HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP201000014 Review Comments Special Use Permit 2010-12-16�� OF ALg�
.1 �IRGINI�r..
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Joan McDowell, Principal Planner
From: Amelia McCulley, Zoning Administrator
Division: Zoning
Date: December 16, 2010
Subject: S.P. 2010 -014 St. Stephens Church Addition
I have reviewed the initial submittal and have the following comments:
1. The side setback in the Rural Areas is 25 feet from the property line. The setback on the south
side is adjacent to Wynova Lane. If this is an access easement, the 25 ft setback is measured
from the edge of the access easement. Please revise the notes and graphic BSL to reflect
this.
2. It is not advisable to include signs (graphically or by note) on the plan at this stage.
3. The parking requirement is based on either fixed seats or area of assembly, whichever is
greater (see below). However, in the Rural Areas, they can submit a parking study to show a
different number of spaces to be necessary than the other stated calculation. Please clarify
which standard is being proposed (stated number with greater requirement between the two, or
through a parking study).
Church: In the development areas identified in the comprehensive plan, if the area of assembly
seats more than one hundred persons, one (1) space per three (3) fixed seats or per seventy -five
(75) square feet of area of assembly, whichever shall be greater; if the area of assembly seats one
hundred persons or fewer, one (1) space per four (4) fixed seats or per seventy -five (75) square
feet of area of assembly, whichever shall be greater. In the rural areas identified in the
comprehensive plan, 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 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. (Amended 2 -5 -03)
4. The parking proposed at the entrance will involve handicapped vehicles backing into the
entrance and this does not seem advisable. Please consider comments from Current
Development on this.
5. Since we often condition a church addition by the general size and /or the major elements, it
would be good to consider what is relevant to this application. With a proposed building
addition at such an odd number, if we condition the size, I suggest that we give them a small
amount of wiggling room.