Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
ARB201500113 Correspondence 2015-09-04
September 4, 2015 Albemarle County Virginia Architectural Review Board Amendment to an Approved Certificate of Appropriateness Timberwood Commons TM32 D141 Timberwood Boulevard Applicant-Stoneking von Storch Architects Owner- Building Management Company Attachments: Application form and Checklist. Cad Drawings: pdfs of Sheets Al,A2 A3 &A4 1/8"=1'-0",showing plans and elevations. Relevant Photos: Examples along the Entry Corridor. Existing Conditions Photos. Aerial Screenshots: Images from 3D model positioned in Google Earth. Model Snapshots: Immediate context,street view images of 3D model. Project Narrative. Submitted: Michael Stoneking Margaret Maliszewski From: Mike Stoneking <mds @s-vs.com> Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 5:25 PM To: Margaret Maliszewski Cc: Robby Noll (robby @tbmcom.com) Subject: RE: Timberwood Commons comments Attachments: A3.pdf; A4.pdf; A5.pdf; A6.pdf; A10.pdf; A14.pdf; A15.pdf; C1.pdf Margaret, Please see revised sheets: C1 A3 A4 AS A6 A10 A14 A15 These pick up all of your comments with the exception of the Comprehensive Sign Package which is forthcoming from the Owner, BMC. I will print and deliver hard copies tomorrow. -Mike From: Margaret Maliszewski [mailto:MMaliszewski @albemarle.org] Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 5:04 PM To: Mike Stoneking Subject: RE: Timberwood Commons comments 1. Please add the note to the elevation sheets also. 2. I can sign off on the foundation permit without the sign plan. From: Mike Stoneking [mailto:mds @s-vs.com] Sent:Thursday, February 18, 2016 4:52 PM To: Margaret Maliszewski<MMaliszewski @albemarle.org> Cc: robby @tbmcom.com Subject: RE: Timberwood Commons comments OK Can do. Two things: 1. I had added the equipment note to the Architecturals-Sent you a pdf of the cover sheet right after we met. That sheet will also be part of the other updated sheets coming to you. 2. Not sure how quickly BMC can turn around the sign package. How does this affect our getting the foundation permit? If we can get that released we can get going and take the time to finish the sign stuff before you're asked to release the shell permit. Is that doable? 1 Mike ` From: Margaret Maliszewski [mailto:MMaliszewski@albemarle.org] Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 4:45 PM To: Mike Stoneking Subject: RE: Timberwood Commons comments See blue. From: Mike Stoneking [mailto:mds@s-vs.com] Sent:Thursday, February 18, 2016 4:18 PM To: Margaret Maliszewski<MMaliszewski @albemarle.org> Cc: robby @tbmcom.com Subject: RE:Timberwood Commons comments Margaret. Answers in red below -Mike From: Margaret Maliszewski [mailto:MMaliszewski©aalbemarle.orcd Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 3:43 PM To: Mike Stoneking Subject: Timberwood Commons comments Mike, I'm looking over your Timberwood Commons submittal and I have a few questions based on the ARB's comments in the October action letter. 1. Regarding comment#2, the area of brick identified below is shown as brick A. Shouldn't it be brick B?Yes, thanks for catching that. Can you correct this on the drawing and re-send? t.t1AIILQTTESV!VI Pediatrec Dent strY 2. Regarding comment#4, I didn't see the window glass note on the drawings. Did I miss it? I didn't realize the note needed to be on the drawings. I can add that. Great, please add the note and re-send. 2 3. Regarding comment#5, I do ho see the equipment located either on the architectural plans or the site plan (the LOR that was approved earlier this month). Can you explain where the equipment is located and what has been done to make sure it won't be visible from the EC? Mechanical equipment has not been selected. I know where we intend to place it and we've locate tall parapets to conceal it. We were going to bind our equipment selectins to this constraint. Shall I locate the zones?Yes, and please add an explanatory note on the drawing. 4. Regarding comment#6, for future reference,the equipment note should have been added to the site plan (the LOR) and the architectural sheets. I asked the client, who is managing the civil engineer to do so. I can check on the status. The LOR has been approved, so let that go. But please add the note to the architectural drawings. 5. Regarding comment#8, the intent was for you to submit general sign information for review and approval now. However, the drawings suggest that there will be a single tenant in each building, so we can postpone this. We cannot deliver sing information now as we have not finalized all the tenants. It will be two per building, not one. Once we know all the tenants we can submit. Or we can submit for each one as the building rents out. We anticipated applying each time. Is that not the proper approach?A comprehensive sign plan is required for any building with more than one tenant, and the ARB typically requires the sign plan before the architecture is approved.This is to make sure appropriate space has been allocated for signage and some level of coordination can be achieved. You don't have to know who all the tenants are to complete a comprehensive sign plan. The plan addresses things like sign locations, sign types, colors, illumination type. A sample is attached. You could put one together quickly. It can be amended later if changes are needed once tenants are firmed up. The goal is to provide for some level of compatibility among the signs on the buildings. Maintaining the same sign type (for example, channel letters), the same illumination type (for example, halo lit), and limiting colors to no more than three are key elements. Thanks. Margaret Margaret M. Maliszewski, Principal Planner Albemarle County Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, VA 22902 434-296-5832 x3276 3