HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB201500097 Correspondence 2015-07-22 COLLINS '`,111e
24Jit ARRETT ST, SUITE K CHARLOTTESVILLE VA 22902
434.293.3719 PH 434.293.2813 FX
WW W.collins-engineering.corn
July 22, 2015
Margaret Maliszewski
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: SDP-2015-26:Avinity I, Phase IV—Minor Amendment
Dear Margaret:
Thank you for your comments dated June 10, 2015. A standalone sign application is now
submitted incorporating the following changes in response to the items in your letter:
1. A separate sign permit has been submitted for the signs and associated lighting.
2. The sign dimensions are updated with the revised submission, see sign plan detail.
3. The New London Small fixture is a cutoff fixture and uses the lowest wattage available in
this type of product, which is now less than 3000 lumens.
4. The ground mounted floodlights will be shielded with barn doors and directed by the
contractor to point directly at the signage. They are 46 watt, 2883 lumen fixtures.
5. Plantings have been provided at the base of the sign and are coordinated with the lighting
fixtures.
6. The photometrics are recalculated with an LLF of 1.0.
7. The note has been provided on the plans as requested. A photometric plan showing the
lighting in plan view is provided for the sign lighting only.
8. The applicant acknowledges these comments.
9. The lighting notes have been revised.
Please contact me if you have any questions or require any further information.
Sincerely,
Scott Collins, PE
Noe Noe'
AL
o�•�I-1 i�jll�p
U
•
�'jRGINZP
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville,Virginia 22902-4596
Phone(434) 296-5832 Fax(434)972-4126
MEMORANDUM
TO: J. T.Newberry
FROM: Margaret Maliszewski,Principal Planner
RE: SDP-2015-26: Avinity I,Phase IV—Minor Amendment
DATE: June 10, 2015
Regarding the freestanding signs and associated lighting:
1. A separate sign permit application is required for the signs. Approval of this amendment does not include approval
of the signs. It is recommended that the sign information, including the light fixtures associated with the sign, be
eliminated from this amendment. Sign-related light fixtures can be handled with an electrical permit with the sign
application. You may indicate the anticipated sign footprints on the amendment plan with a note indicating that
they are provided simply for information and a sign permit will be applied for separately. Revise the notes on the
cover sheet of the amendment accordingly.
2. With the sign application,provide more complete dimensions for the sign structure. The sign and structure must
meet this ordinance requirement:Freestanding signs. The following regulations shall apply to freestanding signs:
(i)the maximum combined size of a freestanding sign and its support structure shall not exceed two and one-half
(2.5)times the maximum allowable sign size(4.15.16.d)
3. The"New London Small"fixture proposed for the ends of the freestanding signs is not a full cutoff fixture and
appears to exceed 3000 lumens. Eliminate the fixture or propose an alternate fixture that meets ordinance
requirements.
4. It is not clear whether the ground-mounted floodlights meet full cutoff requirements. Clearly indicate the proposed
lamp type and wattage for this fixture.
5. Entrance Corridor sign guidelines require planting at the base of freestanding signs, ground-mounted lights must be
coordinated with the planting, and the planting must be coordinated with approved landscaping. This should be
addressed with the sign application.
6. Revise the photometric calculations using an LLF of 1.0
7. Note that the sign guidelines state that"Lighting should be aimed so as not to project illumination beyond the
sign". Illumination appears to be excessive along portions of the sign structure that are beyond the sign text.
8. Note that these comments do not constitute a complete review of the sign proposal.
9. The lighting notes on the sign drawing do not appear to coordinate with the information on the lighting plan. Please
coordinate.
Regarding the pole lights:
1. Some proposed light poles are located adjacent to trees. Shift light pole locations away from tree canopies.
Regarding the plan generally:
1. Revise the plan using an LLF of 1.0.
2. Clearly state in the luminaire schedule the lamp type and wattage proposed for each fixture; for example, 70 watt
metal halide. (The descriptions aren't clear and the information is difficult to find in the catalog cut sheets.)
