HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP200700035 Legacy Document 2007-10-02COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE STAFF REPORT SUMMARY
Project Name:
Staff: Scott Clark
SP 2007-00034 First Church of The Nazarene (Church)
SP 2007-00035 First Church of the Nazarene (Child
Care
Planning Commission Public Hearing: October 9,
Board of Supervisors Public Hearing: November 7,
2007
2007
Owners: Albemarle Edgehill Farm LLC
Applicant: Charlottesville First Church of the
Nazarene
Acreage: 7.32 acres
Special Use Permits for: Church and child care
TMP: Tax Map 79 Parcel 10
Conditions: Yes
Location: North side of intersection of Richmond
Road (US 250) and Louisa Road (Route 22).
Existing Zoning and By -right use: RA Rural Areas:
Magisterial District: Rivanna
agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential
density (0.5 unit/acre); EC Entrance Corridor —
overlay to protect properties of historic, architectural or
cultural significance from visual impacts of
development along routes of tourist access;
Requested # of Dwelling Units: N/A
DA RA X
Proposal: Church with seating for 374 persons, and
Comprehensive Plan Designation: RA - Rural
after-school care program for 100 children on site of
Areas: preserve and protect agricultural, forestal, open
proposed church.
space, and natural, historic and scenic resources/
density (.5 unit/ acre)
Character of Property: This portion of the parcel is
Use of Surrounding Properties: The remainder of
open land, bounded by I-64 to the north and Route 22
this property, located on the opposite side of I-64, is
to the south.
part of an area of large farm estates on the east face of
the Southwest Mountains. Adjacent uses to the south
include commercial uses and a quarry.
Factors Favorable:
Factors Unfavorable:
1. Virginia Department of Transportation and
1. The proposed design, with parking
Virginia Department of Health review indicates
surrounding the building, would create a
that the church and child-care uses can be
suburban character in the Rural Areas and the
supported on the site without negative impacts
Entrance Corridor. However, the location of
to public health and safety.
the area needed for the primary septic
2. This church would be located in an area
drainfield prevents a rearrangement that
already characterized by highway -related,
would move the building forward and put
commercial, and resource -extraction uses.
parking behind the building.
2. The proposed plan shows more parking than
is typically necessary for a church of this
scale. Staff has recommended a condition
limiting the site to 150 parking spaces (as
suggested by the applicant), rather than 180
(as shown on the plan).
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of SP 2007-00034 and SP 2007-00035, subject to
conditions.
Petition:
PROJECT: SP 20007-00034 First Church of the Nazarene - Church
PROPOSED: Church with seating for 374 persons, on a 7.32 -acre portion of a 865.167 -acre parcel.
ZONING CATEGORY/GENERAL USAGE: RA -- Rural Areas: agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses;
residential density (0.5 unit/acre); EC Entrance Corridor - Overlay to protect properties of historic,
architectural or cultural significance from visual impacts of development along routes of tourist access
SECTION: 10.2.2.35 Church building and adjunct cemetery
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Rural Areas - preserve and protect agricultural,
forestal, open space, and natural, historic and scenic resources/ density (.5 unit/ acre)
ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes
LOCATION: North side of intersection of Richmond Road (US 250) and Louisa Road (Route 22), south
of Interstate 64.
TAX MAP/PARCEL: Tax Map 79 Parcel 10
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rivanna
PROJECT: SP 20007-00035 First Church of the Nazarene - Child Care
PROPOSED: After-school care program for 100 children on site of proposed church, on a 7.32 -acre
portion of a 865.167 -acre parcel.
ZONING CATEGORY/GENERAL USAGE: RA -- Rural Areas: agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses;
residential density (0.5 unit/acre); EC Entrance Corridor - Overlay to protect properties of historic,
architectural or cultural significance from visual impacts of development along routes of tourist access
SECTION: 10.2.2.7 Day care, child care or nursery facility (reference 5.1.06)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Rural Areas - preserve and protect agricultural,
forestal, open space, and natural, historic and scenic resources/ density ( .5 unit/ acre)
ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes
LOCATION: North side of intersection of Richmond Road (US 250) and Louisa Road (Route 22), south
of Interstate 64.
