HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP200800006 Correspondence Letter of Revision 3 2021-03-09Kevin McCollum
From:
Laserfiche-Notification@albemarle.org
Sent:
Monday, March 8, 2021 5:42 PM
To:
Kevin McCollum
Cc:
CDD Submittal
Subject: Re -Submission from CDD Portal - Transaction #00012359
Re -Submission was made to CDD Portal. Please review.
Summary of Submission:
Project: Monticello Visitor & Smith History Ctr - Minor
App Number: SDP200800006
Name: bryan cichocki
Email: bryan.cichocki@timmons.com
Phone:434-327-5380
Files Submitted: LOR#2 SDP-2008-06 Monticello Burial Ground for Enslaved People.pdf, 03-08-2021 LOR #2 SDP-2008-006
Comment Response Letter.pdf, LOR #2 SDP200800006 Letter.pdf
View Files Submitted: http://cob-ificheO3/WebLinkWA/Search.aspx?dbid=2&searchcommand={[CDD-
WebSubm issions]: [ReceiptN umbe rj="00012359"}
Kevin McCollum
From:
Liz Russell
Sent:
Monday, March 8, 2021 10:47 AM
To:
Kevin McCollum
Subject:
Re: Security Gate at Monticello (SDP200800006)
Just dropped off the copies for you at community development.
On Mar 5, 2021, at 8:37 AM, Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org> wrote:
This Message originated outside your organization.
Yes, 4 hard copies (11x17) of the sheets CS-7 and L-1 showing the changes on the site plan set and the
entire submittal package including the UL letter. Please address it to me, Kevin McCollum, and included
the project number SDP200800006.
Thanks so much!
Kevin McCollum, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
From: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Sent: Friday, March 5, 20218:24 AM
To: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>; Roger Rothwell <rothwell@monticello.org>
Cc: Cameron Langille <blangille@albemarle.org>; Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE: Security Gate at Monticello (SDP200800006)
Thank you all for your assistance through this process.
Just to clarify — you require 4 hard copies (11x17) of the sheets CS-7 and L-1 showing the changes on the
site plan set (both attached). I will also print for record the entire submittal package including now this
attached UL letter.
I check the county site to confirm the process for in person drop offs at CD and get these to you as soon
as possible.
Liz
From: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ora>
Sent: Thursday, March 4, 20215:47 PM
To: Roger Rothwell <rrothwell@monticello.ora>; Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Cc: Cameron Langille <blangille@albemarle.ora>; Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ora>;
Howard Lagomarsino <hla¢omarsino@albemarle.org>
Subject: FW: Security Gate at Monticello (SDP200800006)
This Message originated outside your organization.
Good Evening,
It appears there are no outstanding reviews for this project. Please submit four (4) hard copies of the full
LOR plan set, including the attached letter, to the Community Development Department for final
approval. Let me know if you have any questions.
Kevin McC011um, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle Countv
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
From: Howard Lagomarsino <hlaeomarsinoCc@albemarle.ore>
Sent: Wednesday, March 3, 20215:34 PM
To: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ore>
Subject: Security Gate at Monticello (SDP200800006)
Kevin:
This letter satisfies my concerns about the gate in relation to UL 325 and ATSM F2200. Mr. Rothwell
indicated there will be no reduction in road width or issues with overhead obstructions, emergency
access will be provided and mentioned utilization of a Knox Box system as the solution they are
considering.
Not sure of next steps on this revision, but his replies and the letter satisfy my concerns as long as they
are followed through.
Howard Lagomarsino
Division Chief/Fire Marshal
Albemarle County Fire Rescue
hlagomarsino@albemarle.org
office: 434-296-5833 x3377
cell: 434-531-4861
460 Stagecoach Road Charlottesville, Va. 22902
From: Roger Rothwell <rrothwell@monticello.ore>
Sent: Wednesday, March 3, 20213:56 PM
To: Howard Lagomarsino <hlaeomarsino@albemarle.ore>
Subject: Fwd: Letter
Sir,
Thank you again for time and thought into this project. Please see the attached letter from Mid Atlantic
Entry systems.
Thank you,
Roger
Begin forwarded message:
From: Tim Morgan <tim@maentry.com>
Date: March 3, 2021 at 3:05:16 PM EST
To: Roger Rothwell <rothwell@monticello.ora>
Subject: Letter
This Message originated outside your organization.
See attached.
Timothy R. Morgan, CAGSD
President
804-463-2313 Direct
800-653-6879 Toll Free
804-737-5797 Fax
tim@maentry.com
www.midatlanticentry.com
8450 old Richfood Rd,
Mechanicsville VA,23116
4
Kevin McCollum
From: Liz Russell
Sent: Friday, March 5, 2021 8:24 AM
To: Kevin McCollum; Roger Rothwell
Cc: Cameron Langille; Howard Lagomarsino
Subject: RE: Security Gate at Monticello (SDP200800006)
Attachments: Exhibit 4. L-1 from SDP200800006 Plan - TREE REMOVAL.PDF; Exhibit 3. Pages CS-7
from SDP200800006 Plan - LAYOUT & GRADE MARKUP.PDF
Thank you all for your assistance through this process.
Just to clarify — you require 4 hard copies (11x17) of the sheets CS-7 and L-1 showing the changes on the site plan set
(both attached). I will also print for record the entire submittal package including now this attached UL letter.
I check the county site to confirm the process for in person drop offs at CD and get these to you as soon as possible.
Liz
From: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 5:47 PM
To: Roger Rothwell <rothwell@monticello.org>; Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Cc: Cameron Langille <blangille@albemarle.org>; Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>; Howard Lagomarsino
<hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>
Subject: FW: Security Gate at Monticello (SDP200800006)
This Message originated outside your organization.
Good Evening,
It appears there are no outstanding reviews for this project. Please submit four (4) hard copies of the full LOR plan set,
including the attached letter, to the Community Development Department for final approval. Let me know if you have
any questions.
Kevin MCCDIIUm,Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
From: Howard Lagomarsino <hlaaomarsino@albemarle.ore>
Sent: Wednesday, March 3, 2021 5:34 PM
To: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ore>
Subject: Security Gate at Monticello (SDP200800006)
Kevin
This letter satisfies my concerns about the gate in relation to UL 325 and ATSM F2200. Mr. Rothwell indicated there will
be no reduction in road width or issues with overhead obstructions, emergency access will be provided and mentioned
utilization of a Knox Box system as the solution they are considering.
Not sure of next steps on this revision, but his replies and the letter satisfy my concerns as long as they are followed
through.
Howard Lagomarsino
Division Chief/Fire Marshal
Albemarle County Fire Rescue
hlagomarsino@albemarle.org
office: 434-296-5833 x3377
cell: 434-531-4861
460 Stagecoach Road Charlottesville, Va. 22902
From: Roger Rothwell <rrothwell@monticello.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 3, 2021 3:56 PM
To: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>
Subject: Fwd: Letter
Sir,
Thank you again for time and thought into this project. Please see the attached letter from Mid Atlantic Entry systems.
Thank you,
Roger
Begin forwarded message:
From: Tim Morgan <tim@maentry.com>
Date: March 3, 2021 at 3:05:16 PM EST
To: Roger Rothwell <rrothwell@monticello.org>
Subject: Letter
This Message originated outside your organization.
See attached.
Timothy R. Morgan, CAGSD
President
804-463-2313 Direct
800-653-6879 Toll Free
804-737-5797 Fax
tim@maentry.com
www.midatlanticentrv.com
8450 Old Richfood Rd,
Mechanicsville VA,23116
Kevin McCollum
From: Kevin McCollum
Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 5:47 PM
To: Roger Rothwell; Liz Russell
Cc: Cameron Langille; Kevin McCollum; Howard Lagomarsino
Subject: FW: Security Gate at Monticello (SDP200800006)
Attachments: UL Letter.pdf
Good Evening,
It appears there are no outstanding reviews for this project. Please submit four (4) hard copies of the full LOR plan set,
including the attached letter, to the Community Development Department for final approval. Let me know if you have
any questions.
Kevin MCCOIIU m, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
From: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 3, 2021 5:34 PM
To: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Subject: Security Gate at Monticello (SDP200800006)
Kevin:
This letter satisfies my concerns about the gate in relation to UL 325 and ATSM F2200. Mr. Rothwell indicated there will
be no reduction in road width or issues with overhead obstructions, emergency access will be provided and mentioned
utilization of a Knox Box system as the solution they are considering.
Not sure of next steps on this revision, but his replies and the letter satisfy my concerns as long as they are followed
through.
Howard Lagomarsino
Division Chief/Fire Marshal
Albemarle County Fire Rescue
hlaaomarsino@albemarle.org
office.- 434-296-5833 x3377
cell: 434-531-4861
460 Stagecoach Road Charlottesville, Va. 22902
From: Roger Rothwell <rothwell@monticello.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 3, 2021 3:56 PM
To: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>
Subject: Fwd: Letter
Sir,
Thank you again for time and thought into this project. Please see the attached letter from Mid Atlantic Entry systems.
Thank you,
Roger
Begin forwarded message:
From: Tim Morgan <tim@maentry.com>
Date: March 3, 2021 at 3:05:16 PM EST
To: Roger Rothwell <rothwell@monticello.org>
Subject: Letter
This Message originated outside your organization.
See attached.
Timothy R. Morgan, CAGSD
President
804-463-2313 Direct
800-653-6879 Toll Free
804-737-5797 Fax
tim@maentry.com
www.midatlanticentrv.com
8450 Old Richfood Rd,
Mechanicsville VA,23116
9
Kevin McCollum
From:
Howard Lagomarsino
Sent:
Wednesday, March 3, 2021 5:34 PM
To:
Kevin McCollum
Subject:
Security Gate at Monticello (SDP200800006)
Attachments:
UL Letter.pdf
Kevin
This letter satisfies my concerns about the gate in relation to UL 325 and ATSM F2200. Mr. Rothwell indicated there will
be no reduction in road width or issues with overhead obstructions, emergency access will be provided and mentioned
utilization of a Knox Box system as the solution they are considering.
Not sure of next steps on this revision, but his replies and the letter satisfy my concerns as long as they are followed
through.
Howard Lagomarsino
Division Chief/Fire Marshal
Albemarle County Fire Rescue
hlagomarsino@albemarle.org
office. 434-296-5833 x3377
cell: 434-531-4861
460 Stagecoach Road Charlottesville, Va. 22902
From: Roger Rothwell <rrothwell@monticello.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 3, 2021 3:56 PM
To: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>
Subject: Fwd: Letter
Sir.
Thank you again for time and thought into this project. Please see the attached letter from Mid Atlantic Entry systems.
Thank you,
Roger
Begin forwarded message:
From: Tim Morgan <tim@maentrv.com>
Date: March 3, 2021 at 3:05:16 PM EST
To: Roger Rothwell <rrothwell@monticello.org>
Subject: Letter
This Message originated outside your organization.
See attached.
10
Timothy R. Morgan, CAGSD
President
804-463-2313 Direct
800-653-6879 Toll Free
804-737-5797 Fax
tim@maentry.com
www.midatlanticentrv.com
8450 Old Richfood Rd,
Mechanicsville VA,23116
11
Kevin McCollum
From: Roger Rothwell <rothwell@monticello.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 2, 2021 8:32 AM
To: Howard Lagomarsino
Cc: Kevin McCollum
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Mr. Lagomarsino,
I wanted to follow up to see if a meeting or call would be helpful. Please let me know what works best for you.
Thank you,
Roger
From: Roger Rothwell
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 10:56 AM
To: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>
Cc: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Mr. Lagomarsino,
Sorry for the delay, below is a comment for the specification writer and I have attached paperwork with highlighted
things that show the system will be UL compliant. Please also see the attached, with the highlighted safety options, we
are installing with the gate. Our Gate installer, Mid -Atlantic Entry Systems was very appreciative that you all took the
time to read through the specifications and would be happy to discuss any this information. He can answer any specific
questions and he is well versed in the safety code.
Let me know how 1 can help with your M30 compliance question. Being that it is a barrier arm and installed on
class 4 installations there is not a lot you have to do for compliance. The operator is built in with the entrapment
guard on the catch post and the photo eye is not required but definitely helpful.
My goal is to get you the information that you need to approve the project so we can continue to move forward. I will
have a few follow up questions for you and/or your department on how to best set it up for teams access in all
situations.