3. Indicate on the plan proposed pole and fixture colors.
CO LL I N S2��ARRETT ST, SUITE K CHARLOTTESVILLE VA 22902
434.293.3719 PH 434.293.2813 FX
www.collins-engineering.com
September 4, 2015
Brent Nelson
Planner
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville,VA 22902
RE: ARB 201500079;Avinity Freestanding Signs
Thank you for your comments dated August 5, 2015 on the above-referenced project. The updated plans reflect
changes to address your comments as described below:
1. Copies of the sign rendering have been provided at a larger scale.
2. Material samples have been provided.
3. Sign colors have been included on the sign rendering.
4. Site plan-
a. Landscaping:
i. The landscaping has been revised to include shrubs to shield the ground-mounted
lighting.
b. Lighting:
i. The luminaire schedule has been updated.
ii. A note has been added on the plan stating that the illumination on the sign structure
shall not exceed 10 footcandles.
iii. A note has been added on the plan stating that the illumination around the sign
structure shall not exceed 20 footcandles.
Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 434-293-3719.
Sincerely,
Scott Collins, PE
Collins Engineering
Brent Nelson
From: Scott Collins <scott@collins-engineering.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 4:07 PM
To: Brent Nelson
Subject: RE: ARB 201500097, Avinity Sign, Staff Comments
Brent-
Thanks. Is this approved?
From: Brent Nelson [mailto:bnelson@albemarle.org]
Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2016 9:20 AM
To:Scott Collins
Subject: RE:ARB 201500097,Avinity Sign,Staff Comments
Thanks Scott. I will review and get back to you.
Brent
Brent W. Nelson
Planner
Planning Services, Community Development
Albemarle County Office Building
401 McIntire Road, 22902
434-296-5832, ext. 3438
bnelson@albemarle.org
From:Scott Collins [mailto:scott@collins-engineering.com]
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2016 8:35 AM
To: Brent Nelson<bnelson@albemarle.org>
Cc:Jenni Pack<ienni@collins-engineering.com>
Subject: RE:ARB 201500097,Avinity Sign, Staff Comments
Brent-
I think we have a design that will meet your comments below (plan is attached). We switched the sign lighting to a wall
mounted LED light that shines the light down on the sign. We have also updated the light fixture at the end of the wall
to be a top light, LED fixture. Both lights have lumens less than or equal to 3,000 Lumens. I will send down (2) copies of
the plan today as well for your final review.
Thx
Scott
From: Brent Nelson [mailto:bnelson@albemarle.org]
Sent:Wednesday, November 11, 2015 9:34 AM
To:Scott Collins
Subject:ARB 201500097,Avinity Sign, Staff Comments
1
Scott - my current comments are below red following my prior comments in green.
1. A color illustration of the sign/sign structure(as required on the sign application/checklist)was not provided.
a. Note:the black line drawing provided is dark and illegible.Sign design and dimensions are not visible.
2. Samples of the proposed materials for the wall and sign(as required on the sign application/checklist)were not provided.
3. Proposed sign colors(as required on the sign application/checklist)were not provided on the drawing. Providing Pantone color
numbers on the drawing is preferred;however,color samples will also be accepted.
4. Issues identified at this point:
a. Regarding landscaping:
i. ARB sign guidelines recommend that ground-mounted lighting be shielded by landscaping so that it is not
visible from the right-of-way. Revise the landscape proposal to include planting to meet this guideline.
b. Lighting proposal:
i. Section 4.17.4(a)(2)(e)of the zoning ordinance indicates a 40 watt metal halide bulb is deemed to emit 3,000
or more lumens. Fixtures that are not full cutoff are required to be under 3,000 lumens.The New London
fixture is not full cutoff and proposed with a 50 watt metal halide bulb.The ground-mounted fixtures are not
full cutoff and the propose wattage is not indicated
1. Revise the luminaire schedule on Sheet 2 to include a column for proposed bulb wattage.The metal
halide bulbs proposed for both fixtures will need to be under the 40 watt threshold.
10-06-15 Review:The proposed wattage column in the luminaire schedule does not give the actual wattage of the
bulbs to be used in both fixtures.The proposed wattage of a metal halide bulb for both fixtures must be under 40
watts. Revise the schedule to indicate the exact wattage of the both bulbs to be used. Provide proof(e.g. cutsheet)
that metal halide bulbs in those wattages, fitting those fixtures, are available.