TAX MAP/PARCEL: Tax Map 79 Parcel 10
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rivanna
Character of the Area:
The immediate surroundings include commercial and highway -related uses, a railroad, and the Luck
Stone quarry. However, to the north (across I-64) the area is characterized by large rural estates along the
Southwest Mountains.
The subject parcel, owned by Albemarle Edgehill Farm LLC, is divided by I-64 (see Attachment B). The
portion that this SP would apply to is located south of I-64. Views between the two portions of the
property are blocked by the wooded interstate right-of-way. The portion north of I-64 is included in the
Southwest Mountains Rural Historic District, and includes Edgehill, an 1828 house (interior replaced
after a 1916 fire), which was built on the site of a house designed by Thomas Jefferson in 1798.
Specifics of the Proposal:
The proposal would include an 18,811 -square -foot building with a 90 -by -50 -foot multi-purpose assembly
room, offices, classrooms, restrooms, a kitchen, and a "cafe" area. Uses would include church services,
meetings and training sessions, and after-school child care for up to 100 children.
Planning and Zoning History:
This site was zoned Commercial prior to the comprehensive rezoning adopted on December 10, 1980
It is now zoned RA Rural Areas.
SP 93-32: This special use permit request proposed a 4,000 -square -foot gift shop; a 3,000 -square -foot
outdoor market; a 4,000 -square -foot antique shop; and a 3,000 -square -foot animal hospital and kennel
on this site. The Planning Commission recommended denial, but the item was indefinitely deferred
prior to Board of Supervisors action.
SP 2000-18: This special use permit request proposed a 65 -foot -tall telecommunications pole on an
adjacent portion of TMP 79-10 not included in the current proposal. The proposal was approved by
the Board of Supervisors on August 16, 2000.
Conformity with the Comprehensive Plan:
The Comprehensive Plan designates the proposed church site as Rural Areas, emphasizing the
preservation and protection of agricultural, forestal, open space, and natural, historic and scenic resources.
Churches are allowed in the Rural Area zoning district by Special Use Permit.
The Rural Areas chapter of the Comprehensive Plan encourages facilities that support connections
between rural residents. However, the scale of this church and its location on or near major highways
indicates that it may serve both Rural Area and Development Area residents. The child care facility could
provide a service to the Rural Areas, but could also serve Development Area residents.
The Rural Areas Plan also calls for "community meeting places, a basic level of services,
and rural organizations and other cultural institutions at traditional rural scales...." This facility would
include an 18,811 -square -foot building and approximately 150 parking spaces, which would be
significantly larger than most traditional churches in the Rural Areas. Child care is sometimes a feature of
rural churches, but not usually at this scale.
However, the County has approved several churches of comparable size in the Rural Areas:
Church File
Number
Year
Approved
Seats
Calvary Baptist Church SP 83-7
1983
300
Maple Grove Christian Church SP 84-40
1984
250
Crozet Church of God SP 89-25
1989
250
Covenant Church of God SP 90-35
1990
800*
Unity Church in Charlottesville SP 91-71
1992
300
Blue Ridge Community Church SP 98-69
1999
250
Unity Church SP 03-43
2004
250
Grace Community Church SP 04-23
2004
500
First Christian Church SP 06-20
1 2007
306
* A later application for a 300 -seat church on this same site was denied due to concerns
over possible routing of the Meadowcreek Parkway.
Also, the County is limited in its ability to control the size of churches, due to the federal Religious Land
Uses and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). Controlling the size of a religious facility, or denying it
based on number of attendees, may be considered an improper restriction on that institution's religious
freedom. However, physical impacts of the development on the site and the surroundings can be
addressed.
The character of the surrounding area is unusual, as it contains LI Light Industrial, HC Highway
Commercial, and NR Natural Resource Overlay zoning within areas designated as Rural Areas in the
Comprehensive Plan.