Thank you,
Roger
From: Roger Rothwell
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2021 11:10 AM
To: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.ore>
Cc: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ore>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Mr. Lagomarsino,
Great question, our contractor has installed these gates at airports and government location so they should meet safety
requirements for safety codes. They are not designed for pedestrian access. These gates are designed to stop a vehicle
12
in a security related event of someone planning harm to our staff/guests or to our World Heritage Site. It is not your
typical gate. We have had security audits recommending the installation of a crash rated gate. The Foundation has
looked into every style of gate imaginable from tire popping tiger teeth strips to wedge style crash gates and have
settled on this style.
I have reached out to get more information from the gate manufacturer and the gate installer. I will follow back up with
you when more is known. I really appreciate you doing your due diligence with this and 1 will be in touch.
Thanks again,
Roger
/l 5.%,4.� ,
MONTICELLO
Roger Rothwell I Assistant Director of Facilities
Thomas Jefferson Foundation, Inc. � Monticello
Post Office Box 316 1 Charlottesville, VA 22902
Phone 4 434-984-9871 1 Cen'i 434-981-11741® rrothwell(a),,monticello.ore
Monticello has reopened to the public, and we trope you 71 join us on fife mountaintop soon. We've introduced extensive safety
measures for staff and guests, and designed a new, flexible Monticello experience including self -guided tours and outdoor
experiences perfect for families. Lean more at momicello.ore/reopenine. For updates, follow @TJMonticello on social media,
visit our website, and join our livestreams.
To ensure safety and limit numbers, many of us are continuing to work remotely, and will not be found in our offices on a daily
basis.
From: Howard Lagomarsino <hlaaomarsino@albemarle.ora>
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 202110:50 AM
To: Roger Rothwell <rrothwell@monticello.ore>
Cc: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ora>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
This Message originated outside your organization.
Mr. Rothwell:
Thank you for your responses. The only concern remaining is still the ATSM F2200 and UL 325. It is my understanding UL
508 references control panels and ATSM F2656 references rating for crash arms and gates (basically testing on what
type of vehicles they stop). The only concern remaining is still the ATSM F220 and UL 325. These are specifically cited as
needing to be met in the fire code and are safety standards for all gates/security closures. They reference things like
design standards to address the potential of the gate will not crush someone, so these standards apply.
I do not have access to a full versions of UL 508 and ATSM F2656. It is possible UL325 and ATSM F2200 are referenced in
these in some manner, thereby satisfying this code requirement. Just ensuring exercise of due diligence and ensuring
these standards are addressed.
Howard Lagomarsino
Division Chief/Fire Marshal
Albemarle County Fire Rescue
hlagomarsino@albemarle.org
13
office: 434-296-5833 x3377
cell: 434-531-4861
460 Stagecoach Road Charlottesville, Va. 22902
From: Roger Rothwell <rothwell@monticello.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2021 10:32 AM
To: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>; Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Cc: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Good morning,
Thanks for your assistance with this review, we appreciate your help ensuring this will work for your teams in an
emergency situation. Below are your responses in red and my responses in blue.
Please let me know if you have any additional question to get the LOR moving forward, I'm sure there will be more
discussions after this process to confirm we are all on the same page. I'm also happy to jump on a call and involve
additional members of our Security team.
Thank you,
Roger
fft"T LO
Roger Rothwell I Assistant Director of Facilities
Thomas Jefferson Foundation, Inc. I Monticello
Post Office Box 3161 Charlottesville, VA 22902
Phone Y 434-984-9871 1 Cell 2 434-981-11741® rrothwellGdmonticello.ore
Monticello has reopened to the public, and we hope you'll join us all the mountaintop soon. We've introduced extensive safety
measures for staff and guests, and designed a new, flexible Monticello experience including self -guided tours and outdoor
experiences perfect for families. Learn more at monticello.orp/reopening. For updates, follow @TJMonticello on social media,
visit our website, and join our livestreams.
To ensure safety and limit numbers, many of us are continuing to work remotely, and will not be found in our offices on a daily
basis.
Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue - Howard Lagomarsino, hlagomarsinona,albemarle.org — Requested
changes(2/5/2021)
1. For emergency vehicle access a 20 ft width, unobstructed for the entire length, including at gates is required. Since this
an existing, previously approved road, there are no objections to the gates as long as the construction of the gates, its
associated structures and roadway conditions, including surrounding objects and vexation do not reduce the current width
of the roadway without the gates.
H. Lagomarsino 2/10: As I remember, the road serving these areas is not very wide already. It definitely does not
provide the 20ft width required in thefire code for emergency vehicle access roads, but the road also was built
well before 2000, when this section changed to the 20 feet requirement (I am not asking that the road be made to
comply with the 20 feet width).
My continents are to codify the need for- energency access, hence, the intent is that the gate structure — the
columns holding the control arms etc., not obsbmct the current width of the road that is in place now. What 1 am
looking for, is when the arm of the gate is up, the width of the access point is the same cis the width of the road
currently, it doesn't choke the road down further.
14
The Gate will be installed for a 20 ft. clear opening span(see attached drawing). This is to include the existing
slate ditch but it will not impeded the current road in any way. The new gate will increase this clear width.
2. Assurance that a clear, unobstructed vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches or greater will be provided and maintained at
the gates and the length of the roadway.
When the arm is fully up, no part of the arm blocks the proposed clear opening.
3. Provide evidence the gates comply with UL 325 and ATSM F2200.
More info provided by H. Lagomarsino 2/10: The ATSM F2656 standard is about the crash test penfornnance of
the gate where as the ATSM F2200 is about the operation of the gate (how it opens and closes, its design as a
gate in general - does not address the crash worthiness of the gate) --- hope this helps. F2200 includes issues
such as pinch hazard safety, pedestrian safety — basically ensuring someone is not crushed by the gate etc.
The Gate meets UL 508A and ASTM F2656-07 ratings as shown on the attached PDF. The arm is UL
compliant, the installation will be made compliant by adding a photo beam across the opening, all other
pinch points are covered.
4. Must provide for immediate emergency override for operation of gates for emergency vehicle access in an emergency.
H. Lagomarsino 2/10: As far the emergency activation, there needs to be a mechanisnn for emergency responders
to open the gate in an emergency, if it is closed. I have seen this take the form of the property owner providing a
code responders can activate, a key, in several cases, the siren on the rig opened the gate, Basically, anything
that allows emergency access without delaying the response to an emergency (generally, this means not waiting
,for security to arrive to open). In lieu of providing a gate code or a key to the first due fire station only or (as
there is no guarantee that the first due unit is not on another call — so any County Station or City HQ station
could be the first unit arriving — not reasonable or as secure as the system we currently utilize, to consider giving
keys or codes to everyone who may respond), a key box system (not just any key box — one designed for security of
the contents so not just anyone can access or easily break in — some even have alarms to alert when the key box is
activated) could be mounted on the structural components of the gate and it can either contain the code or a key
to operate the gate.
We have the Knox Box Company system in am- County apparatus. This consists of a key that opens any Knox Box
installed by a property owner in the County and a Key secure system in our apparatus. The Key Secure System
ensures positive control of the key that will open all Knox Boxes in the Comity. Select emergency response
members are granted access to the key installed into the Key Secure system and provided their own unique
identifier. The responder must enter this identifier into the Key Secure System to remove the key. The Key Secure
System retains information ofwho removed the key, when they took it out and put it back and uploads this to a
cloud based system, so we can track it at our o.Tice. As a quality control, we monitor to ensure the removal of keys
are legitimately related to emergencies. Once the key is removed from the Key Secure System, the responder
utilizes that key to open the Knox Box installed by the property owner and retrieve the necessmy information or
key to open the gate or door.
Our gate installer is familiar with this system and has fire boxes and KNOX cylinders included in the project. I
have also had discussions regarding a signal that the trucks send out for the gates to automatically open. I
would like to look more into this and are very interested what works best from your perspectives. On a typical
visit our security team can open the gate for the fire trucks but it's great to have the redundancy.
From: Liz Russell
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20214:35 PM
To: Howard Lagomarsino <hagomarsino@albemarle.org>
Cc: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>; Roger Rothwell <rrothwell@monticello.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
15
Hi Howard, thanks for your response and further clarification. I'm cc'ing Roger Rothwell, Assistant Director of Facilities
and point person for the installation of the gate and associated work.
We share your objective that we do not impede emergency access. Roger is communicating with the installer to verify
dimensions. We welcome your suggestions on the emergency activation as well. There was some confusion over the
ASTM rating. The gate is rated to ASTM F2656 (Test Method for Crash Testing of Vehicle Security Barriers) but it is not
clear on ASTM F2200 (Standard Specification for Automated Vehicular Gate Construction).
Roger once you are able to get clarification from the installer it might be good to set up a call so that we can make sure
we are all on the same page and I can appropriately resubmit the clarification points to the County.
Liz
From: Howard Lagomarsino <hlazomarsino@albemarle.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20214:20 PM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.ore>
Cc: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ore>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
This Message originated outside your organization.
All:
I spoke with Shawn Maddox, who has looked at this previously and confirmed these comments are in line with his past
discussions on this topic. Basically, we are looking for the project to not make our emergency access worse, but realize
the need for the security aspect of the project, so we are providing ways we can work through this and stay within the
spirit of the code.
As I remember, the road serving these areas is not very wide already. It definitely does not provide the 20 ft width
required in the fire code for emergency vehicle access roads, but the road also was built well before 2000, when this
section changed to the 20 feet requirement (I am not asking that the road be made to comply with the 20 feet width).
My comments are to codify the need for emergency access, hence, the intent is that the gate structure —the columns
holding the control arms etc., not obstruct the current width of the road that is in place now. What I am looking for, is
when the arm of the gate is up, the width of the access point is the same as the width of the road currently, it doesn't
choke the road down further.
As for the emergency activation, there needs to be a mechanism for emergency responders to open the gate in an
emergency, if it is closed. I have seen this take the form of the property owner providing a code responders can activate,
a key, in several cases, the siren on the rig opened the gate, Basically, anything that allows emergency access without
delaying the response to an emergency (generally, this means not waiting for security to arrive to open). In lieu of
providing a gate code or a key to the first due fire station only or (as there is no guarantee that the first due unit is not
on another call — so any County Station or City HQ station could be the first unit arriving — not reasonable or as secure as
the system we currently utilize, to consider giving keys or codes to everyone who may respond), a key box system (not
just any key box — one designed for security of the contents so not just anyone can access or easily break in — some even
have alarms to alert when the key box is activated) could be mounted on the structural components of the gate and it
can either contain the code or a key to operate the gate.
We have the Knox Box Company system in our County apparatus. This consists of a key that opens any Knox Box
installed by a property owner in the County and a Key secure system in our apparatus. The Key Secure System ensures
positive control of the key that will open all Knox Boxes in the County. Select emergency response members are granted
16
access to the key installed into the Key Secure system and provided their own unique identifier. The responder must
enter this identifier into the Key Secure System to remove the key. The Key Secure System retains information of who
removed the key, when they took it out and put it back and uploads this to a cloud based system, so we can track it at
our office. As a quality control, we monitor to ensure the removal of keys are legitimately related to emergencies. Once
the key is removed from the Key Secure System, the responder utilizes that key to open the Knox Box installed by the
property owner and retrieve the necessary information or key to open the gate or door.
Hope this helps, but maybe easier to call me directly at 434-531-4861
Howard Lagomarsino
Division Chief/Fire Marshal
Albemarle County Fire Rescue
hlagomarsino@albemarle.org
office. 434-296-5833 x3377
cell: 434-531-4861
460 Stagecoach Road Charlottesville, Va. 22902
From: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ora>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20213:40 PM
To: Liz Russell <lrussell(c@monticello.org>
Cc: Howard Lagomarsino <hla&omarsino@albemarle.ora>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Yes, that would probably be best. He is copied here for clarification if need be.
Kevin McCollum, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
From: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.ore>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20213:13 PM
To: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ora>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Thank you, Kevin. Would it be appropriate to reach out to Mr. Lagomarsino for clarity on his comments in advance of
resubmitting?
Liz
From: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ore>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20211:40 PM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.ore>
Subject: FW: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
17
This Message originated outside your organization.
Accidentally sent this to the wrong Liz. Sorry about that. Please see my email below and the attached comments.
