Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB201600065 Application Review History 2016-06-06 APPLICATION REVIEW HISTORY ARB #/Name ARB201600065 'U,,(.or o., (Ak1/4-6 ACTION DATE NOTES County received application 5/12/16 Received by Design Planner 5/24/16 (Submittal date 5/23/16) Corresponding submittal 6/3/16 Staff review needed—Part of Stonefield deadline/ARB meeting date Block G and CSP applies. Submittal is at least close if not totally compliant with CSP. Transfer from intake to ARB Staff 5/19/16 (Design Planner did not receive until 5/24/16 and there was a holiday on 5/30/16) Submittal is complete enough: "Metal" is specified, and sample provided, 5/27/2016 but what type of metal not specified. Didn't Completeness Check specify sign area dimensions, but that is not on completeness list. Sign dimensions and height were given. Didn't give length of building,but gave length of bay the business is in. Call to Contact 6/2/2016 I called Bob Anderson. He confirmed that the text is meant to be left justified and that is actually a company"logo"/standard. 6/2/2016 I called Bob Anderson. He confirmed that the fax and the returns of the sign will be Call to Contact aluminum. No material was specified on the sign plan. A material sample was submitted, but material type, and which surfaces it applied to, was not specified on the sample. 6/1/16—6/6/16 Review findings: • They are missing the"30 milliamp (ma)neon"note. Margaret said if that was the only thing we will approve the sign but include that not in the letter of approval. First ARB staff review • The left justification of"European" does not meet the ARB Guidelines. However, it will be significantly blocked by the other two buildings that will be along Route 29, it is about 340' away from Route 29, and nothing in the CSP specifies that the text needs to be centered. Approval letter sent 6/6/2016 Approval letter emailed to contact and Applicant Survey Included? mailed to contact and owner.