STAFF COMMENT:
Staff will address each provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance.
31.2.4.1: Special Use Permits provided for in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the
Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property,
The more rural properties to the north are separated from this site by I-64. Since the directly adjacent
properties to the south area already developed for commercial uses, the addition of a church and after-
school child care is unlikely to create a substantial detriment. The Virginia Department of Transportation
has stated that the proposed entrance improvements are sufficient to support the proposed uses.
that the character of the district will not be changed thereby and
Churches are a part of the character of the Rural Areas district. However, churches and other institutional
facilities built to larger scales can change the character of the Rural Areas district by creating an intensity of
use that is not typical for that area.
This property is located in the Entrance Corridor (EC) overlay zoning district. The proposal has been reviewed
by the Design Planner, who has stated that the major remaining issue with this plan is the layout of the building
and parking (see Attachment E for Design Planner comments). The large church building is surrounded by
parking, giving the site a suburban appearance that is out of character with the Rural Areas and Entrance
Corridor guidelines. Staff has recommended that the applicant move the building closer to Route 22 and place
the parking behind the building. The applicant has not made this change, and has offered two explanations: (1)
the site needed for the primary septic drainfield would be in front of the building, and moving the building
would not leave enough drainfield areas to support the use; and (2) the applicant wishes to keep parking near
the front of the building for easy access for members with limited mobility.
The details of building design and landscaping would be addressed by the Architectural Review Board during
review of a site development plan for this use. However, a conceptual elevation of the proposed building is
shown in Attachment D.
The current conceptual plan shows 180 parking spaces, which is significantly in excess of what would be
needed for the 374 -seat sanctuary. The applicants were sizing the parking lot for large or overlapping events on
the site, and for a possible expansion to a 450 -seat sanctuary in the future. The applicants have stated that they
will address this by building only 150 parking spaces, with the extra 30 spaces to be removed from the
northwest corner of the site. Removing the spaces from that area would not address the visual character of the
design, but would avoid a conflict between grading for the parking lot and the necessary undisturbed buffer
between this site and the adjoining RA property.
that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance,
Section 18, Chapter 10 of the Zoning Ordinance outlines the purpose of Rural Areas zoning:
"This district (hereafter referred to as RA) is hereby created and may hereafter be established by
amendment of the zoning map for the following purposes: (Amended 11-8-89)
-Preservation of agricultural and forestal lands and activities;
-Water supply protection;
-Limited service delivery to the rural areas; and
-Conservation of natural, scenic, and historic resources. (Amended 11-8-89) "
With the exception of water -supply protection (which is not applicable in this location), this proposal
does not meet these purposes of the Rural Areas zoning district. However, the site is isolated from other
more rural land by I-64 and is adjacent to commercial uses.
4
with uses permitted by right in the district,
The property is zoned RA, Rural Areas. The uses permitted by right under RA Zoning directly support
agriculture, forestry, and the conservation of rural land. Part of the County's vision for the RA districts
includes the support of agricultural and forestal communities through community meeting places, at rural
scales, that provide the opportunity to take part in community life. Although the proposed church is larger
than the typical church in the Rural Areas, it is comparable to several Rural Area churches approved in
the County that accommodate 250 to 300 attendees.
Child care applications are typically for smaller scales. However, the County approved SP 2006-22
Northridge Preschool, which requested a daycare facility with a daily maximum of 50 children and a total
enrollment of 100.
with the additional regulations provided in section 5.0 of this ordinance,
There are no regulations in Section 5.0 of the Ordinance that apply to church buildings.
The following section applies to the proposed child-care use:
5.1.06 DAY CARE CENTER, TAMIL Y DA Y HOME
Each day care center or family day home shall be subject to the following: (Added 10-3-01)
a. No such use shall operate without the required licensure by the Virginia Department of Social
Services. It shall be the responsibility of the owner/operator to transmit to the zoning
administrator a copy of the original license. Failure to do so shall be deemed willful
noncompliance with the provisions of this chapter; (Amended 10-3-01)
b. Periodic inspection of the premises shall be made by the Albemarle County fire official at his
discretion. Failure to promptly admit the fire official for such inspection shall be deemed
willful noncompliance with the provisions of this chapter; (Amended 10-3-01)
c. These provisions are supplementary and nothing stated herein shall be deemed to preclude
application of the requirements of the Virginia Department of Social Services, Virginia
Department of Health, Virginia State Fire Marshal, or any other local, state orfederal agency.