From: Kevin McCollum
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 12:40 PM
To: Liz Toka <Iiztoka@gmail.com>
Subject: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Good Afternoon Liz,
Attached is the review comment letter for SDP200800006. As you can see Fire -Rescue has requested changes. Please
address these comments or make the applicable changes and resubmit this application to me. A digital (pdf) submittal to
me will suffice.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Kevin McCollum, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
18
Kevin McCollum
From: Roger Rothwell <Rothwell@monticello.org>
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 10:56 AM
To: Howard Lagomarsino
Cc: Kevin McCollum
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Attachments: Cutsheet_StrongArmM30 M50_D0516-l.pdf
Mr. Lagomarsino,
Sorry for the delay, below is a comment for the specification writer and I have attached paperwork with highlighted
things that show the system will be UL compliant. Please also see the attached, with the highlighted safety options, we
are installing with the gate. Our Gate installer, Mid -Atlantic Entry Systems was very appreciative that you all took the
time to read through the specifications and would be happy to discuss any this information. He can answer any specific
questions and he is well versed in the safety code.
Let me know how I can help with your M30 compliance question. Being that it is a barrier arm and installed on
class 4 installations there is not a lot you have to do for compliance. The operator is built in with the entrapment
guard on the catch post and the photo eye is not required but definitely helpful.
My goal is to get you the information that you need to approve the project so we can continue to move forward. I will
have a few follow up questions for you and/or your department on how to best set it up for teams access in all
situations.
Thank you,
Roger
From: Roger Rothwell
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 202111:10 AM
To: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>
Cc: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Mr. Lagomarsino,
Great question, our contractor has installed these gates at airports and government location so they should meet safety
requirements for safety codes. They are not designed for pedestrian access. These gates are designed to stop a vehicle
in a security related event of someone planning harm to our staff/guests or to our World Heritage Site. It is not your
typical gate. We have had security audits recommending the installation of a crash rated gate. The Foundation has
looked into every style of gate imaginable from tire popping tiger teeth strips to wedge style crash gates and have
settled on this style.
I have reached out to get more information from the gate manufacturer and the gate installer. I will follow back up with
you when more is known. I really appreciate you doing your due diligence with this and I will be in touch.
Thanks again,
Roger
19
MINT'ICELLO
Roger Rothwell I Assistant Director of Facilities
Thomas Jefferson Foundation, Inc. I Monticello
Post Office Box 3161 Charlottesville, VA 22902
Phone ! 434.984.9871 1 Cell tt 434-981-117412 rmthwell(aZmonticello.ore
Monticello hits reopened to the public, and we hope you'll join us ail lite mountaintop soar. We've introduced extensive safety
measures for staff and guests, and designed a new, flexible Monticello experience including self -guided tours and outdoor
experiences perfect for families. Learn more at ntonticello.orn/reopenirtp. For updates, follow C1TJMontieello on social media,
visit our website. and join our livestreants.
To ensure safety and limit numbers, many of us are continuing to work remotely; and will not be found in our offices on a daily
basis.
From: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.ore>
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2021 10:50 AM
To: Roger Rothwell <rrothwell@monticello.ore>
Cc: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
This Message originated outside your organization.
Mr. Rothwell:
Thank you for your responses. The only concern remaining is still the ATSM F2200 and UL 325. It is my understanding UL
508 references control panels and ATSM F2656 references rating for crash arms and gates (basically testing on what
type of vehicles they stop). The only concern remaining is still the ATSM F220 and UL 325. These are specifically cited as
needing to be met in the fire code and are safety standards for all gates/security closures. They reference things like
design standards to address the potential of the gate will not crush someone, so these standards apply.
I do not have access to a full versions of UL 508 and ATSM F2656. It is possible UL325 and ATSM F2200 are referenced in
these in some manner, thereby satisfying this code requirement. lust ensuring exercise of due diligence and ensuring
these standards are addressed.
Howard Lagomarsino
Division Chief/Fire Marshal
Albemarle County Fire Rescue
hlagomarsino@albemarle.org
office: 434-296-5833 x3377
cell: 434-531-4861
460 Stagecoach Road Charlottesville, Va. 22902
From: Roger Rothwell <rrothwell@monticello.ora>
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2021 10:32 AM
To: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.ore>; Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ora>
Cc: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.ore>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
20
Good morning,
Thanks for your assistance with this review, we appreciate your help ensuring this will work for your teams in an
emergency situation. Below are your responses in red and my responses in blue.
Please let me know if you have any additional question to get the LOR moving forward, I'm sure there will be more
discussions after this process to confirm we are all on the same page. I'm also happy to jump on a call and involve
additional members of our Security team.
Thank you,
Roger
IMTTICELLO
Roger Rothwell I Assistant Director or Facilities
Thomas Jefferson Foundation, Inc. I Monticello
Post Office Box 316 1 Charlottesville, VA 22902
Phone 2 434-984-9871 1 Cell! 434-981-11741® rrotlnwell(d,,monticello.or¢
Monticello has reopened to the public, and we hope you'll join us on the mountaintop soon. We've introduced extensive safety
measures for staff and guests, and designed a new, flexible Monticello experience including self -guided tours and outdoor
experiences perfect for families. Learn more at monticello.orcIreopening- For updates, follow a,TJMondcello on social media,
visit our website. and join our livestreams.
To ensure safety and limit numbers, many of us are continuing to work remotely, and will not be found in our offices on a daily
basis.
Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue - Howard Lagomarsino, hlaeomarsino(a albemade.org — Requested
changes (2/5/202 1)
1. For emergency vehicle access a 20 ft width, unobstructed for the entire length, including at gates is required. Since this
an existing, previously approved road, there are no objections to the gates as long as the construction of the gates, its
associated structures and roadway conditions, including surrounding objects and vexation do not reduce the current width
of the roadway without the gates.
H. Lagomarsino 2/10: As I remember, the road serving these areas is not very wide already. It definitely does not
provide the 20 l width required in the fire code for emergency vehicle access roads, but the road also was built
well before 2000, when this section changed to the 20 feet requirement (1 am not asking that the road be made to
comply with the 20 feet width).
My comments are to codify the need for emergency access, hence, the intent is that the gate structure — the
columns holding the control arms etc., not obstruct the current width of the road that is in place now. What I am
looking fur, is when the arm of the gate is up, the width of the access point is the same as the width of the road
currently, it doesn't choke the road down further.
The Gate will be installed for a 20 ft. clear opening span(see attached drawing). This is to include the existing
slate ditch but it will not impeded the current road in any way. The new gate will increase this clear width.
2. Assurance that a clear, unobstructed vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches or greater will be provided and maintained at
the gates and the length of the roadway.
When the ann is fully up, no part of the ann blocks the proposed clear opening.
3. Provide evidence the gates comply with UL 325 and ATSM F2200.
More info provided by H. Lagomarsino 2/10: The ATSM F2656 standard is about the crash test petformance q
the gate where as the ATSM F2200 is about the operation of the gate (how it opens and closes, its design as a
21
gate in general - does not address the crash worthiness of the gate) --- hope this helps. F2200 includes issues
such as pinch hazard safety, pedestrian safety — basically ensuring someone is not crushed by the gate etc.
The Gate meets UL 508A and ASTM F2656-07 ratings as shown on the attached PDF. The arm is UL
compliant, the installation will be made compliant by adding a photo beam across the opening, all other
pinch points are covered.
4. Must provide for immediate emergency override for operation of gates for emergency vehicle access in an emergency.
H. Lagomarsino 2/10: As for the emergency activation, there needs to be a mechanism for emergency responders
to open the gate in an emergency, if it is closed. I have seen this take the form of the property owner providing a
code responders can activate, a key, in several cases, the siren on the rig opened the gate, Basically, anything
that allows emergency access without delaying the response to an emergency (generally, this means not waiting
for security to arrive to open). In lieu of providing a gate code or a key to the first due fire station only or (as
there is no guarantee that the, first due unit is not on another call — so any County Station or City HQ station
could be the first unit arriving — not reasonable or as secure as the system we currently utilize, to consider giving
keys or codes to everyone who may respond), a key box system (not just any key box — one designed for security of
the contents so not just anyone can access or easily break in — some even have alarms to alert when the key box is
activated) could be mounted on the structural components of the gate and it can either contain the code or a key
to operate the gate.
We have the Knox Box Company system in our County apparatus. This consists of a key that opens any Knox Box
installed by a property owner in the County and a Key secure system in our apparatus. The Key Secure System
ensures positive control of the key that will open all Knox Boxes in the County. Select emergency response
members are granted access to the key installed into the Key Secure system and provided their own unique
identifier. The responder must enter this identifier into the Key Secure System to remove the key. The Key Secure
System retains information of who removed the key, when they took it out and put it back and uploads this to a
cloud based system, so we can track it at our of As a quality control, we monitor to ensure the removal of keys
are legitimately related to emergencies. Once the key is removed from the Key Secure System, the responder
utilizes that key to open the Knox Box installed by the property owner and retrieve the necessary information or
key to open the gate or door.
Our gate installer is familiar with this system and has fire boxes and KNOX cylinders included in the project. I
have also had discussions regarding a signal that the trucks send out for the gates to automatically open. I
would like to look more into this and are very interested what works best from your perspectives. On a typical
visit our security team can open the gate for the fire trucks but it's great to have the redundancy.
From: Liz Russell
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20214:35 PM
To: Howard Lagomarsino <hlaeomarsinoPalbemarle.org>
Cc: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum(@albemarle.org>; Roger Rothwell <rrothweliPmonticello.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Hi Howard, thanks for your response and further clarification. I'm cc'ing Roger Rothwell, Assistant Director of Facilities
and point person for the installation of the gate and associated work.
We share your objective that we do not impede emergency access. Roger is communicating with the installer to verify
dimensions. We welcome your suggestions on the emergency activation as well. There was some confusion over the
ASTM rating. The gate is rated to ASTM F2656 (Test Method for Crash Testing of Vehicle Security Barriers) but it is not
clear on ASTM F2200 (Standard Specification for Automated Vehicular Gate Construction).
Roger once you are able to get clarification from the installer it might be good to set up a call so that we can make sure
we are all on the same page and I can appropriately resubmit the clarification points to the County.
22
Liz
From: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20214:20 PM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Cc: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum(a)albemarle.ore>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
This Message originated outside your organization.
03
I spoke with Shawn Maddox, who has looked at this previously and confirmed these comments are in line with his past
discussions on this topic. Basically, we are looking for the project to not make our emergency access worse, but realize
the need for the security aspect of the project, so we are providing ways we can work through this and stay within the
spirit of the code.
As I remember, the road serving these areas is not very wide already. It definitely does not provide the 20 ft width
required in the fire code for emergency vehicle access roads, but the road also was built well before 2000, when this
section changed to the 20 feet requirement (I am not asking that the road be made to comply with the 20 feet width).
My comments are to codify the need for emergency access, hence, the intent is that the gate structure — the columns
holding the control arms etc., not obstruct the current width of the road that is in place now. What I am looking for, is
when the arm of the gate is up, the width of the access point is the same as the width of the road currently, it doesn't
choke the road down further.
As for the emergency activation, there needs to be a mechanism for emergency responders to open the gate in an
emergency, if it is closed. I have seen this take the form of the property owner providing a code responders can activate,
a key, in several cases, the siren on the rig opened the gate, Basically, anything that allows emergency access without
delaying the response to an emergency (generally, this means not waiting for security to arrive to open). In lieu of
providing a gate code or a key to the first due fire station only or (as there is no guarantee that the first due unit is not
on another call — so any County Station or City HQ station could be the first unit arriving — not reasonable or as secure as
the system we currently utilize, to consider giving keys or codes to everyone who may respond), a key box system (not
just any key box — one designed for security of the contents so not just anyone can access or easily break in — some even
have alarms to alert when the key box is activated) could be mounted on the structural components of the gate and it
can either contain the code or a key to operate the gate.
We have the Knox Box Company system in our County apparatus. This consists of a key that opens any Knox Box
installed by a property owner in the County and a Key secure system in our apparatus. The Key Secure System ensures
positive control of the key that will open all Knox Boxes in the County. Select emergency response members are granted
access to the key installed into the Key Secure system and provided their own unique identifier. The responder must
enter this identifier into the Key Secure System to remove the key. The Key Secure System retains information of who
removed the key, when they took it out and put it back and uploads this to a cloud based system, so we can track it at
our office. As a quality control, we monitor to ensure the removal of keys are legitimately related to emergencies. Once
the key is removed from the Key Secure System, the responder utilizes that key to open the Knox Box installed by the
property owner and retrieve the necessary information or key to open the gate or door.
Hope this helps, but maybe easier to call me directly at 434-531-4861
Howard Lagomarsino
23
Division Chief/Fire Marshal
Albemarle County Fire Rescue
hlagomarsino@albemarle.org
office: 434-296-5833 x3377
cell: 434-531-4861
460 Stagecoach Road Charlottesville, Va. 22902
From: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 3:40 PM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Cc: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Yes, that would probably be best. He is copied here for clarification if need be.
