The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutARB201900002 Review Comments Architectural Review Board Approval 2019-01-16pF AL �411111QI 11u /:\ 45114 � Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 January 16, 2019 Ashleigh Otto Gropen Inc. 1766 Scottsville Rd. Suite A Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: ARB -2019-2: Sentara Martha Jefferson signs (TMP 032AO-02-00-001 AO) Dear Ashleigh, We have received your above -referenced sign application. Your application was incomplete. We cannot begin review until the missing information is submitted and parts are revised. The following items were missing from your submittal and revisions requested: 1. The fee and a separate application form for the proposed monument sign refacings. Page 1, Part B of your application states that you are applying for a wall sign(s), but you include in your application package images of monument signs that appear to be an additional request for refacing. For ARB purposes, you can lump these together, but you will need a separate sign permit for the monument sign(s) refacing and you will need to pay the `Sign Refacing' fee (on page 1, part B) of $59.00. Please contact in- take staff at reception for further information. 2. Entrance Corridor Requirements for Wall Signs. On page 3 of the sign permit application, the requirements for ARB review are listed. Your drawings lack the following information: a. Color: the drawings state "Avery Sunflower Yellow" but no Pantone, Benjamin Moore, or other standard color ID equivalent is given on the drawing. Later in the package, with the monument signs, you have a sheet that has color swatches, in which "Color C" is to match PMS 142C. Is "Color C" also Avery Sunflower Yellow"? Please clarify on the sign drawings. b. Raceway color: the color of the raceway is not provided. Note that the color of the raceway shall match the color of the wall to which the raceway is attached. c. Identification of which parts of the sign are opaque and which are illuminated. Will the logo also be illuminated? Will it be yellow or white when illuminated? Clarify on the sign drawing. 3. Entrance Corridor Requirements for Freestanding Signs. Page 2 of the sign permit application lists the required information which this submittal lacks, such as: a. Site plan showing proposed locations of the signs. While this application is not asking for new monument signs, showing the location on the site plan of the existing monument signs that you propose to reface would be helpful in ascertaining whether both signs are visible from the EC and thereby require ARB review or not. Please include a site plan or amend the site plan included to show the location of the two monument signs which you propose to reface. b. Clarify which of the monument sign drawings reflect what is existing and what is proposed. Confusingly, the monument sign drawing that is entitled "proposed" is what is currently existing today. So that raises the question of whether the monument sign drawing that reads "existing" is what you are proposing. Please clarify. 4. Manufacturer specifications on lighting. Your application includes four pages at the end of manufacturer's specifications for a Kim Lighting model, but none of the information has been input onto the form, or circled, so I don't know what size model you're choosing, what the color of the housing is, whether this is ground -mounted or wall -mounted, what illumination values are, etc. Is the lighting up - lighting for the monument signs? If so, show them on a site plan. What is the color of the housing for the lights? These specifications show a red that appears inappropriate for the EC. Clarify. What light values and illumination do the proposed lamps give? Fill out the specification forms you have provided. Furthermore, your wall sign drawings, as they are proposed to be illuminated, should include the note: The level of illumination provided by the LED lights will not exceed the illumination produced by a single stroke of 30 milliamp (ma) neon. 5. Excising extraneous information. These drawings will be used in future as a record of approval. They should be as clear and concise as possible. Please remove hand-written notes; the former building permit number from 2015 which will confuse the new approval; and if none of the blues or brown proposed on the color swatch sheet are being proposed in this application, remove that information. 6. Additional wall signs. Your application has a page with "Ambulance" (Qty. 3) and "Emergency" (Qty. 3) signs proposed. Where will these 6 signs be located? Provide elevations and a site map that shows these 6 signs in their proposed locations. Furthermore, please note that as per Action on ARB-P(BP)- 2001-12 Wood Grill, Red acrylic #2283 has been determined to be an inappropriate color for signs. Pantone color match for 2283 is 485C. Red #2793 has been approved as an acceptable substitute. Pantone color match for 2793 is 187C. Please re -submit your sign drawings, including the missing information. (You may email the revised drawings to me at hmcmahon&albemarle.org or send the copies by U.S. mail.) If the missing items are received within 15 days of the date of this letter, we will proceed with review, and the submittal date will be adjusted according to the date of your resubmittal. If the missing items are not received within 15 days of the date of this letter, the application will be denied and a new fee will be required to submit a new application. If you have any questions about this process, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, *_ N PdAv- Heather McMahon, Senior Planner 434-296-5832 x3278 hmcmahon(&,,albemarle.ore cc: File ARB -2019-2 Martha Jefferson Hospital Attn. Michael Spatz P.O. Box 2606 Charlottesville, VA 22902