Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Exterior Lighting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board accepts appeal on large Greenwich Point lighting installation; application deferred for more information
Summary
The DRB voted to accept an appeal from Reston Association on Jan. 21 and will rehear, de novo, a lighting application at 11576 Greenwich Point Road after staff and board members identified previously approved under-cap lighting that was not part of the original review.
The Reston Design Review Board accepted an appeal from Reston Association on Jan. 21 concerning extensive exterior lighting at 11576 Greenwich Point Road and voted to hear the application de novo. The RA appeal argued the property installed 76 additional light fixtures, including 44 up-lights, beyond examples normally permitted without application and that earlier approved under-cap pillar lighting in a 2021 courtyard approval constituted relevant, previously unavailable information.
Cam Adams, identified in the record as Reston Association staff who filed the appeal on behalf of the RA Board of Directors, told the board the property’s package showed a substantial number of fixtures and that some building-mounted up-lights and previously approved under-cap lights were not considered in the original review. “The number of the light fixtures seems overwhelmingly unnecessary and do contribute to being excessive in appearance,” Cam said, citing the plan and linked images showing numerous red-dotted fixtures.
Board members debated whether the under-cap lights—approved in a 2021 courtyard application and visible in staff renderings—should have been considered in the applicant’s photometric submission. Some members said the photometric data did show elevated light levels at the courtyard but that the fixture locations were not labeled on the current plans. One board member observed hot spots in the photometric that corresponded with the cap lights.
The board voted to accept the appeal. After the appeal vote the property’s representative asked for more time—citing late receipt of appeal materials and a family medical emergency—and requested a continuance. The board agreed to defer the application to the next full board meeting so the applicant could assemble experts and revised materials; staff indicated a February schedule was feasible and set an expectation that additional materials be submitted as soon as available.
Board members directed staff and the applicant to ensure that any resubmitted application integrates the under-cap lighting into the photometric study and that the applicant be allowed time to present lighting designers and other experts at the de novo hearing.
