HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP201000010 Review Comments Special Use Permit 2010-11-17ALB���A
�'IRGINZP
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4176
November 17, 2010
Steve Driver
Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC
2374 Stuarts Draft Highway
Stuarts Draft, VA 24477
RE: SP201000010 Ivy Creek United Methodist Church
Dear Steve:
We have reviewed the responses to comments and the revised plans that were submitted on
October 18, 2010. We have a number of questions and comments which we believe should be
resolved before your goes to public hearing. I believe it would be beneficial for us to meet with you
and a representative from the church, so that we can discuss these comments. Our comments are
consolidated below:
Planning
The comments from the previous letter have not been resolved. I recommend that we meet with
you and the church representatives to resolve these issues.
Zoning
The following comments related to zoning matters have been provided by Francis MacCall:
1. The two parcels involved with this application are both considered nonconforming lots since
they do not meet the minimum lot size for the Rural Area zoning, which is 2 acres. The use of
the church is nonconforming. This SP application, if approved, will rectify the use
nonconformity making it conforming. Also, the structures themselves are nonconforming as to
setbacks, not only to structures in the RA zoning district but also to the setback recommended
for churches in the Rural Area (See Comment #2).
(Revision 1) Comment addressed On Sheet C2 it appears that the 1 story utility building is
approximately 7' from the rear property
line when the current requirement is a 35' Rural Areas district rear setback or a 50' setback for
a Sp use (See Comment #2). The new addition appears to be approximately 9' from the rear
property line. It also appears that the existing Sunday school building is proposed to be
connected to the fellowship hall addition does not meet the current 35' setback. Connecting the
structures would make the one structure more nonconforming to the setbacks and this is not
permitted. This may be rectified in one of two ways. First, obtain a variance from the BZA for a
setback reduction. Or, second, combine the two parcels into one 3.01 acre parcel. If the
property is combined then the setback issue is resolved.
Combining the lots solves 2 of the 3 nonconformities on the property. If the church and
parsonage buildings are sharing a well and/or septic field, combining the parcels is even more
advisable. The 3rd nonconformity is solved by obtaining approval of the SP for the use.
(Revision 1) Comment addressed
2. It is policy to impose commercial buffers and setbacks for non - residential development in RA or
residential districts as outlined below:
21.7.1 Adjacent to public streets: No portion of any structure, except signs, shall be erected
closer than thirty (30) feet to any public street right -of -way. No off - street parking or loading
space shall be located closer than ten (10) feet to any public street right -of- way.
The ROW of Woodlands Road SR 676 needs to be clearly shown so as to evaluate the
location of the 4 parking spaces shown on Sheet C3
21.7.2 Adjacent to residential and rural areas districts: No portion of any structure,
excluding signs, shall be located closer than fifty (50) feet to any residential or rural areas
district. No off -street parking or loading space shall be located closer than twenty (20) feet
to any residential or rural areas district.
SEE COMMENT #1 regarding existing structure locations and proposed construction
location.
(Revision 1) Comment addressed
3. On Sheet C3 please make it clear that TM44 P12 is on all three sides of parcels 12H and 14.
(Revision 1) Comment addressed
4. Provide some more information as to the location of the septic for both of the uses (parsonage
- which is considered a single family dwelling and the church). If the septic drainfield is below
the parking it is recommend that Health Department comment be obtained at this time and not
after the SP. Furthermore, if the drainfield is in the parking area the Health Department may
require paved parking in that area to reduce compaction to the septic system. In addition, it is
important with this special use permit review to confirm that there is a septic reserve area that
will not be detrimentally impacted by the proposed construction. Health Department approval
should be made a condition of SP approval.
(Revision 1) Communication with the applicant and the Health Department is needed so that
the Health Department can provide comment as to the existing septic disposal system.
5. The development will require the submittal of a site development plan for the project, if the
special permit is approved. In order to expedite the next step with the site plan, staff
recommends that you request approval of a site plan waiver at this time. This can be acted on
by the Commission with the special use permit and eliminates the need for a later process of
notice to neighbors prior to approval of a site plan waiver.
(Revision 1) Comment addressed
6. Provide dimensions and square footage totals for each portion of both existing and proposed
structures. Church ? ?sgft, Fellowship Hall portion ? ?sgft, and Sunday School portion ? ?sgft
(Revision 1) Comment addressed
7. The parking calculation shown on the concept plan is based on the existing fixed seating.
Because the proposed construction will both significantly increase the area of assembly in the
fellowship hall and will eliminate existing parking, we recommend that the parking is addressed
at this time rather than later with the site plan. Parking for churches in the rural areas identified
in the comprehensive plan is calculated as follows from the zoning ordinance:
"...the number of proposed spaces shall be shown in a parking study submitted by the
church; the number of required spaces shall be determined by the zoning administrator,
who shall consider the recommendations in the parking study, traffic generation figures
0
either known to the industry or estimated by the Institute of Transportation Engineers,
peak parking demands, and other relevant information. Nothing herein requires the
parking study to be prepared by a transportation engineer." Section 4.12.6
(Revision 1) The study referred to does not appear to be included. Please clarify the nature and
methodology of the parking analysis that is mentioned.