11-10-15 Review:The cutsheet for fixture P1(Sheet 3)indicates that 70 watts is the minimum wattage available
and yet the luminaire schedule states the bulb is to be 39 watts.Staff's request for a cutsheet of the 39 watt bulb
(or something else proving it exists)was not addressed.
ii. The illumination(footcandles)appears to be excessive for portions of the sign structure that are beyond the
sign text. Revise the illumination in these areas so as not to exceed 10 foot candles.
10-06-15 Review: Note 4 on Sheet 3 reads"Illumination shall not exceed 20 footcandles around the sign
structure."—Should read 10 footcandles.
The footcandle diagram of the sign structure, included in the original submission, is missing in this submission.
Provide the revised footcandle diagram of the sign structure.
11-10-15 Review:The footcandle diagram provided is too small and therefore difficult to read. Footcandle values
on the diagram for parts of the structure beyond the sign area exceed the 10 footcandle limit.
iii. Illumination(footcandles)of the sign area appears to be excessive. Reduce the footcandles in this area.
Consider a range that does not exceed 20 footcandles.
10-06-15 Review: Note 3 on Sheet 3 reads"Illumination shall not exceed 10 foot candles for the sign structure"—
Should read 20 foot candles.
The footcandle diagram of the sign structure, included in the original submission, is missing in this submission.
Provide the revised footcandle diagram of the sign structure.
11-10-15 Review:The footcandle diagram provided is too small and therefore difficult to read. Footcandle values
on the diagram for the sign area portion of the structure exceed the 20 footcandle limit.
Other:
• Sheet 2, Entrance Sign Elevation: Product ID for Fl and P1 lights does not match what is being proposed.
Revise to correct.
• Sheet 2,The luminaire schedule lists 4 Fl lights when 8 are shown in the plan view.The schedule lists 1 P1
light when 2 are shown in plan view. Revise to correct.
Brent
Brent W. Nelson
Planner
Planning Services, Community Development
Albemarle County Office Building
2
Brent Nelson
From: Scott Collins <scott@collins-engineering.com>
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2016 8:35 AM
To: Brent Nelson
Cc: Jenni Pack
Subject: RE:ARB 201500097, Avinity Sign, Staff Comments
Attachments: Avinity Sign Plan - Sheet 1.pdf;Avinity Sign Plan - Sheet 2.pdf;Avinity Sign Plan - Sheet
3.pdf
Brent-
I think we have a design that will meet your comments below (plan is attached). We switched the sign lighting to a wall
mounted LED light that shines the light down on the sign. We have also updated the light fixture at the end of the wall
to be a top light, LED fixture. Both lights have lumens less than or equal to 3,000 Lumens. I will send down (2) copies of
the plan today as well for your final review.
Thx
Scott
From: Brent Nelson [mailto:bnelson@albemarle.org]
Sent:Wednesday, November 11, 2015 9:34 AM
To:Scott Collins
Subject:ARB 201500097,Avinity Sign, Staff Comments
Scott - my current comments are below in red following my prior comments in green.
1. A color illustration of the sign/sign structure(as required on the sign application/checklist)was not provided.
a. Note:the black line drawing provided is dark and illegible.Sign design and dimensions are not visible.
2. Samples of the proposed materials for the wall and sign(as required on the sign application/checklist)were not provided.
3. Proposed sign colors(as required on the sign application/checklist)were not provided on the drawing. Providing Pantone color
numbers on the drawing is preferred;however,color samples will also be accepted.
4. Issues identified at this point:
a. Regarding landscaping:
i. ARB sign guidelines recommend that ground-mounted lighting be shielded by landscaping so that it is not
visible from the right-of-way. Revise the landscape proposal to include planting to meet this guideline.
b. Lighting proposal:
i. Section 4.17.4(a)(2)(e)of the zoning ordinance indicates a 40 watt metal halide bulb is deemed to emit 3,000
or more lumens. Fixtures that are not full cutoff are required to be under 3,000 lumens.The New London
fixture is not full cutoff and proposed with a 50 watt metal halide bulb.The ground-mounted fixtures are not
full cutoff and the propose wattage is not indicated
1. Revise the luminaire schedule on Sheet 2 to include a column for proposed bulb wattage.The metal
halide bulbs proposed for both fixtures will need to be under the 40 watt threshold.
