The Town of Washington’s Architectural Review Board (ARB) unanimously approved plans for signage at Rush River Commons at its Monday meeting, despite some concern over the prominence of the signage detracting from the town.
Previously, the plans were in front of the town’s Planning Commission, where engineers on the project were petitioning for a special use permit. At a March meeting, a clerical error on the part of the town and Rush River Commons was discovered, and after the issue was corrected, the square footage of proposed signage fell under the threshold laid out in the zoning ordinance. With no need for a special permit, the plans went straight to the ARB.
Throughout the approval process, members of the community have voiced concerns over the size of the signage. Caroline Anstey, chair of the Planning Commission, spoke during public comment, reiterating concerns she voiced while considering the permit application.
Sign up for Rapp News Daily, a free newsletter delivered to your email inbox every morning.
She said there are no other “campus” signs in the town. She fears that large signage — her main concern being a large project identification sign at the edge of Warren Avenue — would separate Rush River Commons from the rest of the town.
“We don’t have neighborhoods, we are just Washington…we don’t have anywhere else in the town, campus signs,” Anstey said. “I support the initiative for the project. I just am very uncomfortable with a project identification sign, a campus sign, because we have them nowhere else in the town.”
The 10-foot project identification sign would be positioned at a 90-degree angle at the corner of Leggett Lane and Warren Avenue. The Town of Washington welcome sign is located right across the road.
ARB member Ryan Crabbe said after seeing the presented plan, he feels more at ease about the identification sign, because it is not facing oncoming traffic on Warren Avenue head on and not directly competing with the town sign.
Rush River engineer Steve Plescow, who presented the plans to the board, said that several of the signs were inspired by signs at The Inn at Little Washington. The height of the identification sign is the same as the inn’s, he said, and both buildings are two stories tall, so the team thought the height “felt right.”
“I appreciate what Caroline said. Yes, we’re in the Town of Washington, but there’s lots of things in Washington…everything has a sign. If someone is coming to our project, they need to know they’re in the right place…I think we have a right to have a sign,” Plescow said.
Crabbe agreed that a business needs to be able to identify itself, and asked if the sign could be pushed back from the road a little bit, closer to the building. Plescow said because several utilities converge behind where the sign is to be placed, they are constrained on the placement. If it could not be moved, ARB Chair Deborah Harris asked if the height of the sign could be lowered some, and Plescow said the team is open to suggestions.
“Bringing it down a foot or two is not the end of the world,” Plescow said.
Chuck Akre, creator of Rush River Commons, was present at the meeting, and thanked Anstey for her comments, but said the intent of Rush River Commons is to enrich and add to the community, not detract from it.
“We’ve complied with the steps in the zoning…and Caroline’s point may be right, but we won’t know that for a long time,” Akre said.
The board ultimately approved the plans as they were presented.
Parts of packing shed ‘past the point of no return’
Zoning administrator Steve Gyurisin presented an update on the packing shed at the corner of Gay and Porter streets in the town, which has fallen into disrepair with little intervention from its owner. Over the years it was home to multiple art galleries, a video rental store and a law office.
The property is listed for sale, and Gyurisin said he met with the real estate agent and a representative of the owner who took him on a tour of the property. He said the main structure, from observations on his quick visit, seems sturdy, but several other structures on the property appear to be “past the point of no return” and will require stabilization or demolition.
Gyurisin described beams hanging from the ceiling with no supports, exposed wiring and a collapsing deck at the entrance of the building. He said the owner did respond to his request to clean up the property, and the area has been landscaped.
Gyurisin said he does not know if the building has been sold yet and was not privy to any new contracts, but recommended that the board revisit the issue in a few months time when a new owner may have taken over.
“I think it’s very easy for me to tell the ARB that [the shed] is well on the road to demolition,” Gyurisin said. “I will come back later, to the ARB, if nothing is done.”
“The old owner is likely not going to invest or do anything, and I think it’s just giving the building a fair chance with the new owner,” Harris said.
The board unanimously accepted Gyurisin’s report.
Other business
Five other applications were discussed at the meeting, including a new emergency services garage to house emergency medical vehicles and sheriff’s office vehicles, which was approved unanimously by the board.
An application to add an attached breezeway and single-car garage to 558 Gay St., which was continued at the board’s December meeting, was again not approved. The original plans were submitted by the contractor, Eddie Fletcher, in November 2023. Owner Thornton Matheson came back Monday with updated plans, and presented the board with a few design options.
The board thanked Matheson for being flexible and presenting the updated design, but asked her to present plans that would include an open breezeway, instead of having the garage attached with a closed in walkway to maintain the Victorian style as much as possible.
Subtext 2024