Current Development
The following comments have been provided related to how your proposal may or may not be able
to meet site plan or subdivision ordinance requirements in the future by Bill Fritz:
The proposed fellowship hall is located in close proximity to the well. The applicant should contact
the health department to determine if the well may continue to be used or if a new well will be
required. A site plan will be required prior to the issuance of a building permit or erosion and
sediment control permit. During the review of the building permit issues such as landscaping,
health deparment approval and stormwater maintenance will be resolved along with all other
provisions of the zoning ordinance. The surface type of the parking area is not specified. Paving
and curb and gutter will be required. If the applicant does not intend to pave and install curb and
gutter I would recommend that waiver be processed with the special use permit. No parking
setback exists in the RA district. If one is included in the SP it should clearly state what the
setback is for the 5 spaces adjacent to Woodlands Road.
Engineering and Water Resources
The following comments related to engineering and water resources have been provided by Glenn
Brooks:
1. Stormwater management will need to be provided, as the site area available is small and the
requirements are strict in this area of the county. A concept should be included with the special use
permit. Drainage will need to be collected from the parking areas and rooftop, and parking areas
will need to be surfaced.
2. Parking areas should be connected with a vehicle travelway, so site circulation does not use the
public road. It is recommend that the eastern entrance be removed.
3. Parking rows should not terminate without a turnaround. This is best accomplished with a
travelway around the parking rows.
4. Islands should be placed at the end of the parking rows next to the entrance travelway.
This site will need to meet the requirements of the zoning ordinance and water protection
ordinance with the final site plan.
Health Dept.
They are going to need to uncover the distribution boxes for all the drainfields, so we can see
exactly where everything is. In regard to well, it has to be 50' if chemical termite treatment is used.
However, there are some treatment methods where that distance can be reduced to 10'.
However, since the well is existing, our regs would only be recommendations and any
requirements would come from the county building inspections department.
VDOT
I have reviewed the latest plan and response comments and have the following:
1. Woodlands Road has a functional classification of Rural Major Collector and a 50 mph
posted speed.
2. The minimum spacing of full access non - signalized intersections is 570 feet in accordance
with the requirements of Appendix F -24 of the VDOT Road Design Manual. It does not appear that
two entrances to this site are physically possible due to the spacing requirements. Also, the
entrance needs to be spaced 570 feet from adjacent existing commercial entrances.
3. The required intersection sight distance for SDL is 480 feet and SDR is 555 feet in
accordance with the requirements of Appendix F -35 of the VDOT Road Design Manual. Any sight
3
triangle lines that fall outside of the prescriptive easements will require adequate clearing if needed
and sight line easements. The site plan needs to show site triangles at any proposed entrance.
4. A proposed entrance grade needs to be shown in accordance with the standard CG -11.
5. Entrance materials at least to the edge of the prescriptive easement need to be shown.
6. The plan needs to show turn lane warrant analysis for both left and right turn lanes.
Fire / Rescue
Must comply with the Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code. Final approval is subject to field
inspection and verification.
Design Planner
In response to round 1 comments, the applicant has indicated that large trees and views of the
historic building will be preserved. However, the revised plan retains no additional trees and makes
no change to the extension of the addition along the east elevation of the church. To respect and
reinforce the architectural and historic character of the church amidst the substantial non - historic
construction, it is still recommended that the addition be redesigned to eliminate contact with the
northern stone bay of the church's east elevation and that the south elevation of the addition not
project any further south than the face of the existing separate Sunday school building. It is
recommended that the addition impact the historic fabric of the church as little as possible
Resubmittal or Public Hearing
Within 30 days of the date of this letter, please do one of the following:
(1) Resubmit in response to these comments on a resubmittal date as published in the
project review schedule (the full resubmittal schedule may be found at
www.albemarle.org in the "forms" section at the Community Development page), OR
(2) Request a public hearing be set with the Planning Commission based on the
information provided with your original submittal (a date will be set in accordance with
the Planning Commission's published schedule as mutually agreed to by you and the
County), OR
(3) Request indefinite deferral and state your justification for requesting the deferral.
(Indefinite deferral means that you intend to resubmit /request a public hearing be set
with the Planning Commission after the 30 day period.)
If we have not received a response from you within 30 days, we will contact you again. At that
time, you will be given 10 days to do one of the following: a) request withdrawal of your
application, b) request deferral of your application to a specific Planning Commission date as
mutually agreed to with staff, or c) request indefinite deferral and state your justification for
requesting the deferral. If none of these actions is taken, staff will schedule your application for a
public hearing based on the information provided with your original submittal.
Unless you fail to respond within the time periods specified above, a public hearing with the
Planning Commission will not be advertised until you advise us that the project is ready to proceed
to a public hearing. At that time, a legal advertisement will be run in the newspaper and a staff
report will be prepared to go to the Planning Commission.
Please be advised that, once a public hearing has been advertised, only one deferral prior to the
Planning Commission's public hearing will be allowed during the life of the application. The only
exception to this rule will be extraordinary circumstances, such as a major change in the project
proposal by the applicant or more issues identified by staff that have not previously been brought
to the applicant's attention. As always, an applicant may request deferral at the Planning
Commission meeting.
Please feel free to contact me if you wish to meet or need additional information.
E
Sincerely,
Joan McDowell
Principal Planner, Rural Areas
cc: Bob Patterson
Ivy Creek United Methodist Church
674 Woodlands Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901