Kevin McCollum, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
From: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 3:13 PM
To: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Thank you, Kevin. Would it be appropriate to reach out to Mr. Lagomarsino for clarity on his comments in advance of
resubmitting?
Liz
From: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 1:40 PM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Subject: FW: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
This Message originated outside your organization.
Accidentally sent this to the wrong Liz. Sorry about that. Please see my email below and the attached comments.
From: Kevin McCollum
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 12:40 PM
To: Liz Toka <liztoka@gmail.com>
Subject: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Good Afternoon Liz,
24
Attached is the review comment letter for SDP200800006. As you can see Fire -Rescue has requested changes. Please
address these comments or make the applicable changes and resubmit this application to me. A digital (pdf) submittal to
me will suffice.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Kevin McCollum, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
25
Kevin McCollum
From: Roger Rothwell <rothwell@monticello.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2021 11:10 AM
To: Howard Lagomarsino
Cc: Kevin McCollum
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Mr. Lagomarsino,
Great question, our contractor has installed these gates at airports and government location so they should meet safety
requirements for safety codes. They are not designed for pedestrian access. These gates are designed to stop a vehicle
in a security related event of someone planning harm to our staff/guests or to our World Heritage Site. It is not your
typical gate. We have had security audits recommending the installation of a crash rated gate. The Foundation has
looked into every style of gate imaginable from tire popping tiger teeth strips to wedge style crash gates and have
settled on this style.
I have reached out to get more information from the gate manufacturer and the gate installer. I will follow back up with
you when more is known. I really appreciate you doing your due diligence with this and I will be in touch.
Thanks again,
Roger
MONTICELLO
Roger Rothwell I Assistant Director of Facilities
Thomas Jefferson Foundation, Inc. I Monticello
Post Office Box 3161 Charlottesville, VA 22902
Phone 2 434-984-9871 I Cell li 434-981-117412 rrothwellr:monticello.ore
Monticello has reopened to the public, and we hope you'll join us on lire mountaintop soon. We've introduced extensive safety
measures for staff and guests, and designed a new, flexible Monticello experience including self -guided tours and outdoor
experiences perfect for families. Learn more at monticello.ork1reopening. For updates, follow n: TJMonticello on social media,
visit our website and join our livestreams.
To ensure safety and limit numbers, many of us are continuing to work remotely, and will not be found in our offices on a daily
basis.
From: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2021 10:50 AM
To: Roger Rothwell <rrothwell@monticello.org>
Cc: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
This Message originated outside your organization.
Mr. Rothwell:
Thank you for your responses. The only concern remaining is still the ATSM F2200 and UL 325. It is my understanding UL
508 references control panels and ATSM F2656 references rating for crash arms and gates (basically testing on what
type of vehicles they stop). The only concern remaining is still the ATSM F220 and UL 325. These are specifically cited as
26
needing to be met in the fire code and are safety standards for all gates/security closures. They reference things like
design standards to address the potential of the gate will not crush someone, so these standards apply.
I do not have access to a full versions of UL 508 and ATSM F2656. It is possible UL325 and ATSM F2200 are referenced in
these in some manner, thereby satisfying this code requirement. Just ensuring exercise of due diligence and ensuring
these standards are addressed.
Howard Lagomarsino
Division Chief/Fire Marshal
Albemarle County Fire Rescue
hlaciomarsino@albemarle.org
office: 434-296-5833 x3377
cell: 434-531-4861
460 Stagecoach Road Charlottesville, Va. 22902
From: Roger Rothwell <rrothwell@monticello.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2021 10:32 AM
To: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>; Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Cc: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Good morning,
Thanks for your assistance with this review, we appreciate your help ensuring this will work for your teams in an
emergency situation. Below are your responses in red and my responses in blue.
Please let me know if you have any additional question to get the LOR moving forward, I'm sure there will be more
discussions after this process to confirm we are all on the same page. I'm also happy to jump on a call and involve
additional members of our Security team.
Thank you,
Roger
MTI HL-LO
Roger Rothwell I Assistant Director of Facilities
Thomas Jefferson Foundation, Inc. I Monticello
Post Office Box 316 1 Charlottesville, VA 22902
Phone 1111 434-984-9871 I Cell 2 434-981-1174I ® rrothwelln.monticello.or¢
Monticello has reopened to the public, fund we /rope you'll join us on the mountaintop soon. We've introduced extensive safety
measures for staff and guests, and designed a new, flexible Monticello experience including self -guided tours and outdoor
experiences perfect for.families. Learn more at nnonticello.ore/reopenin2. For updates, follow ca TJMonticello on social media,
visit our websile and join our livestreams.
To ensure safety and lintit numbers, many of us are continuing to work remotely, and will trot be found in our offices on a daily
basis.
Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue - Howard Lagomarsino, hlai omarsinoL&albemarle.org — Requested
changes(2/5/2021)
27
1. For emergency vehicle access a 20 ft width, unobstructed for the entire length, including at gates is required. Since this
an existing, previously approved road, there are no objections to the gates as long as the construction of the gates, its
associated structures and roadway conditions, including surrounding objects and vexation do not reduce the current width
of the roadway without the gates.
H. Lagomarsino 2/10: As I remember, the road serving these areas is not very wide already. It definitely does not
provide the 20 ft width required in the fire code for emergency vehicle access roads, but the road also was built
well before 2000, when this section changed to the 20 feet requirement (I am not asking that the road be made to
comply with the 20 feet width).
My comments are to codify the need for emergency access, hence, the intent is that the gate structure — the
columns holding the control arms etc., not obstruct the current width of the road that is in place now. What 1 am
looking for, is when the arm of the gate is up, the width of the access point is the same as the width of the road
currently, it doesn't choke the road down further.
The Gate will be installed for a 20 ft. clear opening span(see attached drawing). This is to include the existing
slate ditch but it will not impeded the current road in any way. The new gate will increase this clear width.
2. Assurance that a clear, unobstructed vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches or greater will be provided and maintained at
the gates and the length of the roadway.
When the arm is fully up, no part of the arm blocks the proposed clear opening.
3. Provide evidence the gates comply with UL 325 and ATSM F2200.
More info provided by H. Lagomarsino 2/10: The ATSM F2656 standard is about the crash test performance of
the gate where as the ATSM F2200 is about the operation of the gate (how it opens and closes, its design as a
gate in general - does not address the crash worthiness of the gate) --- hope this helps. F2200 includes issues
such as pinch hazard safety, pedestrian safety — basically ensuring someone is not crushed by the gate etc.
The Gate meets UL 508A and ASTM F2656-07 ratings as shown on the attached PDF. The arm is UL
compliant, the installation will be made compliant by adding a photo beam across the opening, all other
pinch points are covered.
4. Must provide for immediate emergency override for operation of gates for emergency vehicle access in an emergency.
H. Lagomarsino 2/10: As for the emergency activation, there needs to be a mechanism for emergency responders
to open the gate in an emergency, if it is closed. I have seen this take the form of the property owner providing a
code responders can activate, a key, in several cases, the siren on the rig opened the gate, Basically, anything
that allows emergency access without delaying the response to an emergency (generally, this means not waiting
,for security to arrive to open). In lieu ofproviding a gate code or a key to the first due fire station only or (as
there is no guarantee that thefirst due unit is not on another call — so any County Station or City HQ station
could be the first emit arriving— not reasonable or as secure as the system we currently utilize, to consider giving
keys or codes to everyone who may respond), a key box system (not just any key box— one designed.for security of
the contents so notjust anyone can access or easily break in —some even have alarms to alert when the key box is
activated) could be mounted on the structural components of the gate and it can either contain the code or a key
to operate the gate.
We have the Knox Box Company system in our- County apparatus. This consists of a key that opens any Knox Box
installed by a property owner in the County and a Key secure system in our apparatus. The Key Secure System
ensures positive control of the key that will open all Knox Boxes in the County. Select emergency response
members are granted access to the key installed into the Key Secure system and provided their own unique
identifier. The responder must enter this identifier into the Key Secure System to remove the key. The Key Secure
System retains infor ination of who removed the key, when they took it out and put it back and uploads this to a
cloud based system, so ive can track it at our office. As a quality control, we monitor to ensure the removal of keys
are legitimately related to emergencies. Once the key is removed from the Key Secure System, the responder
utilizes that key to open the Knox Box installed by the property owner and retrieve the necessary information or
key to open the gate or door.
28
Our gate installer is familiar with this system and has fire boxes and KNOX cylinders included in the project. I
have also had discussions regarding a signal that the trucks send out for the gates to automatically open. I
would like to look more into this and are very interested what works best from your perspectives. On a typical
visit our security team can open the gate for the fire trucks but it's great to have the redundancy.
From: Liz Russell
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20214:35 PM
To: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>
Cc: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>; Roger Rothwell <rrothwell@monticello.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Hi Howard, thanks for your response and further clarification. I'm cc'ing Roger Rothwell, Assistant Director of Facilities
and point person for the installation of the gate and associated work.
We share your objective that we do not impede emergency access. Roger is communicating with the installer to verify
dimensions. We welcome your suggestions on the emergency activation as well. There was some confusion over the
ASTM rating. The gate is rated to ASTM F2656 (Test Method for Crash Testing of Vehicle Security Barriers) but it is not
clear on ASTM F2200 (Standard Specification for Automated Vehicular Gate Construction).
Roger once you are able to get clarification from the installer it might be good to set up a call so that we can make sure
we are all on the same page and I can appropriately resubmit the clarification points to the County.
Liz
From: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20214:20 PM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Cc: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
This Message originated outside your organization.
031
I spoke with Shawn Maddox, who has looked at this previously and confirmed these comments are in line with his past
discussions on this topic. Basically, we are looking for the project to not make our emergency access worse, but realize
the need for the security aspect of the project, so we are providing ways we can work through this and stay within the
spirit of the code.
As I remember, the road serving these areas is not very wide already. It definitely does not provide the 20 ft width
required in the fire code for emergency vehicle access roads, but the road also was built well before 2000, when this
section changed to the 20 feet requirement (I am not asking that the road be made to comply with the 20 feet width).
My comments are to codify the need for emergency access, hence, the intent is that the gate structure — the columns
holding the control arms etc., not obstruct the current width of the road that is in place now. What I am looking for, is
when the arm of the gate is up, the width of the access point is the same as the width of the road currently, it doesn't
choke the road down further.
29
As for the emergency activation, there needs to be a mechanism for emergency responders to open the gate in an
emergency, if it is closed. I have seen this take the form of the property owner providing a code responders can activate,
a key, in several cases, the siren on the rig opened the gate, Basically, anything that allows emergency access without
delaying the response to an emergency (generally, this means not waiting for security to arrive to open). In lieu of
providing a gate code or a key to the first due fire station only or (as there is no guarantee that the first due unit is not
on another call — so any County Station or City HQ station could be the first unit arriving — not reasonable or as secure as
the system we currently utilize, to consider giving keys or codes to everyone who may respond), a key box system (not
just any key box — one designed for security of the contents so not just anyone can access or easily break in — some even
have alarms to alert when the key box is activated) could be mounted on the structural components of the gate and it
can either contain the code or a key to operate the gate.
We have the Knox Box Company system in our County apparatus. This consists of a key that opens any Knox Box
installed by a property owner in the County and a Key secure system in our apparatus. The Key Secure System ensures
positive control of the key that will open all Knox Boxes in the County. Select emergency response members are granted
access to the key installed into the Key Secure system and provided their own unique identifier. The responder must
enter this identifier into the Key Secure System to remove the key. The Key Secure System retains information of who
removed the key, when they took it out and put it back and uploads this to a cloud based system, so we can track it at
our office. As a quality control, we monitor to ensure the removal of keys are legitimately related to emergencies. Once
the key is removed from the Key Secure System, the responder utilizes that key to open the Knox Box installed by the
property owner and retrieve the necessary information or key to open the gate or door.
Hope this helps, but maybe easier to call me directly at 434-531-4861
Howard Lagomarsino
Division Chief/Fire Marshal
Albemarle County Fire Rescue
hlagomarsino@albemarle.org
office: 434-296-5833 x3377
cell: 434-531-4861
460 Stagecoach Road Charlottesville, Va. 22902
From: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20213:40 PM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Cc: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Yes, that would probably be best. He is copied here for clarification if need be.
