The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSDP201300064 Correspondence 2017-12-13Cameron Langille From: Cameron Langille Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2017 4:28 PM To: 'Geoff Kilmer' Subject: RE: COOS parking lot lighting Attachments: SDP201300064 LOR 1 Church of Our Savior Approval 12-13-2017.pdf Hi Geoff, The LOR has been approved. Please see the attached approval letter and the signed drawings. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Cameron From: Geoff Kilmer [mailto:geoff@photoworksgroup.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 12:40 PM To: Cameron Langille <blangille@albemarle.org> Subject: Re: COOS parking lot lighting Hi Cameron - I adjusted the scale on the drawing to more precisely fit to 1" to 40'. Attached is a two page PDF sized at 11 x 17 with the site plan drawing at 1" to 40'. This should print fine on your 11 x 17 printer at 100%. Sorry but of all the printers I do have here, I don't have an 11 x 17 format. Please let me know if you have problems with the file. Thanks, Geoff i Cameron Langille From: Geoff Kilmer <geoff@photoworksgroup.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 12:40 PM To: Cameron Langille Subject: Re: COOS parking lot lighting Attachments: COOS_12_12_17_0_final.pdf, Untitled attachment 00009.html; LogoEmailSignaurejpg; Untitled attachment 00012.html Hi Cameron - I adjusted the scale on the drawing to more precisely fit to 1" to 40'. Attached is a two page PDF sized at 11 x 17 with the site plan drawing at 1" to 40'. This should print fine on your 11 x 17 printer at 100%. Sorry but of all the printers I do have here, I don't have an 11 x 17 format. Please let me know if you have problems with the file. Thanks, Geoff Cameron Langille From: Cameron Langille Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 5:42 PM To: 'Geoff Kilmer' Subject: RE: COOS parking lot lighting Hi Geoff, I've printed the revised drawing out on 11 x17 and it almost matches 1" = 40' but it falls a little short. I think it may just be a scaling issue with my specific printer. Would you mind dropping off four hard copies of Sheets 1 and 2 so I can sign them and approve the LOR? Let me know if that will be an issue. Thanks, Cameron From: Geoff Kilmer [mailto:geoff@photoworksgroup.com] Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 4:49 PM To: Cameron Langille <blangille@albemarle.org> Subject: Re: COOS parking lot lighting Hi Cameron - I believe the plans were originally created to be output on a 30 x 40 sheet for the F to 20' scale. I have resized it to fit within a 11x17 @ 50% of original size, and the scale is doubled to F = 40'. You can confirm that by measuring the legend after you output. Thanks for your help. Best Regards, Geoff Cameron Langille From: Geoff Kilmer <geoff@photoworksgroup.com> Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2017 4:53 PM To: Cameron Langille Subject: Re: COOS parking lot lighting Hi Cameron- That;s great news! I'll address the size issue on the plans and send a corrected PDF or hard copies. Best Regards, Geoff Geoffrey Kilmer President 700 Rio Road West Charlottesville, VA 22901 434.973.4562 ext 102 go PhotoWorks roue On Dec 7, 2017, at 4:28 PM, Cameron Langille <blan ig lle a,albemarle.org> wrote: Hi Geoff, Everything has been addressed and we are ready to approve the LOR. When I printed the plans out on 11 x 17" paper, they didn't scale our correctly. What size paper are the drawings scaled to? Is there anyway you could re -size the digital copy so that it scales out to 1"=20' on 11 x 17" paper? I can then print and sign the plans and sent you the official approval letter. Thanks, Cameron From: Geoff Kilmer[mailto:geoff@photoworksgroup.com] Sent: Friday, December 01, 2017 1:58 PM To: Cameron Langille <blangille@albemarle.org> Subject: COOS parking lot lighting Hello Cameron - I believe I've addressed all of the comments concerning the proposed COOS lighting. Please see the two page PDF document attached. We are using the same 12" LED shoebox fixture in all 5 locations. Please see page 2 for the spec sheet. The spec sheet also confirms the LLF is 1.0. The attached lighting plan shows the northern -most light across the zoning line on the R2 property. Thanks for your help Best Regards, Geoff Geoffrey Kilmer President 700 Rio Road West Charlottesville, VA 22901 434.973.4562 ext 102 Cameron Langille From: Geoff Kilmer <geoff@photoworksgroup.com> Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 6:00 PM To: Cameron Langille Cc: Bruce Dotson; Amelia McCulley, David Benish; Margaret Maliszewski Subject: Re: Church of Our Savior Lighting Meeting Hello Cameron - This is great news! Thanks for digging into it and taking another look. I believe I have the other items in order and will send to you early next week. I don't believe we need to keep the scheduled meeting in light of this. (no pun intended) I'm sure Bruce will check in when he sees this email and confirm whether we need to keep the meeting. Best Regards, Geoff Geoffrey Kilmer President 700 Rio Road West Charlottesville, VA 22901 434.973.4562 ext 102 � PhotoWorks roue On Oct 27, 2017, at 5:15 PM, Cameron Langille <blan ig�llekalbemarle.org> wrote: Good Evening Bruce & Geoff, I have some good news regarding the question about the footcandle measurement for the fifth luminaire that is proposed in the R2 zoned portion of the property. Under Section 4.17.4 (b)(1), the footcandle measurement for