10-06-15 Review:The proposed wattage column in the luminaire schedule does not give the actual wattage of the
bulbs to be used in both fixtures.The proposed wattage of a metal halide bulb for both fixtures must be under 40
watts. Revise the schedule to indicate the exact wattage of the both bulbs to be used. Provide proof(e.g. cutsheet)
that metal halide bulbs in those wattages, fitting those fixtures, are available.
11-10-15 Review:The cutsheet for fixture P1 (Sheet 3) indicates that 70 watts is the minimum wattage available
and yet the luminaire schedule states the bulb is to be 39 watts. Staff's request for a cutsheet of the 39 watt bulb
(or something else proving it exists)was not addressed.
ii. The illumination (footcandles)appears to be excessive for portions of the sign structure that are beyond the
sign text. Revise the illumination in these areas so as not to exceed 10 foot candles.
1
.r■r►
10-06-15 Review: Nottee104 on Sheet 3 reads"Illumination shall not exceed 20 footcandles around the sign
structure."—Should read 10 footcandles.
The footcandle diagram of the sign structure, included in the original submission, is missing in this submission.
Provide the revised footcandle diagram of the sign structure.
11-10-15 Review:The footcandle diagram provided is too small and therefore difficult to read. Footcandle values
on the diagram for parts of the structure beyond the sign area exceed the 10 footcandle limit.
iii. Illumination(footcandles)of the sign area appears to be excessive. Reduce the footcandles in this area.
Consider a range that does not exceed 20 footcandles.
10-06-15 Review: Note 3 on Sheet 3 reads"Illumination shall not exceed 10 foot candles for the sign structure"—
Should read 20 foot candles.
The footcandle diagram of the sign structure, included in the original submission, is missing in this submission.
Provide the revised footcandle diagram of the sign structure.
11-10-15 Review:The footcandle diagram provided is too small and therefore difficult to read. Footcandle values
on the diagram for the sign area portion of the structure exceed the 20 footcandle limit.
Other:
• Sheet 2, Entrance Sign Elevation: Product ID for Fl and P1 lights does not match what is being proposed.
Revise to correct.
• Sheet 2,The luminaire schedule lists 4 Fl lights when 8 are shown in the plan view.The schedule lists 1 P1
light when 2 are shown in plan view. Revise to correct.
Brent
Brent W. Nelson
Planner
Planning Services, Community Development
Albemarle County Office Building
401 McIntire Road, 22902
434-296-5832, ext. 3438
bnelson@albemarle.org
2
"rr .rd
Brent Nelson
From: Brent Nelson
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2016 6:14 PM
To: Scott Collins
Subject: ARB 201500097, Avinity Sign, Staff Comments
Attachments: Avinity Sign Plan - Sheet 2.pdf
Scott - I have drafted the approval letter and have it waiting - however, I just noticed that the wall detail on Sheet 2
(attached) has outdated lighting information on it. Please delete the "ground lighting note" and the "decorative light
fixture" note on the right side of the wall detail and email back to me. Once I get it, I will emailed the already drafted
approval letter and update County View with my approval.
Brent
Brent W. Nelson
Planner
Planning Services, Community Development
Albemarle County Office Building
401 McIntire Road, 22902
434-296-5832, ext. 3438
bnelson@albemarle.org
From: Brent Nelson
Sent:Wednesday, March 30, 2016 1:51 PM
To: 'Scott Collins'<scott@collins-engineering.com>
Subject: RE:ARB 201500097,Avinity Sign,Staff Comments
Scott - I received your email and will try to look at it later today.