(Amended 10-3-01)
These regulations are performance standards that would be applied after the applicants began the use on
the site.
The proposed child-care operation would occur in the same building as the church, and would host up to
100 children from 1 to 6 p.m. on weekdays.
and with the public health, safety and general welfare.
The Virginia Department of Transportation has reviewed the conceptual plan for these uses, and has
stated that the proposed improvements are sufficient for the church and child care. The applicant has
shown a 310 -foot right -turn lane in accord with VDOT's request. In addition, VDOT staff has
confirmed that the site design does not conflict with the planned reconstruction of the adjacent
intersection of US 250 and Route 22.
The Virginia Department of Health (VDH) has indicated that the site has sufficient septic capacity to
support the proposed use. Although a specific design has not been reviewed or approved, VDH staff
has stated that there are multiple options for systems that would support the church and child-care
uses. Community Development staff has verified with VDH that the proposed location of the primary
drainfield under the parking lot in front of the church would be permitted by VDH.
SUMMARY:
Staff has identified the following factors favorable to these applications:
1. Virginia Department of Transportation and Virginia Department of Health review indicates that
the church and child-care uses can be supported on the site without negative impacts to public
health and safety.
2. This church would be located in an area already characterized by highway -related, commercial,
and resource -extraction uses.
Staff has identified the following factors unfavorable to these applications:
1. The proposed design, with parking surrounding the building, would create a suburban character
in the Rural Areas and the Entrance Corridor. However, the location of the area needed for the
primary septic drainfield prevents a rearrangement that would move the building forward and put
parking behind the building.
2. The proposed plan shows more parking than is typically necessary for a church of this scale. Staff
has recommended a condition limiting the site to 150 parking spaces (as suggested by the
applicant), rather than 180 (as shown on the plan).
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Based on the findings contained in this staff report, staff recommends approval of Special Use Permit
2007-00034 First Church of the Nazarene (Church) under the following conditions:
1. The church's improvements and the scale and location of the improvements shall be developed in
general accord with the conceptual plan entitled "Conceptual Master Plan, Charlottesville First
Church of the Nazarene", prepared by TCS Engineering Co., LLC, and dated "15AUG07.",
provided that:
a. Entrance improvements shall be approved by VDOT prior to final site plan
approval, and shall include a right -turn lane at the entrance.
b. All parking setbacks and undisturbed buffers required by Zoning Ordinance section
21.7, Minimum Yard Requirements, shall apply; and
c. The number of parking spaces shall not exceed 150 without amendment of this
special use permit.
2. The area of assembly shall be limited to a maximum 374 -seat sanctuary.
3. Facilities on the site shall be used for church activities and shall not be rented or used for
separate commercial uses available to the public.
4. All outdoor lighting shall be arranged or shielded to reflect light away from the abutting
properties.
5. Virginia Department of Health approval of well and septic systems.
Based on the findings contained in this staff report, staff recommends approval of Special Use Permit
2007-00035 First Church of the Nazarene (Child Care) under the following conditions:
1. The maximum number of children shall not exceed one hundred (100) or the number of students
as approved by the Health Department or the Department of Social Services, whichever is less.
