HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB201500115 Review Comments Miscellaneous Submittal 2016-02-03of ALg�
jRGII31P
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832
Fax (434) 972 -4126
Staff review comments on drawings received January 7, 2016 are below in blue color.
Melissa Brent
MG Permits
5609 Wilkens Avenue
Catonsville, MD
21228
Re: ARB 2015 -115, Shell Signs
2212 Ivy Road
Amended Staff Comments
Dear Ms. Brent,
December 31, 2015
My previous staff comments for the above -noted sign proposal have been amended as noted in
red below.
Regarding the freestanding sign proposal:
a. Sign illumination: ARB sign guidelines require that internally illuminated signs have opaque
backgrounds. Notes on the drawing indicate the use of an opaque background; however,
the nighttime view on Sheet 2 of 3 shows a panel with a red illuminated background. Revise
the drawing to show the red panel background as black, non - illuminated in the nighttime
view on Sheet 2 of 3. Staff comment — This comment has not been adequately addressed.
The illumination view still shows a tenant panel at the bottom of the sign structure ( "Stop
In" signs) with a white illuminated background.
b. Gas pricing LED: The gas pricing letters are not shown in either the daytime or nighttime
views on Sheet 2 of 3. Revise Sheet 2 of 3 to show the LED pricing with the color of the LED
(green, red etc.) and the height of the pricing text indicated. Staff comment —This comment
has not been adequately addressed — height of the gas pricing text is not indicated on the
drawing.
Revirethp
d-. Sign colors: The total number of sign colors exceeds the maximum 3 recommended by ARB
sign guidelines leading to an overall unbalanced, uncoordinated appearance. Revise the
drawings to show the existing gray color frame and gray tenant panel background color
maintained as it is on the existing sign —with the exception of the red background color for
the Shell V -Power tenant panel which is allowable Staff comment — This comment has not
been addressed.
Regarding the canopy sign proposal:
a. Sign Height: Sheet 3 of 3 shows the sign cabinet extending beyond the canopy edge creating
an overcrowded and awkward appearance. Revise the drawing by reducing the sign size so
that it does not extend beyond the canopy edge. Include both the sign cabinet dimensions
and height (bottom to top)of the canopy edge. Staff comment —This comment has not been
addressed.
b. LED note: Sheet 3 of 3 indicates the sign is to be internally illuminated LED but does not
include the required note limiting the intensity of that illumination. Revise the drawing to
include the following note:
The level of illumination provided by the LED lights will not exceed the illumination
produced by a single stroke of 30 milliamp (ma) neon. Staff comment — This comment
has not been addressed.
En +ranee C9FFideF signs due to i +r i..tensir.,
Sheet 3 „f 3 by plaeing Red PMS 445 , ath o.,d PMS 187
If you have any questions about this action, please contact me as soon as possible. I lookforward to receiving
your revisions and completing this review with an approval letter.
Sincerely,
Brent
Brent W. Nelson
Planner
434 - 296 -5832, ext. 3438
bnelson @albemarle.org