Brent
Brent W. Nelson
Planner
Planning Services, Community Development
Albemarle County Office Building
401 McIntire Road, 22902
434-296-5832, ext. 3438
bnelson@albemarle.org
From:Scott Collins [mailto:scott@collins-engineering.com]
Sent:Tuesday, March 29, 2016 1:13 PM
To: Brent Nelson<bnelson@albemarle.org>
Subject: FW:ARB 201500097, Avinity Sign, Staff Comments
Brent-
Attached are the final revised sheets for this project. Let me know if these are acceptable, when you get a chance.
1
•
Thx.
Scott
From: Brent Nelson [mailto:bnelson@albemarle.org]
Sent:Wednesday, March 23, 2016 2:39 PM
To:Scott Collins
Subject: RE:ARB 201500097, Avinity Sign, Staff Comments
Scott-
• The Avinity Lighting Wattage Conversion pdf you provided sufficiently addresses the need for verification of the
lumens with the P1 fixture.
Outstanding issues:
• The requirement for the wall photometric plan (#2 in my previous email below) remains and has not been
addressed.
• The required revision to Notes 3 &4 referenced in my previous email still needs to be provided.
Brent
Brent W. Nelson
Planner
Planning Services, Community Development
Albemarle County Office Building
401 McIntire Road, 22902
434-296-5832, ext. 3438
bnelson@albemarle.org
From:Scott Collins [mailto:scott@collins-engineering.com]
Sent:Wednesday, March 23, 2016 1:45 PM
To: Brent Nelson<bnelson@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE:ARB 201500097, Avinity Sign, Staff Comments
Brent-
Here is the info on the LED light (total lumens). Let me know if this is acceptable. The lighting on the wall does not
exceed 20 Footcandles. The photometrics around the wall are accurate, it does not spill over.
I can update notes on sheet 3 and 4 if that is all that is left.
Thx.
Scott
From: Brent Nelson [mailto:bnelson@albemarle.org]
Sent:Wednesday, March 23, 2016 12:29 PM
To:Scott Collins
Subject: RE:ARB 201500097, Avinity Sign,Staff Comments
Scott- Why are you under that impression? I never said anything to that affect. These are two separate requirements.
1. Requiring fixtures that are not full cutoff to be under 3,000 lumens is a dark sky ordinance requirement—a
zoning ordinance requirement.
2
2. The limitation to the lumensn the surface of the wall structure is an ARB'4equirement—for not over lighting
the sign or the wall.
o Please provide a legible wall photometric plan.The footcandle values for the sign area portion of the wall
must not exceed 20 footcandles.The footcandle values on the wall area that is beyond the sign area
must not exceed 10 footcandles. Note: Sign area is defined as the wall area immediately behind and
immediately surrounding the sign text or sign graphic.
o Notes 3 &4 on Sheet 2 are not worded correctly. Revise the notes to read:
■ 3. ) Illumination shall not exceed 20 footcandles for the sign area on the wall.
■ 4.) Illumination shall not exceed 10 footcandles for any portion of the wall beyond the sign area.
I will call you this afternoon to discuss.
Brent
Brent W. Nelson
Planner
Planning Services, Community Development
Albemarle County Office Building
401 McIntire Road, 22902
434-296-5832, ext. 3438
bnelson@albemarle.org
From:Scott Collins [mailto:scott@collins-engineering.com]
Sent:Tuesday, March 22, 2016 9:59 PM
To: Brent Nelson<bnelson@albemarle.org>
Subject: RE:ARB 201500097,Avinity Sign,Staff Comments
Brent-
I am under the impression that if we are under 3,000 lumen, a footcandle diagram is not required. Please
confirm. However, we have included footcandle measurements around the sign, and it meets all the requirements. Do
you have time to discuss this tomorrow on the phone, it's time to get this approved and move on.
Scott
From: Brent Nelson [mailto:bnelson@albemarle.org]
Sent:Tuesday, March 22, 2016 6:02 PM
To:Scott Collins
Subject:ARB 201500097,Avinity Sign, Staff Comments
Scott - my current comments are below in blue following my prior comments in red and green.
1. A color illustration of the sign/sign structure(as required on the sign application/checklist)was not provided.
a. Note:the black line drawing provided is dark and illegible.Sign design and dimensions are not visible.