spillover into residential zoning districts "shall be measured horizontally and vertically at the property line or edge of right-of-way or easement, whichever is closer to the light source." As such, my comment #6 from the last comment letter dated 8/16/17 is incorrect and does not apply. The drawings that Geoff prepared, dated 7/17/2017, clearly show that the footcandle measurement does not exceed 0.5 footcandles at the property boundary. Therefore, the fifth luminaire can remain within the R2 zoned portion of the property and you can disregard comment #6 entirely. No exception request is needed to proceed further with that light location. The other comments from me (comments #2, #4, and #5) still apply, in addition to Margaret's two comments. I have attached a revised comment letter for the LOR with today's date for reference. Please let me know if you would still like to have our meeting on Monday. If not, Geoff can resubmit the revised LOR once the remaining comments have been addressed. Have a great weekend! Cameron From: Cameron Langille Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2017 6:08 PM To: 'A. Bruce Dotson' <abrucedotson@gmail.com> Subject: RE: Church of Our Savior Lighting Meeting Thanks Bruce, we'll see you on Monday. Just come in to the CDD office and let the front desk know that you're here for a meeting with Cameron. I am going to be in another meeting from 2-3 PM, but I will leave early if it looks like it is going to go longer. From: A. Bruce Dotson [mailto:abrucedotson@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2017 5:04 PM To: Cameron Langille <blangille@albemarle.org> Subject: Fwd: Church of Our Savior Lighting Meeting Looks like we are on for Monday at 3. Thanks Bruce PS I have also sent a second email to Amelia as follows: Hi Amelia, No problem with the timing of your response. You were away and things pile up. I have given up on trusting my memory, especially in recent years, and also rely on "notes to self' frequently. Thanks for your comment about the Commission, I very much enjoy it! Tonight I have my Places29 Rio CAC meeting as the PC liaison. Another early dinner. I believe the church actually owes Cameron some specification documents that he requested, so any delay is on us. I don't think I made myself clear in my general phone message, so maybe we do need to meet to get a proper understanding of the ordinance requirements and of our intentions and situation. However, let me try to be clearer about at least one question. Our church use does require a site plan and therefore the Outdoor Lighting regs do apply under 4.17.2 just as you indicate. Under the Standards, 4.17.4.a, all five of our proposed luminaires need to comply as far as I can tell. Under 4.17.4.b, four of our five proposed luminaires would be located on the commercially zoned portion of our parcel and would need to avoid spillover (beyond one half foot candle) onto the rest of our parcel which is zoned residentially. It is the fifth luminaire where I have a zoning question. Another portion of our parcel is zoned residential and contains what was built as a single family detached structure but which we use for a variety of church accessory functions (Associate Rector office, meeting space, storage, bell choir practice etc). This property also contains a portable storage shed. We would like to place a fifth luminaire on this residentially zoned land such that it would illuminate the area around the storage shed as well as a far corner of the overflow parking area. So the luminaire would actually be located on our residentially zoned property. Does the exception in 4.17.4.b "except those containing on or more single-family detached dwellings" apply to our situation? I suspect the answer may be that our current use, rather than the structure type, is not single family detached, or maybe it does apply? But my major thought/question is that 4.17.4.b.1 does not apply to the one luminaire that we propose to locate on the residential portion of our property. Spillover onto commercially zoned land from residentially zoned land is not considered problematic by the ordinance as far as I can tell. It is your reading however that carries the day. Do you agree with my reading? Yes, this gets complicated. Perhaps we do need to set up a meeting unless you feel that my last point is valid. Ours is a very unusual situation. Thanks Bruce ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Geoff Kilmer <geoffhotoworksgroup.com> Date: Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 4:51 PM Subject: Re: Church of Our Savior Lighting Meeting To: "A. Bruce Dotson" <abrucedotson( gmail.com> Yes— It's on my calendar. Thanks! Geoffrey Kilmer President 700 Rio Road West Charlottesville, VA 22901 434.973.4562 ext 102 <image001. jpg> On Oct 26, 2017, at 4:22 PM, A. Bruce Dotson <abrucedotsonkgmail.com> wrote: Geoff, Could you do Monday at 3? Bruce ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Cameron Langille <blan ig•llegalbemarle.org> Date: Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 4:11 PM Subject: Church of Our Savior Lighting Meeting To: Bruce Dotson <abrucedotsonkgmail.com> Good Afternoon Mr. Dotson, Amelia McCulley forwarded your email regarding setting up a meeting next week to discuss some lighting options at the Church of Our Savior. Would you be available to come in for a meeting from 3:00-4:00 PM next Monday, October 30? If that time doesn't work for you, we can arrange another time next week. Thanks, Cameron Cameron Langille Senior Planner Albemarle County 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Ph: 434-296-5832 ext. 3432 blangille(d)-albemarle.org A. Bruce Dotson email: dotsonkvirginia.edu, abrucedotsonkgmail.com phone: 434-973-4176 cell: 434-242-1099 A. Bruce Dotson email: dotsonkvirginia.edu, abrucedotsonkgmail.com phone: 434-973-4176 cell: 434-242-1099 <SDP201300064 Church of Our Savior Letter of Revision 1 Second Review Comments REVISED 10-27- 2017.pdf> Cameron Langille From: Geoff Kilmer <geoff@photoworksgroup.