Kevin McCollum, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
30
From: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.ore>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20213:13 PM
To: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Thank you, Kevin. Would it be appropriate to reach out to Mr. Lagomarsino for clarity on his comments in advance of
resubmitting?
Liz
From: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ora>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 1:40 PM
To: Liz Russell <IrussellCa@monticello.ora>
Subject: FW: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
This Message originated outside your organization.
Accidentally sent this to the wrong Liz. Sorry about that. Please see my email below and the attached comments.
From: Kevin McCollum
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 12:40 PM
To: Liz Toka <liztoka@pmail.com>
Subject: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Good Afternoon Liz,
Attached is the review comment letter for SDP200800006. As you can see Fire -Rescue has requested changes. Please
address these comments or make the applicable changes and resubmit this application to me. A digital (pdf) submittal to
me will suffice.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Kevin McCollum, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
31
Kevin McCollum
From:
Howard Lagomarsino
Sent:
Wednesday, February 17, 2021 10:50 AM
To:
Roger Rothwell
Cc:
Kevin McCollum
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Mr. Rothwell:
Thank you for your responses. The only concern remaining is still the ATSM F2200 and UL 325. It is my understanding UL
508 references control panels and ATSM F2656 references rating for crash arms and gates (basically testing on what
type of vehicles they stop). The only concern remaining is still the ATSM F220 and UL 325. These are specifically cited as
needing to be met in the fire code and are safety standards for all gates/security closures. They reference things like
design standards to address the potential of the gate will not crush someone, so these standards apply.
I do not have access to a full versions of UL 508 and ATSM F2656. It is possible UL325 and ATSM F2200 are referenced in
these in some manner, thereby satisfying this code requirement. Just ensuring exercise of due diligence and ensuring
these standards are addressed.
Howard Lagomarsino
Division Chief/Fire Marshal
Albemarle County Fire Rescue
hlagomarsino@albemarle.org
office: 434-296-5833 x3377
cell: 434-531-4861
460 Stagecoach Road Charlottesville, Va. 22902
From: Roger Rothwell <rothwell@monticello.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2021 10:32 AM
To: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>; Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Cc: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Good morning,
Thanks for your assistance with this review, we appreciate your help ensuring this will work for your teams in an
emergency situation. Below are your responses in red and my responses in blue.
Please let me know if you have any additional question to get the LOR moving forward, I'm sure there will be more
discussions after this process to confirm we are all on the same page. I'm also happy to jump on a call and involve
additional members of our Security team.
Thank you,
Roger
32
MONTICELLO
Roger Rothwell I Assistant Director of Facilities
Thomas Jefferson Foundation, Inc. I Monticello
Post Office Box 316 1 Charlottesville, VA 22902
Phone Y 434-984-9871 1 Cell 2 434-981-1174IS rrothwell(a),monticello.ore
Monticello has reopened to the public, and we lope you'll join us oil lite mountaintop soon. We've introduced extensive safety
measures for staff and guests, and designed a new, flexible Monticello experience including self -guided tours and outdoor
experiences —perfect for families. Learn more at monticello.ore/reoneninn. For updates, follow CTJMomicello on social media,
visit our website, and join our livestreams.
To ensure safety and limit numbers, many of us are continuing to work remotely, and will not be found in our offices on a daily
basis.
Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue - Howard Lagomarsino, hlagomarsinoL,�albemarle.ore — Requested
changes (2/5/2021)
1. For emergency vehicle access a 20 ft width, unobstructed for the entire length, including at gates is required. Since this
an existing, previously approved road, there are no objections to the gates as long as the construction of the gates, its
associated structures and roadway conditions, including surrounding objects and vexation do not reduce the current width
of the roadway without the gates.
H. Lagomarsino 2/10: As 1 remember, the road serving these areas is not very wide already. It definitely does not
provide the 20 ft width required in the fire code for emergency vehicle access roads, but the road also was built
well before 2000, when this section changed to the 20 feet requirement (I am not asking that the road be made to
comply with the 20.feet width).
My comments are to codify the need for emergency access, hence, the intent is that the gate structure — the
columns holding the control arms etc., not obstruct the current width of the road that is in place now. What I am
looking for, is when the arm of the gate is up, the width of the access point is the same as the width of the road
currently, it doesn't choke the road down fm•ther.
The Gate will be installed for a 20 ft. clear opening span(see attached drawing). This is to include the existing
slate ditch but it will not impeded the current road in any way. The new gate will increase this clear width.
2. Assurance that a clear, unobstructed vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches or greater will be provided and maintained at
the gates and the length of the roadway.
When the ann is fully up, no part of the ann blocks the proposed clear opening.
3. Provide evidence the gates comply with UL 325 and ATSM F2200.
More info provided by H. Lagomarsino 2/10: The A TSM F2656 standard is about the crash test performance of
the gate where as the ATSMF2200 is about the operation of the gate (how it opens and closes, its design as a
gate in general - does not address the crash worfhnness of the gate) --- hope this helps. F2200 inchides issues
such as pinch hazard safety, pedestrian safety — basically ensuring someone is not crushed by the gate etc.
The Gate meets UL 508A and ASTM F2656-07 ratings as shown on the attached PDF. The ann is UL
compliant, the installation will be made compliant by adding a photo beam across the opening, all other
pinch points are covered.
4. Must provide for immediate emergency override for operation of gates for emergency vehicle access in an emergency.
H. Lagomarsino 2/10: As for the emergency activation, there needs to be a mechanism for emergency responders
to open the gate in an emergency, if it is closed. I have seen this take the form of the property owner providing a
code responders can activate, a key, in several cases, the siren on the rig opened the gate, Basically, anything
that allows emergency access without delaying the response to an emergency (generally, this means not waiting
,for security to arrive to open). In lieu of providing a gate code or a key to the first due fire station only or (as
there is no guarantee that the first due unit is not on another call — so any County Station or City HQ station
33
could be thefirst unit arriving — not reasonable or as secure as the system we currently utilize, to consider giving
keys or codes to everyone who may respond), a key box system (not just any key box — one designed for security of
the contents so not just anyone can access or easily break in — some even have alarms to alert when the key box is
activated) could be mounted on the structural components of the gate and it can either contain the code or a key
to operate the gate.
We have the Knox Box Company system in our County apparatus. This consists of a key that opens any Knox Box
installed by a property owner in the County and a Key secure system in our apparatus. The Key Secure System
ensures positive control of the key that will open all Knox Boxes in the County. Select emergency response
members are granted access to the key installed into the Key Secure system and provided their own unique
identifier. The responder must enter this identifier into the Key Secure System to remove the key. The Key Secure
System retains information of who removed the key, when they took it out andput it back and uploads this to a
cloud based system, so we can track it at our office. As a quality control, we monitor to ensure the removal ofkeys
are legitimately related to emergencies. Once the key is removed from the Key Secure System, the responder
utilizes that key to open the Knox Box installed by the property owner and retrieve the necessary information or
key to open the gate or door.
Our gate installer is familiar with this system and has fire boxes and KNOX cylinders included in the project. I
have also had discussions regarding a signal that the trucks send out for the gates to automatically open. I
would like to look more into this and are very interested what works best from your perspectives. On a typical
visit our security team can open the gate for the fire trucks but it's great to have the redundancy.
From: Liz Russell
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20214:35 PM
To: Howard Lagomarsino <hlaeomarsino@albemarle.ore>
Cc: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ore>; Roger Rothwell <rothwell@monticello.ore>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Hi Howard, thanks for your response and further clarification. I'm cc'ing Roger Rothwell, Assistant Director of Facilities
and point person for the installation of the gate and associated work.
We share your objective that we do not impede emergency access. Roger is communicating with the installer to verify
dimensions. We welcome your suggestions on the emergency activation as well. There was some confusion over the
ASTM rating. The gate is rated to ASTM F2656 (Test Method for Crash Testing of Vehicle Security Barriers) but it is not
clear on ASTM F2200 (Standard Specification for Automated Vehicular Gate Construction).
Roger once you are able to get clarification from the installer it might be good to set up a call so that we can make sure
we are all on the same page and I can appropriately resubmit the clarification points to the County.
Liz
From: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.ore>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20214:20 PM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Cc: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ora>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
This Message originated outside your organization.
us
34
I spoke with Shawn Maddox, who has looked at this previously and confirmed these comments are in line with his past
discussions on this topic. Basically, we are looking for the project to not make our emergency access worse, but realize
the need for the security aspect of the project, so we are providing ways we can work through this and stay within the
spirit of the code.
As I remember, the road serving these areas is not very wide already. It definitely does not provide the 20 ft width
required in the fire code for emergency vehicle access roads, but the road also was built well before 2000, when this
section changed to the 20 feet requirement (I am not asking that the road be made to comply with the 20 feet width).
My comments are to codify the need for emergency access, hence, the intent is that the gate structure —the columns
holding the control arms etc., not obstruct the current width of the road that is in place now. What I am looking for, is
when the arm of the gate is up, the width of the access point is the same as the width of the road currently, it doesn't
choke the road down further.
As for the emergency activation, there needs to be a mechanism for emergency responders to open the gate in an
emergency, if it is closed. I have seen this take the form of the property owner providing a code responders can activate,
a key, in several cases, the siren on the rig opened the gate, Basically, anything that allows emergency access without
delaying the response to an emergency (generally, this means not waiting for security to arrive to open). In lieu of
providing a gate code or a key to the first due fire station only or (as there is no guarantee that the first due unit is not
on another call — so any County Station or City HQ station could be the first unit arriving — not reasonable or as secure as
the system we currently utilize, to consider giving keys or codes to everyone who may respond), a key box system (not
just any key box —one designed for security of the contents so not just anyone can access or easily break in — some even
have alarms to alert when the key box is activated) could be mounted on the structural components of the gate and it
can either contain the code or a key to operate the gate.
We have the Knox Box Company system in our County apparatus. This consists of a key that opens any Knox Box
installed by a property owner in the County and a Key secure system in our apparatus. The Key Secure System ensures
positive control of the key that will open all Knox Boxes in the County. Select emergency response members are granted
access to the key installed into the Key Secure system and provided their own unique identifier. The responder must
enter this identifier into the Key Secure System to remove the key. The Key Secure System retains information of who
removed the key, when they took it out and put it back and uploads this to a cloud based system, so we can track it at
our office. As a quality control, we monitor to ensure the removal of keys are legitimately related to emergencies. Once
the key is removed from the Key Secure System, the responder utilizes that key to open the Knox Box installed by the
property owner and retrieve the necessary information or key to open the gate or door.
Hope this helps, but maybe easier to call me directly at 434-531-4861
Howard Lagomarsino
Division Chief/Fire Marshal
Albemarle County Fire Rescue
hlagomarsino@albemarle.org
office: 434-296-5833 x3377
cell: 434-531-4861
460 Stagecoach Road Charlottesville, Va. 22902
From: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ora>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20213:40 PM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.ore>
Cc: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.ora>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
35
Yes, that would probably be best. He is copied here for clarification if need be.
Kevin McCollum, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
From: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.orR>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 3:13 PM
To: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Thank you, Kevin. Would it be appropriate to reach out to Mr. Lagomarsino for clarity on his comments in advance of
resubmitting?
Liz
From: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ore>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 1:40 PM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Subject: FW: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
This Message originated outside your organization.
Accidentally sent this to the wrong Liz. Sorry about that. Please see my email below and the attached comments.
From: Kevin McCollum
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 12:40 PM
To: Liz Toka <liztoka@amail.com>
Subject: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Good Afternoon Liz,
Attached is the review comment letter for SDP200800006. As you can see Fire -Rescue has requested changes. Please
address these comments or make the applicable changes and resubmit this application to me. A digital (pdf) submittal to
me will suffice.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Kevin MCCOIIUm,Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
36
37
Kevin McCollum
From:
Roger Rothwell <rothwell@monticello.org>
Sent:
Wednesday, February 17, 2021 10:32 AM
To:
Howard Lagomarsino; Kevin McCollum
Cc:
Liz Russell
Subject:
RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Attachments:
SpecSheet_StrongArmM30M50_DO80O.pdf, Pages from M30 Installation Manual.pdf
Good morning,
Thanks for your assistance with this review, we appreciate your help ensuring this will work for your teams in an
emergency situation. Below are your responses in red and my responses in blue.
Please let me know if you have any additional question to get the LOR moving forward, I'm sure there will be more
discussions after this process to confirm we are all on the same page. I'm also happy to jump on a call and involve
additional members of our Security team.