2. Entrance improvements shall be approved by VDOT prior to final site plan approval; and
3. Virginia Department of Health approval of well and septic systems.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A
— Area Map
Attachment B
— Detail Map
Attachment C
— First Church of the Nazarene conceptual plan
Attachment D
— Conceptual Building Elevation
Attachment E —
Design Planner Comments
0•
SP�-2007=00035 ; `
C
:6`- of.the'Nazaren
�j-
OR
F�I
.I.s3til:7olla m
79-10
,],, >-� VA-
Attachment A
1
04
� F n ;esr
M '
•
Y�
r '
=_-a,�.. _ :fit►. �.��
Attachment B
SIP 2007-00035
'First Church of the Nazarene
m � �
12
N
!P 1
� 1
j
79-10'��
rt7i-
GEH
25 ;-71
y I
'Church Site
.N
�10' Contour �Streams�
Roads Water Body
Driveways Parcels
Feet
0 30 t Buildings Parcel of Interest
W_rIno
0
o
v;,� --°�
,a
email walaT.�
PAJ69t IYaxanlr Gllllerh lMOvall
rpul fir' e • 6 a b
Oaa�5lmms rr NMW'N IfE.@ 1551 1fi1.80 1B.]] xu 12 2p El
PoaR1P 41 ma yEnMtlYa V•Lal Miv.t ,m.]x 15.99 ,1x rs ,8.83 xL5_$x xt.W
ZZ Aivlpealr ., lT'.Ax orb vmYwl AWuau 6a.2, ,O.a ,35;. 1..d x,0.@ ,B,g
Verlm ygtr'C• 1.A 7.1 CYNw08e5>w rw6Peper 111.80 1825 t®Td ,8,51 255,1a 1,.t1
IbNRr[[tt'C• O.tl (Ppq} C+rcNaM baA+P 112F9 15.09 1]495 18.]2 1b5_x0 22,11
h UaaF IxT m CakWyeR bTAM meNaC N19bm WrT 15.11 151.1 I" d27a g
iC fp9aY 51.1 m Ugapp➢rFM mMbb 10:a.a6 r.5x 1®x9 10.e6 xA1d IDd9
' 11%.xa n iEmYr lfy Y/uel lx« rYr}) __
v mulre ,e,9e TC_ _ Vahml f Feral
UI°uyy/ qa: F_
411"
5.11 11aryrrPr°I
s'w'rTMi 605 Ob LyafxEanrxr9u9rrYm PR6 CEV
w.lehl.a-e^r�l�l.lan CW_ o.ao
icMi0w 2;.>o m w+rx, cpm.°ro9+..'a fa..,ws�.n.va°�a Imn s soe 1.s
I.el•xMr�m a �nm rar:.r� sun ana
a.�mT O,PPP- ,91 � LPmry wx.lYTBv&rvmN (sV G 1
G� 5 GM P
urmm:, llydr. e,x � A�,.�9r.. mAarFA. Pnaq A P
awl �ti� wm ox .s
0
0
1X4rine bLa•a V°hprp d•151 ru.R
aF. rraw.. rrAO.14�:rymr.vsWfaw.. qr,,. F.AfaPa�rymlrnT9 IanVIXPrI 989 A. 5 %1 11
w.r,,,rPy oar.aPP lcr• vxraP ermw POST 06Y
w.pnrq +�^u1xWa19n a.• 6.aP r
KfN 5,lna 2rA �d 6
�I+etl PmtLYph O3 6YE-,* Vl6p i Bub ana
ke.
APPm<Pvp Amas Aa10 se! gl.Va 75x� 0.9I Q1e158
pool.,. eT r. 1] a. 1.9tr.1 Paa09 ,- 1 a� .66261
OOar� x81!8 P81aY!
P_ c-� paplh- 1 ! .xdeh.o� O.15 0
ma G1.e.m Awl- ]9 „ n e 2
�"�'1w•' I STS e. Sb0a1%1 fi
w.. Lrrn�9a e°. P�,1 Pmmr. wn 16y��. w..e urwro x.or ra•x6a
Ew Yryr6a 9aimr-r11ry1Aay 1rmmY Fy mv1 w1m 4 rdal.w
.8,
Ylrynr wpt lyala, lYOq!
wrm.°n°rml a.lmrle axile
V CCNTOUR WERV&
lam_
l �
J Jf�
Note.'
Grading in the area of the new
en&mmv shall be coordinated
/ W/th proposed VDOT
improvements to RG P1.