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2017 5:32 PM To: Cameron Langille Subject: Re: COOS letter of revision HI Cameron - Thank you for getting these comments back to me. I'll address them very shortly. Best Regards, Geoff Geoffrey Kilmer President 700 Rio Road West Charlottesville, VA 22901 434.973.4562 ext 102 go PhotoWorks roue On Aug 16, 2017, at 4:55 PM, Cameron Langille <blan ig'lle cr,albemarle.org> wrote: Hi Geoff, Attached is the second review comment letter with my comments and those from Margaret. You'll notice that we both have a comment referencing the LLF needing to be 1.0 for each light. In the revised drawings you first sent me on 8-4-2017, the LLF was still shown as 0.950. The later email you sent from the sales rep had a different set of drawings that only proposed one luminaire type, and that one showed the LLF as 1.0. Moving forward, just be sure to send us drawings that show the 1.0 LLF as was shown on the second set of revised plans. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Cameron From: Geoff Kilmer[mailto:geoff@photoworksgroup.com] Sent: Friday, August 04, 2017 6:27 PM To: Cameron Langille <blangille@albemarle.org> Subject: Re: COOS letter of revision Hello Cameron - Thank you for the quick reply. I'll address each of your comments by number- 1. This letter of revision is not meant to replace any of the previously approved 38 luminaries on site. While the installed lighting does an adequate job of lighting the covered walkway and building entrances as they we designed to, they do not provide illumination to the overflow gravel parking lot. 2. I've attached cut sheets for the lights that I had previously sent to Stuart Wright. I reviewed all details with him before he submitted the project to you, including the type of fixtures that conform with dark skies, the output levels on and off site, etc, etc. Based on his input, I went ahead and ordered the fixtures. The proposed height is 20' based on an 18' pole sitting on a 2' concrete pier. 3. Not sure that I understand your comment. All 5 fixtures are identical. I have a clean PDF attached of the site plan with vector information so it's scalable. If you prefer, I can have full size plans run at T&N and delivered to your office. 4. We are using the 120w 12" shoe box Hercules fixtures. The fixtures are LED and are full cutoff. The LEDa are recessed behind a glass lens to accomplish this. I believe the attached cut sheets will support this information. 5. Will do. 6. I see the fixture is placed just over the zoning line. We can place it across the line so it's on the commercial side. I assume you are aware it's just one lot, so if any light spills over the line, it is still on the same lot. If necessary, LPP does offer light baffles to further cut off the light. I am forwarding an email from my LPP sales rep who confirmed the fixtures are a full cutoff when mounted at 0 degrees, and that they have a baffle available to cut of unwanted spillage. Please let me know if you need further information. Best Regards, Geoff Geoffrey Kilmer President 700 Rio Road West Charlottesville, VA 22901 434.973.4562 ext 102 <image001. jpg> On Au g 3,20 17, at 5:27 PM, Cameron Langille <blan_ig'lle a,albemarle.org> wrote: <SDP201300064 Church of Our Savior Letter of Revision 1 Comments.pdf> <SDP201300064 Church of Our Savior Letter of Revision 1 Second Review Comments.pdf> Cameron Langille From: Cameron Langille Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2017 5:27 PM To: 'Geoff Kilmer' Subject: RE: COOS letter of revision Attachments: SDP201300064 Church of Our Savior Letter of Revision 1 Comments.pdf Hi Geoff, I was just finishing up my review of the letter of revision this afternoon. Attached is a PDF of the first review comments. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Cameron From: Geoff Kilmer [mailto:geoff@photoworksgroup.com] Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2017 3:57 PM To: Cameron Langille <blangille@albemarle.org> Subject: COOS letter of revision Hello Cameron - I met with Buck Smith this morning to apply for the building permits to install parking lot lighting at Church of Our Saviour, 1165 E Rio Road. I understand you are the planner with the task of reviewing the site plan revision. I understand the permits can't be issued until your affirmation of the site plan. As church school begins the first part of September, I'm attempting to have this project completed in August. Anything you could do to push along the review would be greatly appreciated. I would guess this project is very minor in scope compared to many site plans you must review. I've attached the paperwork I have that's relevant to this request. Thank you for your consideration Best Regards, Geoff Geoffrey Kilmer President 700 Rio Road West Charlottesville, VA 22901 434.973.4562 ext 102 Ph toWorksGroup