Thank you,
Roger
MNTICELLO
Roger Rothwell I Assistant Director of Facilities
Thomas Jefferson Foundation, Inc. I Monticello
Post Office Box 316 1 Charlottesville, VA 22902
Phone ! 434-984-9871 1 Cell 2 434-981-117412 rrothwellnmonticello.ore
Monticello has reopened to lire public, and we (rope you W joist us on the mountaintop soon. We've introduced extensive safety
measures for staff and guests, and designed a new, flexible Monticello experience including self -guided tours and outdoor
experiences —perfect for families. Learn more at monticello.ore/reonening. For updates, follow nTJMonticello on social media,
visit our website, and join our livestreams.
To ensure safety and limit numbers, many of us are continuing to work remotely, and will not be found in our offices on a daily
basis.
Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue - Howard Lagomarsino, hlagomarsinoL&albemarle.org — Requested
changes(2/5/2021)
1. For emergency vehicle access a 20 ft width, unobstructed for the entire length, including at gates is required. Since this
an existing, previously approved road, there are no objections to the gates as long as the construction of the gates, its
associated structures and roadway conditions, including surrounding objects and vexation do not reduce the current width
of the roadway without the gates.
H. Lagomarsino 2/10: As I remember, the road serving these areas is not very wide aheady. It definitely does not
Provide the 20 fit width required in the fire code for emergency vehicle access roads, but the road also was built
well before 2000, when this section changed to the 20 feet requirement (I ant not asking that the road be made to
comply with the 20 feet width).
My comments are to codify the need for emergency access, hence, the intent is that the gate structure — the
columns holding the control arms etc., not obstruct the current width of the road that is in place now. What I au
looking for, is when the arm of the gate is up, the width of the access point is the .same as the width of the road
currently, it doesn't choke the road down.further.
38
The Gate will be installed for a 20 ft. clear opening span(see attached drawing). This is to include the existing
slate ditch but it will not impeded the current road in any way. The new gate will increase this clear width.
2. Assurance that a clear, unobstructed vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches or greater will be provided and maintained at
the gates and the length of the roadway.
When the arm is fully up, no part of the ann blocks the proposed clear opening.
3. Provide evidence the gates comply with UL 325 and ATSM F2200.
More info provided by H. Lagomarsino 2/10: The ATSM F2656 standard is about the crash test performance of
the gate where as the ATSMF2200 is about the operation of the gate (how it opens and closes, its design as a
gate in general - does not address the crash worthiness of the gate) --- hope this helps. F2200 includes issues
such as pinch hazard safety, pedestrian safety — basically ensuring someone is not crushed by the gate etc.
The Gate meets UL 508A and ASTM F2656-07 ratings as shown on the attached PDF. The arm is UL
compliant, the installation will be made compliant by adding a photo beam across the opening, all other
pinch points are covered.
4. Must provide for immediate emergency override for operation of gates for emergency vehicle access in an emergency.
H. Lagomarsino 2/10: As for the emergency activation, there needs to be a mechanism for emergency responders
to open the gate in an emergency, if it is closed. I have seen this take the form of the property owner providing a
code responders can activate, a key, in several cases, the siren on the rig opened the gate, Basically, anything
that allows emergency access without delaying the response to an emergency (generally, this means not waiting
for security to arrive to open). In lieu of providing a gate code or a key to the first due fire station only or (as
there is no guarantee that the first due unit is not on another call — so any County Station or City HQ station
could be the first unit arriving— not reasonable or as secure as the system we currently utilize, to consider giving
keys or codes to everyone who may respond), a key box system (not just any key box — one designed for security of
the contents so not just anyone can access or easily break in — some even have alarms to alert when the key box is
activated) could be mounted on the structural components of the gate and it can either contain the code or a key
to operate the gate.
We have the Knox Box Company system in our County apparatus. This consists of a key that opens any Knox Box
installed by a property owner in the County and a Key secure system in our apparatus. The Key Secure System
ensures positive control of the key that will open all Knox Boxes in the County. Select emergency response
members are granted access to the key installed into the Key Secure system and provided their own unique
identffier. The responder must enter this identifier into the Key Secure System to remove the key. The Key Secure
System retains information of who removed the key, when they took it out and put it back and uploads this to a
cloud based system, so we can track it at our office. As a quality control, we monitor to ensure the removal of keys
are legitimately related to emergencies. Once the key is removed fi-om the Key Secure System, the responder
utilizes that key to open the Knox Box installed by the property owner and retrieve the necessary information at -
key to open the gate or door.
Our gate installer is familiar with this system and has fire boxes and KNOX cylinders included in the project. I
have also had discussions regarding a signal that the trucks send out for the gates to automatically open. I
would like to look more into this and are very interested what works best from your perspectives. On a typical
visit our security team can open the gate for the fire trucks but it's great to have the redundancy.
From: Liz Russell
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20214:35 PM
To: Howard Lagomarsino <hla¢omarsino(a)albemarle.ore>
Cc: Kevin McCollum <kmccollumCdalbemarle.ore>; Roger Rothwell <rrothwell(@monticello.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
39
Hi Howard, thanks for your response and further clarification. I'm cc'ing Roger Rothwell, Assistant Director of Facilities
and point person for the installation of the gate and associated work.
We share your objective that we do not impede emergency access. Roger is communicating with the installer to verify
dimensions. We welcome your suggestions on the emergency activation as well. There was some confusion over the
ASTM rating. The gate is rated to ASTM F2656 (Test Method for Crash Testing of Vehicle Security Barriers) but it is not
clear on ASTM F2200 (Standard Specification for Automated Vehicular Gate Construction).
Roger once you are able to get clarification from the installer it might be good to set up a call so that we can make sure
we are all on the same page and I can appropriately resubmit the clarification points to the County.
Liz
From: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.ore>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20214:20 PM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.ore>
Cc: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ore>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
This Message originated outside your organization.
01
I spoke with Shawn Maddox, who has looked at this previously and confirmed these comments are in line with his past
discussions on this topic. Basically, we are looking for the project to not make our emergency access worse, but realize
the need for the security aspect of the project, so we are providing ways we can work through this and stay within the
spirit of the code.
As I remember, the road serving these areas is not very wide already. It definitely does not provide the 20 ft width
required in the fire code for emergency vehicle access roads, but the road also was built well before 2000, when this
section changed to the 20 feet requirement (I am not asking that the road be made to comply with the 20 feet width).
My comments are to codify the need for emergency access, hence, the intent is that the gate structure — the columns
holding the control arms etc., not obstruct the current width of the road that is in place now. What I am looking for, is
when the arm of the gate is up, the width of the access point is the same as the width of the road currently, it doesn't
choke the road down further.
As for the emergency activation, there needs to be a mechanism for emergency responders to open the gate in an
emergency, if it is closed. I have seen this take the form of the property owner providing a code responders can activate,
a key, in several cases, the siren on the rig opened the gate, Basically, anything that allows emergency access without
delaying the response to an emergency (generally, this means not waiting for security to arrive to open). In lieu of
providing a gate code or a key to the first due fire station only or (as there is no guarantee that the first due unit is not
on another call — so any County Station or City HQ station could be the first unit arriving — not reasonable or as secure as
the system we currently utilize, to consider giving keys or codes to everyone who may respond), a key box system (not
just any key box — one designed for security of the contents so not just anyone can access or easily break in — some even
have alarms to alert when the key box is activated) could be mounted on the structural components of the gate and it
can either contain the code or a key to operate the gate.
We have the Knox Box Company system in our County apparatus. This consists of a key that opens any Knox Box
installed by a property owner in the County and a Key secure system in our apparatus. The Key Secure System ensures
positive control of the key that will open all Knox Boxes in the County. Select emergency response members are granted
40
access to the key installed into the Key Secure system and provided their own unique identifier. The responder must
enter this identifier into the Key Secure System to remove the key. The Key Secure System retains information of who
removed the key, when they took it out and put it back and uploads this to a cloud based system, so we can track it at
our office. As a quality control, we monitor to ensure the removal of keys are legitimately related to emergencies. Once
the key is removed from the Key Secure System, the responder utilizes that key to open the Knox Box installed by the
property owner and retrieve the necessary information or key to open the gate or door.
Hope this helps, but maybe easier to call me directly at 434-531-4861
Howard Lagomarsino
Division Chief/Fire Marshal
Albemarle County Fire Rescue
hlagomarsino@albemarle.orci
office: 434-296-5833 x3377
cell: 434-531-4861
460 Stagecoach Road Charlottesville, Va. 22902
From: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20213:40 PM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.ora>
Cc: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.ore>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Yes, that would probably be best. He is copied here for clarification if need be.
Kevin McCollum, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
From: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.ore>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20213:13 PM
To: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ora>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Thank you, Kevin. Would it be appropriate to reach out to Mr. Lagomarsino for clarity on his comments in advance of
resubmitting?
Liz
From: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 1:40 PM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.ore>
Subject: FW: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
41
This Message originated outside your organization.
Accidentally sent this to the wrong Liz. Sorry about that. Please see my email below and the attached comments.
From: Kevin McCollum
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 12:40 PM
To: Liz Toka <liztoka@gmad.com>
Subject: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Good Afternoon Liz,
Attached is the review comment letter for SDP200800006. As you can see Fire -Rescue has requested changes. Please
address these comments or make the applicable changes and resubmit this application to me. A digital (pdf) submittal to
me will suffice.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Kevin McCollum, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
42
Kevin McCollum
From: Liz Russell
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 4:35 PM
To: Howard Lagomarsino
Cc: Kevin McCollum; Roger Rothwell
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Hi Howard, thanks for your response and further clarification. I'm cc'ing Roger Rothwell, Assistant Director of Facilities
and point person for the installation of the gate and associated work.
We share your objective that we do not impede emergency access. Roger is communicating with the installer to verify
dimensions. We welcome your suggestions on the emergency activation as well. There was some confusion over the
ASTM rating. The gate is rated to ASTM F2656 (Test Method for Crash Testing of Vehicle Security Barriers) but it is not
clear on ASTM F2200 (Standard Specification for Automated Vehicular Gate Construction).
Roger once you are able to get clarification from the installer it might be good to set up a call so that we can make sure
we are all on the same page and I can appropriately resubmit the clarification points to the County.
Liz
From: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20214:20 PM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Cc: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
This Message originated outside your organization.
f:1
I spoke with Shawn Maddox, who has looked at this previously and confirmed these comments are in line with his past
discussions on this topic. Basically, we are looking for the project to not make our emergency access worse, but realize
the need for the security aspect of the project, so we are providing ways we can work through this and stay within the
spirit of the code.
As I remember, the road serving these areas is not very wide already. It definitely does not provide the 20 ft width
required in the fire code for emergency vehicle access roads, but the road also was built well before 2000, when this
section changed to the 20 feet requirement (I am not asking that the road be made to comply with the 20 feet width).
My comments are to codify the need for emergency access, hence, the intent is that the gate structure — the columns
holding the control arms etc., not obstruct the current width of the road that is in place now. What I am looking for, is
when the arm of the gate is up, the width of the access point is the same as the width of the road currently, it doesn't
choke the road down further.
As for the emergency activation, there needs to be a mechanism for emergency responders to open the gate in an
emergency, if it is closed. I have seen this take the form of the property owner providing a code responders can activate,
a key, in several cases, the siren on the rig opened the gate, Basically, anything that allows emergency access without
delaying the response to an emergency (generally, this means not waiting for security to arrive to open). In lieu of
43
providing a gate code or a key to the first due fire station only or (as there is no guarantee that the first due unit is not
on another call — so any County Station or City HQ station could be the first unit arriving — not reasonable or as secure as
the system we currently utilize, to consider giving keys or codes to everyone who may respond), a key box system (not
just any key box — one designed for security of the contents so not just anyone can access or easily break in — some even
have alarms to alert when the key box is activated) could be mounted on the structural components of the gate and it
can either contain the code or a key to operate the gate.
We have the Knox Box Company system in our County apparatus. This consists of a key that opens any Knox Box
installed by a property owner in the County and a Key secure system in our apparatus. The Key Secure System ensures
positive control of the key that will open all Knox Boxes in the County. Select emergency response members are granted
access to the key installed into the Key Secure system and provided their own unique identifier. The responder must
enter this identifier into the Key Secure System to remove the key. The Key Secure System retains information of who
removed the key, when they took it out and put it back and uploads this to a cloud based system, so we can track it at
our office. As a quality control, we monitor to ensure the removal of keys are legitimately related to emergencies. Once
the key is removed from the Key Secure System, the responder utilizes that key to open the Knox Box installed by the
property owner and retrieve the necessary information or key to open the gate or door.
