Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP200800029 Review Comments Special Use Permit 2008-12-12COUNTY 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: Brent Nelson RE: Design Planning comments on: SP 2008-29: South Plains Presbyterian Church, Construction of the Fellowship Hall, Sanctuary, and Parking Lot DATE: December 10, 2008 I have reviewed the Special Use Permit application for the above referenced proposal (Sheets A0, SP1 and SP2 all with the latest revision date of 11/14/08), and I have the following comments in italics after the original comment from the July 29, 2008 staff memorandum: This resubmission did not contain any reference to stormwater management. Entrance Corridor Guidelines encourage the design of surface runoff structures in such a manner as to fit the natural topo avoiding the need for screening. The stormwater management system will be reviewed at the site plan review stage. All aspects of the design that would be visible from the Route 22 Entrance Corridor shall meet EC guidelines and are subject to ARB review. Issue: Grading/Construction/Loss of Significant Trees Comments: The pastoral setting of the historic church and manse is a primary feature of the site's scenic quality. The setting of the church contributes significantly to the character of the rural corridor. The Architectural Review Board is charged with approving only site and building proposals that reflect designs which are compatible with historically significant architecture of Albemarle County. The location of the proposed sanctuary (Phase 2), as shown on the Conceptual Site Plan, appears to require the removal of a number of large trees. The exact number could not be determined due to the quality of the drawing. These trees are located in an area 50' to 120' southeast of the Entrance Corridor. They contribute significantly to the vernacular landscape of Route 22, so their loss could significantly impact the Corridor. Existing trees are not clearly drawn and labeled for size, type, and location of the canopy drip line; therefore, the full impact of this proposal on those trees cannot be assessed. Given the large size of these trees, it would appear that proposed grading will likely occur within the drip line of nearby trees situated just outside of the building footprint. It appears that shifting the location of the sanctuary and fellowship hall southeastward could avoid the removal of a number of these existing trees. It has been ARB policy not to approve work within the drip line of trees designated to remain. It has been shown that trees are ultimately lost when development occurs within close proximity, particularly when the trees are in the late stage of their life as so many of these are. Staff cannot support a proposal that would remove significant trees when alternate building locations are available, and it is anticipated that the ARB will not approve a plan that includes grading within the drip line. Recommendations: Revise the Conceptual Site Plan by moving the location of the proposed sanctuary and fellowship hall to avoid the removal or demise of large existing trees that would be impacted by their current location. Revise the Conceptual Site Plan to clearly show the location, size, type, and existing canopy drip line of all existing trees in the area to be developed. Issue.- The ssue.The applicant's memo accompanying this latest resubmission indicates that the trees designated for removal have been identified on the drawing with a dotted line representing the canopy. A note, explaining the designation for the dotted canopy line, was not included on the drawings. The dotted circles are difficult to discern on the drawings due to their faint appearance amongst a significant amount of information. The drawings would benefit from the use of a "TBR" (to be removed) label, with a bold type, adjacent to the identification of each tree that is designated for removal. The location of each individual tree trunk is not clearly shown and appears to be a drafting error. The footprint of the proposed sanctuary encroaches on the canopy and root system of the 33" Red Oak located 20' northeast of the proposed structure. This is one of the most significant trees on the property due to its size and location in relation to the Route 22 Entrance Corridor. The grading and digging outside of the footprint, required for construction of the sanctuary, will further encroach upon its canopy/root system. It has been ARB policy not to approve work within the drip line of trees designated to remain. It has been shown that trees are ultimately lost when development occurs within close proximity, particularly when the trees are in the late stage of their life. Staff cannot support a proposal that would remove significant trees when alternate building locations are available, and it is anticipated that the ARB will not approve a plan that includes grading within the drip line of this tree. Recommendations: Revise the Conceptual Site Plan to include a note explaining the designation for the dotted tree canopy line and a "TBR" (to be removed) label, in bold type, adjacent to each of the trees designated for removal. Revise the drawing to clearly show the location of each existing tree trunk. Revise the Conceptual Site Plan by shifting the location of the proposed sanctuary/fellowship hall footprints southeastward to avoid conflicts with the canopy and root system of the 33" Red Oak located 20' northeast of the proposed sanctuary. Issue: Proposed Building/Design/Compatability/Rector's House Comments: The proposed building design, as reflected in the perspective rendering on Sheet A0, represents a style of architecture that is compatible with that of the existing church. The proposed fellowship hall and sanctuary are significantly larger structures than the existing church and sited forward (northwest) of the existing church. This deemphasizes the architecture of the historic structure, a major element in this vernacular landscape. Shifting the location of the proposed sanctuary and fellowship hall southeastward, so the distance from the Entrance Corridor to the front (northwest, EC) elevation of the existing church and the northwest (EC) elevation of the proposed sanctuary is more equal, would give the architecture of the existing church more hierarchy, as viewed from the Corridor. This would further help to mitigate the imbalance in scale between the existing and proposed structures. The architectural design of the church will be reviewed, in detail, at the site plan review stage. All aspects of the design that would be visible from the Route 22 Entrance Corridor are subject to ARB review. Recommendations: Revise the Conceptual Site Plan by shifting the location of the proposed sanctuary and fellowship hall to give the architecture of the existing church more hierarchy, as viewed from the Corridor. The architectural design of the church will be reviewed at the site plan review stage. All aspects of the design that would be visible from the Route 22 Entrance Corridor shall meet EC guidelines and are subject to ARB review. Issue: In this latest submission, the sanctuary footprint, previously 95x48' (4,560 sf) has been reduced in size to 50'x65' (3,250 sf). The location of the northwest (EC) elevation of the sanctuary has been shifted southeastward, away from the Corridor, to align with the adjacent northwest (EC) elevation of the fellowship hall. Whereas the reduction in size and relocation of the sanctuary footprint represent positive steps in giving the existing church more visual hierarchy, the location and size of the fellowship hall continues to deemphasize the architecture of the existing historic church. Shifting the location of the proposed sanctuary and fellowship hall further southeastward, so the distance from the Entrance Corridor to the front (northwest) elevation of the existing church and the northwest (EC) elevation of the proposed sanctuary and fellowship hall is more equal, would give the architecture of the existing church more hierarchy, as viewed from the Corridor. This would further help to mitigate the imbalance in scale between the existing and proposed structures. The existing 2 -story, frame rectory, adjoining the south (rear) elevation of the proposed fellowship hall, previously designated for demolition, is designated as to remain in the current proposal. It appears that the upper section of this structure would be visible from the Entrance Corridor; however, it is not shown in the perspective drawing provided with this latest submission. The rectory, while an important historic structure that should be retained and reused, is of an architectural style and material (frame) composition that is not compatible with the sanctuary and fellowship hall. As a result, it would have an awkward and unresolved appearance in its current close proximity to the sanctuary and fellowship hall. This awkward relationship would be even more visible from the Corridor during Phase 1 of this development due to construction of the proposed sanctuary not taking place until Phase 2 of the development. Relocating the existing rectory to another location on the parcel where it maintains an appropriate distance from and orientation to the proposed structures would be more appropriate. Recommendations: Revise the Conceptual Site Plan by shifting the location of the proposed sanctuary and fellowship hall southeastward so the distance from the Entrance Corridor to the front (northwest) elevation of the existing church and the northwest (EC) elevation of the proposed sanctuary and fellowship hall is more equal, giving the architecture of the existing church more hierarchy, as viewed from the Corridor. If possible, relocate the existing rectory, displaced by the revised sanctuary/fellowship hall location, to a location on the parcel that would provide an appropriate distance from and orientation to the proposed structures.