. i.a xerwna6.xvi Plm.� .
o.r: ,sA,ym P'a^xT Qxa,e agar, Ao..Pw rw�.
R&Ta AM FamWa' LWITh 2W. OOelFhrl n
669 rPG
1.. fhe. 65 miNai. 39ww: C-, Enpm "
raF-Fl,l1L,,O- -11,
Mx FI•N wqq- 100 e. Bomv: (IPPGn �1aA.09
T=w• mnrm° 9 1.
IIV°rbr rl TmreMa6P°w�� ,3
flgVlM Arw
AreuabN 91xYn- Ip 3 ars m R Tory b xRV, 9 F.T
11691619➢ 59xtsn• 1I - 1 6-11 e,
P9. LW A.. -I,-
100 6. wltla Sr 100 9. W
N---. Church
Shadweh
D_jQG Sewage Flaws
.o°'. IFi[ Lnn fbx Supry IASOOar T PaY rvao°uery rhPmery Fmiq 6allr9ay 1dW�
Perch re..c. a� awanrt 5 1850 ovo
QerrrF 0 1 ',l,q 150 31p aee GPDf)�FaatB� almr�6° IS 50 150 150 50 TW GPO
� �. IW 3 900 900 GPO
BPdx 5i. Pwnl {5051 a Sun Level °r L5. 6]5 Arn 1i6 GPp
TdWa ta00 em sOP 600 5W 500 QTS 66x6 GPO
a°m Tlm.�
Concept
Dra ming
15AUGD7
tVLAa
V u oW Pjb � �i
e� U
4
�1 �
Fes.
a
U C
Fes -+-1 IV .e i
u a G
9
0 0 u
c.
U
9fLi x¢ 1 06_]_
a- xx. L7
Attachment C
SOF A� Attachment E
LrRG1I3tA
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
MEMORANDUM
TO: Scott Clark
FROM: Margaret Maliszewski
RE: SP -2007-34 and SP -2007-35: First Church of the Nazarene
DATE: August 2, 2007
I have reviewed the SP Concept Plan with revision date of August 15, 2007, the site section illustration
dated August 24, 2007 and the revised color site plan dated August 24, 2007 for the above -noted project. I
have the following comments. Remaining recommendations are identified in bold.
Issue: Parking surrounding the church, future parking
Comments: The applicant has indicated that drainfield location is driving the location of the church, and
that the parking surface will not be visible from Route 22, and that 75% of the parking is behind the face
of the building. Relegating a significant portion of the parking is positive. However, a layout that
surrounds the church with paving and parking, combined with the large size and scale of the proposed
church, establishes a character that is urban or suburban. Emphasizing the building and further de-
emphasizing parking areas and travelways would better support the remaining rural character of the area
and the intent of the ARB Guidelines.
Recommendation: Consolidate the parking rather than surround the building with it. Use the
building to buffer the parking from Route 22.
Issue: Retaining walls
Comments: The retaining wall issue has been resolved.
Issue: Impact of lighting on the Entrance Corridors
Issue: Buffer from I64
Comments: The development relies on off-site wooded area to meet ARB requirements as viewed from the
north. Trees are still recommended along the north side of the site, but this can be handled during ARB
review of the site plan. See recommendation, below.
Issue: EC landscape treatment
Issue: Parking lot landscaping
Comments: Landscaping has been revised so that the plan more closely meets the ARB Guidelines.
However, all guidelines are still not met and, as noted previously, the ARB may require a different
treatment along the Route 22 EC. The landscaping will be reviewed by the ARB in detail at the site plan
review stage.
Recommendation: Add the following note to the plan: The landscaping shown on this plan does not
meet ARB Guidelines and will be redesigned at preliminary and final site plan review to meet the
11
Guidelines, as required by the ARB.
Issue: Detention pond
Comments: The detention pond has been moved from the east end of the site to the west end. The ARB
will require that the pond be fully integrated into the landscape. This issue can be reviewed at the site plan
review stage.
Issue: Architectural design
Comments: No further comments at this time.
12