Hope this helps, but maybe easier to call me directly at 434-531-4861
Howard Lagomarsino
Division Chief/Fire Marshal
Albemarle County Fire Rescue
hlagomarsino@albemarle.org
office: 434-296-5833 x3377
cell: 434-531-4861
460 Stagecoach Road Charlottesville, Va. 22902
From: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ora>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20213:40 PM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell(lmonticello.ore>
Cc: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.ore>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Yes, that would probably be best. He is copied here for clarification if need be.
Kevin McCollum, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
From: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.ore>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20213:13 PM
To: Kevin McCollum <kmccollumCa@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
44
Thank you, Kevin. Would it be appropriate to reach out to Mr. Lagomarsino for clarity on his comments in advance of
resubmitting?
Liz
From: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ora>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20211:40 PM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell(a)monticello.ore>
Subject: FW: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
This Message originated outside your organization.
Accidentally sent this to the wrong Liz. Sorry about that. Please see my email below and the attached comments.
From: Kevin McCollum
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 202112:40 PM
To: Liz Toka <IiztokaPgmail.com>
Subject: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Good Afternoon Liz,
Attached is the review comment letter for SDP200800006. As you can see Fire -Rescue has requested changes. Please
address these comments or make the applicable changes and resubmit this application to me. A digital (pdf) submittal to
me will suffice.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Kevin McCollum, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle Countv
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
45
Kevin McCollum
From:
Howard Lagomarsino
Sent:
Wednesday, February 10, 2021 4:20 PM
To:
Liz Russell
Cc:
Kevin McCollum
Subject:
RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
All:
I spoke with Shawn Maddox, who has looked at this previously and confirmed these comments are in line with his past
discussions on this topic. Basically, we are looking for the project to not make our emergency access worse, but realize
the need for the security aspect of the project, so we are providing ways we can work through this and stay within the
spirit of the code.
As I remember, the road serving these areas is not very wide already. It definitely does not provide the 20 ft width
required in the fire code for emergency vehicle access roads, but the road also was built well before 2000, when this
section changed to the 20 feet requirement (I am not asking that the road be made to comply with the 20 feet width).
My comments are to codify the need for emergency access, hence, the intent is that the gate structure — the columns
holding the control arms etc., not obstruct the current width of the road that is in place now. What I am looking for, is
when the arm of the gate is up, the width of the access point is the same as the width of the road currently, it doesn't
choke the road down further.
As for the emergency activation, there needs to be a mechanism for emergency responders to open the gate in an
emergency, if it is closed. 1 have seen this take the form of the property owner providing a code responders can activate,
a key, in several cases, the siren on the rig opened the gate, Basically, anything that allows emergency access without
delaying the response to an emergency (generally, this means not waiting for security to arrive to open). In lieu of
providing a gate code or a key to the first due fire station only or (as there is no guarantee that the first due unit is not
on another call — so any County Station or City HQ station could be the first unit arriving — not reasonable or as secure as
the system we currently utilize, to consider giving keys or codes to everyone who may respond), a key box system (not
just any key box — one designed for security of the contents so not just anyone can access or easily break in — some even
have alarms to alert when the key box is activated) could be mounted on the structural components of the gate and it
can either contain the code or a key to operate the gate.
We have the Knox Box Company system in our County apparatus. This consists of a key that opens any Knox Box
installed by a property owner in the County and a Key secure system in our apparatus. The Key Secure System ensures
positive control of the key that will open all Knox Boxes in the County. Select emergency response members are granted
access to the key installed into the Key Secure system and provided their own unique identifier. The responder must
enter this identifier into the Key Secure System to remove the key. The Key Secure System retains information of who
removed the key, when they took it out and put it back and uploads this to a cloud based system, so we can track it at
our office. As a quality control, we monitor to ensure the removal of keys are legitimately related to emergencies. Once
the key is removed from the Key Secure System, the responder utilizes that key to open the Knox Box installed by the
property owner and retrieve the necessary information or key to open the gate or door.
Hope this helps, but maybe easier to call me directly at 434-531-4861
Howard Lagomarsino
Division Chief/Fire Marsha!
Albemarle County Fire Rescue
46
hlagomarsino@albemarle.org
office: 434-296-5833 x3377
cell: 434-531-4861
460 Stagecoach Road Charlottesville, Va. 22902
From: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20213:40 PM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Cc: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Yes, that would probably be best. He is copied here for clarification if need be.
Kevin McCollum, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle Countv
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
From: Liz Russell <Irussell(@monticello.orp>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20213:13 PM
To: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Thank you, Kevin. Would it be appropriate to reach out to Mr. Lagomarsino for clarity on his comments in advance of
resubmitting?
Liz
From: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ore>
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 20211:40 PM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell(c@monticello.ora>
Subject: FW: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
This Message originated outside your organization.
Accidentally sent this to the wrong Liz. Sorry about that. Please see my email below and the attached comments.
From: Kevin McCollum
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 12:40 PM
To: Liz Toka <liztoka@amail.com>
Subject: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Good Afternoon Liz,
47
Attached is the review comment letter for SDP200800006. As you can see Fire -Rescue has requested changes. Please
address these comments or make the applicable changes and resubmit this application to me. A digital (pdf) submittal to
me will suffice.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Kevin McCollum, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
48
Kevin McCollum
From: Kevin McCollum
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 1:40 PM
To: Liz Russell
Subject: FW: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Attachments: SDP200800006 LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021.pdf
Accidentally sent this to the wrong Liz. Sorry about that. Please see my email below and the attached comments.
From: Kevin McCollum
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 12:40 PM
To: Liz Toka <liztoka@gmail.com>
Subject: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter 2-10-2021
Good Afternoon Liz,
Attached is the review comment letter for SDP200800006. As you can see Fire -Rescue has requested changes. Please
address these comments or make the applicable changes and resubmit this application to me. A digital (pdf) submittal to
me will suffice.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Kevin McCollum, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle Countv
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
49
Kevin McCollum
From: Kevin McCollum
Sent: Friday, February 5, 2021 11:20 AM
To: Liz Russell
Cc: Cameron Langille; John Anderson
Subject: RE: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History
Ctr - Minor. [ Engineering review comments ]
Attachments: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter.pdf
Liz,
I don't have any comments or suggestions on this. I can copy John on this email to see if he has any thoughts. I think he
was just suggesting you could possibly include some of the previous revisions within this application, but not required.
John, any additional comment? For your reference I have attached our review comment letter. Currently, no objection
but still waiting F/R review.
Kevin
From: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Sent: Friday, February 5, 2021 10:57 AM
To: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Cc: Cameron Langille <blangille@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History Ctr - Minor. [
Engineering review comments ]
Thanks for the response. I did see the Engineers comments but was confused by them since we provided the mark-ups
on pages from the final SDP for the site (as the Application specifies), so by nature there would be improvements that
don't apply to the current LOR. I am not sure how we would remedy this but welcome your thoughts.
Liz
From: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ore>
Sent: Friday, February 5, 2021 10:50 AM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.ore>
Cc: Cameron Langille <blaneille(n@albemarle.ore>
Subject: RE: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History Ctr - Minor. [
Engineering review comments ]
This Message originated outside your organization.
Good Morning Liz,
Attached you will find our review comment letter for this Letter of Revision application. As you can see we currently
have no objection. However, we are still waiting to hear from Fire -Rescue, so this project is not yet ready for approval. I
will forward Fire -Rescue's comments to you once I receive them. I sent a reminder to them earlier this week to get me
their comments, but I have not heard back since.
50
I am copying Cameron Langille on this email who has been shadowing me on this project if he has any additional
comment. I believe you will need to submit four (4) hard copies to us for final approval once we hear from Fire -Rescue.
Please see Engineering's suggestions for changes prior to final submittal.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Kevin McCollum, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle Countv
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
From: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.orz>
Sent: Friday, February 5, 2021 10:07 AM
To: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ore>
Subject: FW: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History Ctr - Minor. [
Engineering review comments ]
Good morning Kevin,
Following up on the Application for LOR #3. Does this letter serve as approval of the Application or will there be a letter
with comments or approval issued by your office?
Thanks for your assistance and review of this application,
Liz Russell
M NTICELLO
Lrz Russell I assistant Director of Facilities + Planning
Thomas Jefferson Foundation, Inc. I Monticello
P.O. Box 316 1 Charlottesville, VA 22902
Work: 434-984-7589 1 Cell: 434-466-1275 1 Email: lmssellnmonticello.org
From: John Anderson <landerson2@albemarle.ora>
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 9:34 AM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.ore>
Cc: mmerriam@monticello.org; Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ora>
Subject: FW: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History Ctr - Minor. [
Engineering review comments ]
This Message originated outside your organization.
51
Ms. Russell, my apologies, I mis-typed your email, and hope that this reaches you, now. Thanks, take care, best, J. Anderson
From: John Anderson
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 20219:32 AM
To: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ore>
Cc: Irussel@monticello.org; mmerriam@monticello.org
Subject: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History Ctr - Minor . [ Engineering
review comments ]
The Review for the following application has been completed:
Application Number = SDP200800006 , LOR3
Reviewer = John Anderson
Review Status = No Obiection
Completed Date = 01/28/2021
This email was sent from County View Production.
Kevin,
Attached also in CV. Engineering has no objection to LOR3 (Limited tree removal; minimal grading to install 2 crash
gates). Thanks for your patience.
Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation:
Engineering appreciates your comprehensive submittal (w / 5 exhibits). No further coordination with Engineering is required
for LOR3.
Planning Div. (Kevin McCollum) is project coordinator, and point of contact for LOR3 approval.
We wish you well with this project.
best, J. Anderson
John E. Anderson, PE I Civil Engineer II
Department of Community Development I County of Albemarle, Virginia
401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville, VA 22902
434.296.5832 ext. 3069
52
Kevin McCollum
From: Liz Russell
Sent: Friday, February 5, 2021 10:57 AM
To: Kevin McCollum
Cc: Cameron Langille
Subject: RE: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History
Ctr - Minor. [ Engineering review comments ]
Thanks for the response. I did see the Engineer's comments but was confused by them since we provided the mark-ups
on pages from the final SDP for the site (as the Application specifies), so by nature there would be improvements that
don't apply to the current LOR. I am not sure how we would remedy this but welcome your thoughts.
Liz
From: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Sent: Friday, February 5, 2021 10:50 AM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Cc: Cameron Langille <blangille@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History Ctr - Minor. [
Engineering review comments ]
This Message originated outside your organization.
Good Morning Liz,
Attached you will find our review comment letter for this Letter of Revision application. As you can see we currently
have no objection. However, we are still waiting to hear from Fire -Rescue, so this project is not yet ready for approval. I
will forward Fire -Rescue's comments to you once I receive them. I sent a reminder to them earlier this week to get me
their comments, but I have not heard back since.
I am copying Cameron Langille on this email who has been shadowing me on this project if he has any additional
comment. I believe you will need to submit four (4) hard copies to us for final approval once we hear from Fire -Rescue.
Please see Engineering's suggestions for changes prior to final submittal.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Kevin McCollum, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle Countv
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
From: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.ore>
Sent: Friday, February 5, 2021 10:07 AM
To: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
53
Subject: FW: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History Ctr - Minor. [
Engineering review comments ]
Good morning Kevin,
Following up on the Application for LOR #3. Does this letter serve as approval of the Application or will there be a letter
with comments or approval issued by your office?
Thanks for your assistance and review of this application,
Liz Russell
tMeNTICELL0
Liz Russell I Assistant Director of Facilities + Planning
Thomas Jefferson Foundation, Inc. I Monticello
P.O. Box 316 1 Charlottesville, \•A 22902
Work: 434-984-7589 1 Cell: 434-466-1275 1 Email: kussellLMmonticello.org
From: John Anderson <ianderson2@a1bemarle.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 9:34 AM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Cc: mmerriam@monticello.org; Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Subject: FW: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History Ctr - Minor . [
Engineering review comments ]
This Message originated outside your organization.
Ms. Russell, my apologies, I mis-typed your email, and hope that this reaches you, now. Thanks, take care, best, J. Anderson
From: John Anderson
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 9:32 AM
To: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Cc: Irussel@monticello.org; mmerriam@monticello.org
Subject: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History Ctr - Minor. [ Engineering
review comments ]
The Review for the following application has been completed:
Application Number = SDP200800006, LOR3
Reviewer = John Anderson
Review Status = No Obiection
Completed Date = 01/28/2021
54
This email was sent from County View Production.