2. Samples of the proposed materials for the wall and sign(as required on the sign application/checklist)were not provided.
3. Proposed sign colors(as required on the sign application/checklist)were not provided on the drawing. Providing Pantone color
numbers on the drawing is preferred;however, color samples will also be accepted.
4. Issues identified at this point:
a. Regarding landscaping:
i. ARB sign guidelines recommend that ground-mounted lighting be shielded by
landscaping so that it is not visible from the right-of-way. Revise the landscape proposal to include planting to
meet this guideline.
b. Lighting proposal:
3
•
{
i Section 4.17.4(a)(2)(e)of the zoning ordinance indicates a 40 watt metal halide bulb
is deemed to emit 3,000 or more lumens. Fixtures that are not full cutoff are required to be under 3,000
lumens.The New London fixture is not full cutoff and proposed with a 50 watt metal halide bulb.The ground-
mounted fixtures are not full cutoff and the propose wattage is not indicated
1. Revise the luminaire schedule on Sheet 2 to include a column for proposed bulb wattage.The metal
halide bulbs proposed for both fixtures will need to be under the 40 watt threshold.
10-06-15 Review:The proposed wattage column in the luminaire schedule does not give the actual wattage of the
bulbs to be used in both fixtures.The proposed wattage of a metal halide bulb for both fixtures must be under 40
watts. Revise the schedule to indicate the exact wattage of the both bulbs to be used. Provide proof(e.g. cutsheet)
that metal halide bulbs in those wattages, fitting those fixtures, are available.
11-10-15 Review:The cutsheet for fixture P1(Sheet 3) indicates that 70 watts is the minimum wattage available
and yet the luminaire schedule states the bulb is to be 39 watts. Staff's request for a cutsheet of the 39 watt bulb
(or something else proving it exists)was not addressed.
03-21-16 Review:The luminaire schedule says P1 emits 2,880 lumens; however,the cutsheet showing where that
figure comes from is not included in the drawings. Note:The cutsheet verifying the lumens values for fixture Fl
was included in the drawings.
ii. The illumination(footcandles)appears to be excessive for portions of the sign
structure that are beyond the sign text. Revise the illumination in these areas so as not to exceed 10 foot
candles.
10-06-15 Review: Note 4 on Sheet 3 reads "Illumination shall not exceed 20 footcandles around the sign
structure."—Should read 10 footcandles.
The footcandle diagram of the sign structure, included in the original submission, is missing in this submission.
Provide the revised footcandle diagram of the sign structure.
11-10-15 Review:The footcandle diagram provided is too small and therefore difficult to read. Footcandle values
on the diagram for parts of the structure beyond the sign area exceed the 10 footcandle limit.
03-21-16 Review:The footcandle diagram, referenced above and included in all previous submissions,was not
included in this submission.The previous comment (directly above)still applies.
iii. Illumination(footcandles)of the sign area appears to be excessive. Reduce the
footcandles in this area.Consider a range that does not exceed 20 footcandles.
10-06-15 Review: Note 3 on Sheet 3 reads"Illumination shall not exceed 10 foot candles for the sign structure"—
Should read 20 foot candles.
The footcandle diagram of the sign structure, included in the original submission, is missing in this submission.
Provide the revised footcandle diagram of the sign structure.
11-10-15 Review:The footcandle diagram provided is too small and therefore difficult to read. Footcandle values
on the diagram for the sign area portion of the structure exceed the 20 footcandle limit.
03 21 16 Review The footcandle diagram, referenced above and included in all previous submissions,was not
included in this submission The previous comment (directly above) still applies.
Other:
• Sheet 2, Entrance Sign Elevation: Product ID for Fl and P1 lights does not match what is being proposed.
Revise to correct.
• Sheet 2,The luminaire schedule lists 4 Fl lights when 8 are shown in the plan view.The schedule lists 1
P1 light when 2 are shown in plan view. Revise to correct.
Brent
Brent W. Nelson
Planner
Planning Services, Community Development
Albemarle County Office Building
401 McIntire Road, 22902
434-296-5832, ext. 3438
bnelson @albemarle.org
4