials were proposed between unit 5 and the driveway. Mr. Sekas stated it would be a landscaping package with mulch and that they would also sod on the lower side of the parking lot. Ms. Hanley asked about a lighting package. Mr. Sekas stated there would only be on exterior fixture for lighting at each of the garages. They are to be small black lamps with a narrow arm and an umbrella lamp. There will also be recessed lights under the porticos at the front. Ms. van Doorn asked if the siding proposed for Park St was the same as that used for the Center St townhomes. Mr. Sekas stated yes, they were the same 7 ½” hardi-plank cement board. Ms. van Doorn inquired about the bay windows as she felt it added depth. She asked how far they would extend, Mr. Sekas stated they would extend 2 feet. Mr. Cheselka asked about the colors of the siding and the front doors as he felt there may be a better option for more variety. Mr. Sekas stated they would be using the same color selection as Cadence on Center and that the renderings did not do justice to the actual townhomes as they are more definitive in person. Mr. Layer had Mr. Sekas go through each elevation explaining the materials that were proposed. He asked about the non-repetitive nature of the elements on the units. Mr. Sekas stated the outer units were, the interior units were the same, and one unique unit. Mr. Layer suggested making the bay on the end unit grey as well to break up the symmetry giving two grey and one brick. Mr. Layer stated the side elevation would look better with additional landscaping. Mr. Layer asked if the shingles were wood or composite. Mr. Sekas stated they were composite. He also asked if they were sloping or straight up. Mr. Sekas said it was straight up with a slight angle. Mr. Layer inquired about trees on that side as well and Mr. Sekas stated they had twenty-two proposed trees and stated the locations, but there were none proposed for the side as there was a wall. Ms. West reminded the Board that the meeting would need to end at 6:30. Board member stated they felt there was more to discuss regarding this agenda item. Mr. Baldwin asked if any member of the public would like to be heard on the item, and there were none. Mr. Baldwin asked if the hardi-plank units were the same color as those on Cadence on Center, Mr. Sekas stated yes. Mr. Baldwin asked the Board members for their additional input on the item. Mr. Cheselka stated he wasn’t in favor of the current colors on the units and thought the move of the bay may be beneficial. Mr. Layer said the bay would not need to be moved, it would just be using the color gray on the bay on the right hand side that was brick. Mr. Layer Town of Vienna Page 3 Printed on 3/19/2021 Board of Architectural Review Meeting Minutes February 25, 2021 stated seeing the change and other color variations, in particular the doors, would help with enhancing the townhomes. He also stated adding landscaping would help as well. Ms. van Doorn stated adding triangular cap pieces to the doors on the two side units with siding would help differentiate the units as well. Mr. Baldwin asked staff about potentially doing a work session as there were many items the Board members would present as changes for the designs for the units. Ms. West stated they could schedule a work session. Mr. Baldwin stated he felt a work session would be better as there were many things brought up during the meeting that could be discussed and worked out at a work session. Ms. Hanley inquired about the door placement in efforts to keep them more symmetrical. Mr. Sekas stated they would consider it and explained that they utilized the layout from Center St. when proposing the changes for Park St. There was additional discussion regarding the changes board members had presented to Mr. Sekas in reference as to what should be submitted for the work session. Mr. Baldwin then asked for a motion to defer until after the board has a work session with the applicant. Motion to defer the application until a work session can be scheduled with elevation studies giving indication that a greater individuality is achieved on the façade than what was proposed by the applicant: Mr. Layer Second: Mr. Cheselka Ms. Hanley asked if the work session could be held sooner so the application could be heard by the board again at the next public hearing. Ms. West stated she would be in touch with the board and the applicant the following day to set up the work session. Ayes: Ms. van Doorn, Mr. Layer, Mr. Baldwin, Mr. Cheselka, and Ms. Hanley. Ayes: 5, Nays: 0 Meeting Adjournment Mr. Layer asked for a motion to adjourn Motion to adjourn: Mr. Layer Second: Ms. van Doorn With no objections the meeting adjourned at 6:24 Respectfully Submitted, Sharmaine Abaied Board Clerk 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 4 Printed on 3/19/2021