Kevin,
Attached also in CV. Engineering has no objection to LOR3 (Limited tree removal; minimal grading to install 2 crash
gates). Thanks for your patience.
Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation:
Engineering appreciates your comprehensive submittal (w / 5 exhibits). No further coordination with Engineering is required
for LOR3.
Planning Div. (Kevin McCollum) is project coordinator, and point of contact for LOR3 approval.
We wish you well with this project.
best, J. Anderson
John E. Anderson, PE I Civil Engineer II
Department of Community Development I County of Albemarle, Virginia
401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville, VA 22902
434.296.5832 ext. 3069
55
Kevin McCollum
From: Kevin McCollum
Sent: Friday, February 5, 2021 10:50 AM
To: Liz Russell
Cc: Cameron Langille
Subject: RE: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History
Ctr - Minor. [ Engineering review comments ]
Attachments: SDP200800006 Monticello LOR 3 Review Comment Letter.pdf
Good Morning Liz,
Attached you will find our review comment letter for this Letter of Revision application. As you can see we currently
have no objection. However, we are still waiting to hear from Fire -Rescue, so this project is not yet ready for approval. I
will forward Fire -Rescue's comments to you once I receive them. I sent a reminder to them earlier this week to get me
their comments, but I have not heard back since.
I am copying Cameron Langille on this email who has been shadowing me on this project if he has any additional
comment. I believe you will need to submit four (4) hard copies to us for final approval once we hear from Fire -Rescue.
Please see Engineering's suggestions for changes prior to final submittal.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Kevin McCollum, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
From: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Sent: Friday, February 5, 2021 10:07 AM
To: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Subject: FW: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History Ctr - Minor. [
Engineering review comments ]
Good morning Kevin,
Following up on the Application for LOR #3. Does this letter serve as approval of the Application or will there be a letter
with comments or approval issued by your office?
Thanks for your assistance and review of this application,
Liz Russell
56
f9N6WT1VdLL0
Liz Russell I .assistant Director of Facilities + Planning
Thomas Jefferson Foundation, Inc. I :Nfonticello
P.O. Box 316 1 Charlottesville, VA 22902
Work: 434-984-7589 1 Cell: 434-466-1275 1 Email: Imssell a monticello.org
From: John Anderson <]anderson2@a1bemarle.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 20219:34 AM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Cc: mmerriam@monticello.ore; Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Subject: FW: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History Ctr- Minor
Engineering review comments ]
This Message originated outside your organization.
Ms. Russell, my apologies, I mis-typed your email, and hope that this reaches you, now. Thanks, take care, best, J. Anderson
From: John Anderson
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 20219:32 AM
To: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ora>
Cc: Irussel@monticello.ore; mmerriam@monticello.org
Subject: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History Ctr - Minor. [ Engineering
review comments ]
The Review for the following application has been completed:
Application Number = SDP200800006, LOR3
Reviewer = John Anderson
Review Status = No Objection
Completed Date = 01/28/2021
This email was sent from County View Production.
Kevin,
Attached also in CV. Engineering has no objection to LOR3 (Limited tree removal; minimal grading to install 2 crash
gates). Thanks for your patience.
Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation:
Engineering appreciates your comprehensive submittal (w / 5 exhibits). No further coordination with Engineering is required
for LOR3.
57
Planning Div. (Kevin McCollum) is project coordinator, and point of contact for LOR3 approval.
We wish you well with this project.
best, J. Anderson
John E. Anderson, PE I Civil Engineer II
Department of Community Development I County of Albemarle, Virginia
401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville, VA 22902
434.296.5832 ext. 3069
58
Kevin McCollum
From: Liz Russell
Sent: Friday, February 5, 2021 10:07 AM
To: Kevin McCollum
Subject: FW: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History
Ctr - Minor. [ Engineering review comments ]
Attachments: SDP2008-00006_LOR3_Monticello Visitor & Smith History Ctr 012821.pdf
Good morning Kevin,
Following up on the Application for LOR #3. Does this letter serve as approval of the Application or will there be a letter
with comments or approval issued by your office?
Thanks for your assistance and review of this application,
Liz Russell
M NTICELLO
Liz Russell I assistant Director of Facilities + Planning
Thomas Jefferson Foundation, Inc. I Monticello
P.O. Box 316 1 Charlottesville, VA 22902
Work:434-984-7589 1 Cell:434-466-1275 1 Emad:Imssell@mondcello.org
From: John Anderson <janderson2@albemarle.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 9:34 AM
To: Liz Russell <Irussell@monticello.org>
Cc: mmerriam@monticello.org; Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Subject: FW: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History Ctr - Minor. [
Engineering review comments ]
This Message originated outside your organization.
Ms. Russell, my apologies, I mis-typed your email, and hope that this reaches you, now. Thanks, take care, best, J. Anderson
From: John Anderson
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 20219:32 AM
To: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.ore>
Cc: Irussel@monticello.ora; mmerriam@monticello.ore
Subject: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History Ctr - Minor. [ Engineering
review comments ]
59
The Review for the following application has been completed:
Application Number = SDP200800006, LOR3
Reviewer = John Anderson
Review Status = No Objection
Completed Date = 01/28/2021
This email was sent from County View Production.
Kevin,
Attached also in CV. Engineering has no objection to LOR3 (Limited tree removal; minimal grading to install 2 crash
gates). Thanks for your patience.
Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation:
Engineering appreciates your comprehensive submittal (w / 5 exhibits). No further coordination with Engineering is required
for LOR3.
Planning Div. (Kevin McCollum) is project coordinator, and point of contact for LOR3 approval.
We wish you well with this project.
best, J. Anderson
John E. Anderson, PE I Civil Engineer 11
Department of Community Development I County of Albemarle. Virginia
401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville. VA 22902
434.296.5832 ext. 3069
60
Kevin McCollum
From: Betty Slough
Sent: Tuesday, February 2, 2021 4:15 PM
To: Kevin McCollum
Subject: RE: Transmittal of LOR for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor Center (Security Gates)
Kevin,
I have no objection either.
Betty R Slough
Commercial Plan Reviewer/ Deputy Building Official
Albemarle County
https://www.albemarle.ora
bslough@albemarle.org
office 434-296-5832 x3362
cell 434-872-3793
401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, VA 22902
From: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Sent: Monday, February 1, 2021 12:42 PM
To: Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>; Betty Slough <bslough@albemarle.org>
Subject: FW: Transmittal of LOR for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor Center (Security Gates)
Good Afternoon,
Just a reminder, I was hoping you all could take a look at this Letter of Revision by the end of this week. It seems straight
forward enough. I currently have no objection and Engineering has already indicated that they have no objection as well.
Let me know.
Thanks!
Kevin
From: Kevin McCollum
Sent: Friday, January 22, 2021 10:57 AM
To: Betty Slough <bslough@albemarle.org>; Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>; Emily Cox
<ecox2@albemarle.org>; John Anderson <0anderson2@albemarle.ore>; Matthew Wentland
<mwentland@albemarle.org>; David James <James2@albemarle.org>
Cc: Cameron Langille <blangille@albemarle.org>
Subject: Transmittal of LOR for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor Center (Security Gates)
Good Morning,
Attached is a LOR for the installment of security gates at the Monticello Visitor Center (SDP200800006). This information
is also available in County View and you have been entered in as a reviewer for this application. Please send me
comments or update County View as applicable by 2/5. This is my first LOR review, but I will be working with Cameron
and he suggested LORs have a 10 day review policy. Thanks!
61
Kevin MCCOIIUM, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
62
Kevin McCollum
From: Kevin McCollum
Sent: Monday, February 1, 2021 12:42 PM
To: Howard Lagomarsino; Betty Slough
Subject: FW: Transmittal of LOR for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor Center (Security Gates)
Attachments: Exhibits.pdf; SDP200800006 LOR Application 2021-01-19.pdf; Strong Arm Secuity Gate
Cutsheets.pdf
Good Afternoon,
Just a reminder, I was hoping you all could take a look at this Letter of Revision by the end of this week. It seems straight
forward enough. I currently have no objection and Engineering has already indicated that they have no objection as well.
Let me know.
Thanks!
Kevin
From: Kevin McCollum
Sent: Friday, January 22, 2021 10:57 AM
To: Betty Slough <bslough@albemarle.org>; Howard Lagomarsino <hlagomarsino@albemarle.org>; Emily Cox
<ecox2@albemarle.org>; John Anderson <janderson2@albemarle.org>; Matthew Wentland
<mwentland@albemarle.org>; David James <djames2@albemarle.org>
Cc: Cameron Langille <blangille@albemarle.org>
Subject: Transmittal of LOR for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor Center (Security Gates)
Good Morning,
Attached is a LOR for the installment of security gates at the Monticello Visitor Center (SDP200800006). This information
is also available in County View and you have been entered in as a reviewer for this application. Please send me
comments or update County View as applicable by 2/5. This is my first LOR review, but I will be working with Cameron
and he suggested LORs have a 10 day review policy. Thanks!
Kevin McCollum, certified Zoning official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
63
Kevin McCollum
From: John Anderson
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 9:34 AM
To: Liz Russell
Cc: mmerriam@monticello.org; Kevin McCollum
Subject: FW: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History
Ctr - Minor. [ Engineering review comments ]
Attachments: SDP2008-00006_LOR3_Monticello Visitor & Smith History Ctr 012821.pdf
Ms. Russell, my apologies, I mis-typed your email, and hope that this reaches you, now. Thanks, take care, best, J. Anderson
From: John Anderson
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 9:32 AM
To: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org>
Cc: Irussel@monticello.org; mmerriam@monticello.org
Subject: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History Ctr - Minor. [ Engineering
review comments j
The Review for the following application has been completed:
Application Number = SDP200800006, LOR3
Reviewer = John Anderson
Review Status = No Objection
Completed Date = 01/28/2021
This email was sent from County View Production.
Kevin,
Attached also in CV. Engineering has no objection to LOR3 (Limited tree removal; minimal grading to install 2 crash
gates). Thanks for your patience.
Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation:
Engineering appreciates your comprehensive submittal (w / 5 exhibits). No further coordination with Engineering is required
for LOR3.
Planning Div. (Kevin McCollum) is project coordinator, and point of contact for LOR3 approval.
We wish you well with this project.
best, J. Anderson
John E. Anderson, PE I Civil Engineer II
Department of Community Development I County of Albemarle, Virginia
401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville, VA 22902
64
434.296.5832 ext. 3069
65
Kevin McCollum
From: John Anderson
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 9:32 AM
To: Kevin McCollum
Cc: Irussel@monticello.org; mmerriam@monticello.org
Subject: Planning Application Review for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor & Smith History Ctr -
Minor. [ Engineering review comments ]
Attachments: SDP2008-00006_LOR3_Monticello Visitor & Smith History Ctr 012821.pdf
The Review for the following application has been completed:
Application Number = SDP200800006 , LOR3
Reviewer = John Anderson
Review Status = No Objection
Completed Date = 01/28/2021
This email was sent from County View Production.
Kevin,
Attached also in CV. Engineering has no objection to LOR3 (Limited tree removal; minimal grading to install 2 crash
gates). Thanks for your patience.
Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation:
Engineering appreciates your comprehensive submittal (w / 5 exhibits). No further coordination with Engineering is required
for LOR3.
Planning Div. (Kevin McCollum) is project coordinator, and point of contact for LOR3 approval.
We wish you well with this project.
best, J. Anderson
John E. Anderson, PE I Civil Engineer II
Department of Community Development I County of Albemarle, Virginia
401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville, VA 22902
434.296.5832 ext. 3069
66
Kevin McCollum
From: Kevin McCollum
Sent: Friday, January 22, 2021 1037 AM
To: Betty Slough; Howard Lagomarsino; Emily Cox; John Anderson; Matthew Wentland;
David James
Cc: Cameron Langille
Subject: Transmittal of LOR for SDP200800006 Monticello Visitor Center (Security Gates)
Attachments: Exhibits.pdf; SDP200800006 LOR Application 2021-01-19.pdf; Strong Arm Secuity Gate
Cutsheets.pdf
Good Morning,
Attached is a LOR for the installment of security gates at the Monticello Visitor Center (SDP200800006). This information
is also available in County View and you have been entered in as a reviewer for this application. Please send me
comments or update County View as applicable by 2/5. This is my first LOR review, but I will be working with Cameron
and he suggested LORs have a 10 day review policy. Thanks!
Kevin McCollum, Certified Zoning Official
Planner
Community Development Department
Zoning Division
Albemarle County
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3141
401 McIntire Rd, Charlottesville VA 22902
67