HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP200700027 Review Comments 2008-02-19 Page 1 of 2
Wayne Cilimberg
r9,
From: Joan McDowell
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 9:25 AM
To: Marcia Joseph
Cc: Planning Commission; Greg Kamptner; Wayne Cilimberg
Subject: RE: SP 2007-27 Emmanuel Episcopal Church
Good morning Marcia
1. Page 4 refers to a condition 15: Sorry, I missed that one when the condition was removed. Since this is new
building will not be visible from the Entrance Corridor, we decided that this condition should be removed. The
improvements in front of the church (visible from Rt. 250)will be subject to ARB approval.
2. Page 5 (entrance requirements): they will determine what is needed during the site plan process, so I was
asked to remove the condition
3. Page 6 (warrant analysis): they have not done the analysis; it will be done during the site plan process
4. Page 8 (5 year extension): this condition will allow them three additional years to vest this application (five
years total); zoning ordinance section 31.2.4.4
REVOCATION gives them 24 months to commence construction. The previous special use permit was vested.
"Any special use permit issued pursuant to this chapter may be revoked by the board of supervisors,
after notice and hearing pursuant to Virginia Code§ 15.2-2204, for willful noncompliance with
this chapter or any conditions imposed under the authority of section 31.2.4.3. If the use, structure
or activity for which a special use permit is issued is not commenced within twenty-four(24)
months after the permit is issued, the permit shall be deemed abandoned and the authority granted
thereunder shall thereupon terminate. For purposes of this section, if the use authorized by the
permit requires the construction of one or more structures, the term"commenced" means starting
the lawful physical construction of any structure necessary to the use authorized by the permit
within twenty-four(24) months after the permit is issued. The board of supervisors may, as a
condition of approval, impose an alternative period in which to commence the use, structure or
activity as may be reasonable in a particular case. A determination that a permittee has
commenced a use, structure or activity under this section is not a determination that the permittee
has acquired a vested right under Virginia Code § 15.2-2307 (Amended 10-3-01)"
5. Page 8/condition 10: (lighting condition): this condition is the result of a long deliberation by the Board
They asked that this condition be required for larger RA projects. Sally Thomas was concerned about reducing
2/19/2008
Page 2 of 2
spill over to adjacent properties, as well as cut off. Compliance with the ordinance will be part of the site plan
review.
Please let me know if you have any additional questions.
Joan
From: Marcia Joseph [mailto:marcia481@earthlink.net]
Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2008 4:14 PM
To: Joan McDowell
Cc: Planning Commission; Greg Kamptner
Subject: SP 2007-27 Emmanuel Episcopal Church
Joan,
Page 4 refers to a condition 15,the conditions shown on page 7 go up to 10. I'm not sure where
condition 15 is.
page 5 states that VDOT commented they will require a 35' radius, however condition 2 on page 7 has
been removed. Is there a reason condition 2 was removed?
Page 6 sites a warrant analysis to guide road improvements, has VDOT determined what the vehicle
count is per day and on Sunday in this location?
Page 8 condition 7 indicates that if construction does not commence by March 9, 2013 then the special
permit is abandoned, will this then revert back to SP 1999-48?
Page 8 condition 10 states that a lighting plan "reasonably limiting the amount of adverse outdoor light
pollution shall be submitted..." Why can't this applicant comply with full cut off requirements of the
ordinance?
Thanks,
Marcia
Marcia Joseph,ASLA,AICP
At Large Representative
Albemarle County Planning Commission
Joseph Associates LLC
481 Clarks Tract
Keswick,Virginia 22947
Phone 434-984-4199
Fax 434-984-3098
2/19/2008