There was a time, two decades ago, when members of the Arlington County Board seemed intent on having the final say when it came to lighting atop commercial and residential buildings in the county’s urban canyons.
Those days, apparently, are long gone, with those powers increasingly being delegated to staff via the county government’s zoning ordinance.
The latest proof: County Board members voted 5-0 on Sept. 23 to remove sign conditions on two Crystal City buildings, easing the way for the owners to have more flexibility.
The goal is not to “turn Crystal Drive into Times Square” – those the words of board member Takis Karantonis – but to provide an equal playing field for all property owners while keeping some guardrails to protect residents.
Board members OK’d a staff proposal calling for easing restrictions put in place decades ago at the Crystal Park 1 and Crystal Park 3 office buildings, located at 2011 and 2231 Crystal Drive. Those restrictions, which narrowly tailor the size and type of signage atop the properties, were imposed as part of site-plan approvals in 2004 and 2006.
Under the revision adopted Sept. 23, signage on the two buildings in the future will be approved per provisions of the county’s zoning ordinance.
“This request is similar to those for other buildings that have also received site-plan-amendment approval in recent years, granting relief from more restrictive rooftop-sign-condition language,” staff said in a memo to County Board members, recommending the changes.
Tight controls over building signage were “born in a different era of governance,” said current County Board Chairman Christian Dorsey, and changes like the one enacted on Sept. 23 represent “a welcome improvement from the way Arlington used to operate.”
(Whether County Board members from the era of the early 2000s – the likes of Chris Zimmerman, Walter Tejada, Paul Ferguson and Barbara Favola – would agree is, perhaps, open to interpretation.)
Karantonis suggested the level of lighted signage in the Crystal City area was appropriate and “not at all offensive, in my personal view.”
The National Landing Business Improvement District supported the staff proposal. The Crystal City Civic Association had voiced opposition to the change, suggesting in a letter to County Board members that it violated a benefits-package agreement that was put in place as part of the site plan for the initial approval of the Crystal Park footprint. County-government staff, however, countered that the signage in question is not directly tied to that agreement.
Whether the civic association’s leadership subsequently changed its mind, or simply decided not to bother showing up given the anticipated vote tally, no representatives came to speak at the requisite public hearing.
There remain other buildings across Arlington under specific rules for lighted signage, and it’s likely those property owners ultimately will ask for waivers, too.
When they happen, Karantonis said, it would be wise of the government’s staff to reach out to affected neighborhoods to give them a heads-up.
A county-government staffer replied that such outreach wasn’t in their procedures, Karantonis seemed displeased.
“It’s just customer service,” he shot back.
