HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP201600010 Staff Report Special Use Permit 2016-08-23 c:CST trii
�,�►
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING
STAFF REPORT SUMMARY
I Project Name: SF201600010 Cornerstone Community Staff: Scott Clark,Senior Planner
Church
Planning Commission Public Hearing:August 23,2016 Board of Supervisors Hearing: TBA
Owner(s):Monticello Wesleyan Church&The Wesleyan Applicant(s):Monticello Wesleyan Church&The
j Church Inc Wesleyan Church Inc
Acreage:3.28 acres Special Use Permit for: Church,as permitted under
Section 10.2.2.35 of the Zoning Ordinance.
TMP:Tax Map Parcel 045000000031D0 By-right use:RA Rural Areas-agricultural, forestal,
Location:2001 Earlysville Rd and fishery uses;residential density(0.5 unit/acre in
development lots)
Magisterial District:Rio Proffers/Conditions: Yes
I School District:Broadus Wood Elementary—Jouett
Middle—Albemarle High School
Requested#of Dwelling Units/Lots: none DA RA-X
Proposal: Expansion of existing church from 180 to Comp.Plan Designation Rural Area—preserve and
250 seats,and increase parking from approximately protect agricultural, forestal,open space,and natural,
46 spaces(partly unpaved)to 97 spaces(all paved). historic and scenic resources;residential(0.5 unit/acre
in development lots)
) Character of Property: The 3.28-acre lot is largely open Use of Surrounding Properties:Surrounding
and developed for the church use,including the church properties include the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir,
building and existing parking area.The northeast portion of residential properties,and the Ivy Creek Natural Area
,d the lot is wooded. (across the reservoir).
Factors Favorable: Factors Unfavorable:
1. The proposed site changes would include the
addition of water-quality protection measures that None.
would help to protect the adjacent reservoir from
1 runoff.
I 2. The Virginia Department of Transportation has not
J found that entrance improvements or a left-turn lane
are necessary.
4 Recommendation: Staff recommends approval with conditions.
SP201600010—Cornerstone Community Church
Planning Commission:August 23, 2016
Page 1
I
1
A
STAFF CONTACT: Scott Clark, Senior Planner
I PLANNING COMMISSION: August 23,2016
j BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: TBD
PROJECT:
SP201600010 Cornerstone Community Church
PETITION:
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rio
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 045000000031D0
LOCATION 2001 Earlysville Rd
PROPOSAL: Expansion of existing church from 180 to 250 seats.
I PETITION:Church, as permitted under Section 10.2.2.35 of the Zoning Ordinance.No dwellings proposed.
ZONING: RA Rural Areas-agricultural,forestal,and fishery uses;residential density(0.5 unit/acre in
development lots)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Rural Area preserve and protect agricultural,forestal, open space,and natural,
historic and scenic resources;residential(0.5 unit/acre in development lots)
CHARACTER OF THE AREA:
1 The site is located in a portion of the Rural Areas that has largely been converted to residential development. The
South Fork Rivanna Reservoir is adjacent to the church. See Attachment A for an area map, and Attachment B for a
map of the site.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
SDP198000027: On May 27, 1980,the Planning Commission approved this site plan for a 5,700-square-foot
1 church building on this site.
VA 198300075: On November 15, 1983,the Board of Zoning Appeals approved a variance to allow a sign within
50 feet of the property line(a variance of 25 feet).
VA198400033: On June 12, 1984,the Board of Zoning appeals denied a variance to allow a sign within 3 feet of
4 the property line(a variance of 72 feet).
1 SDP198800069: On November 1, 1988,the Planning Commission approved a site-plan amendment to add 4,408
square feet to the existing church building.
SP199700023:On August 13, 1997,the Board of Supervisors denied this special use permit request for a private
I rowing club and a floating dock on the church site. The proposed use would have allowed two or more sessions per
day of 50 rowers each,plus 4 staff members and 6 coxswains. Denial was based on the Board's determination that
the reservoir's use as a public water supply could be negatively affected by this level of recreational use.
DETAILS OF THE PROPOSAL:
The proposal is to expand the existing non-conforming 9,000 square-foot church building to approximately 17,800
square feet of internal space(including additional basement space).The footprint of the existing building would
I expand on three sides,increasing from 6,250 square feet to approximately 10,500 square feet.Within that footprint,
1 the sanctuary would increase by approximately 2,300 square feet,and the remainder of the addition would be for
I "welcoming and greeting space,"church activities,etc. Seating would increase from 180 to 250. The applicant
wishes to expand the existing parking area,which is only partially paved and accommodates approximately 46
vehicles,to 97 paved spaces.The applicants have stated that 97 spaces are needed to accommodate occasional large
services, as there is no street parking in the area to accommodate any extra parking needs.New biofilters would be
added between the developed portion of the site and the reservoir. See Attachment C for the proposed conceptual
plan.
SP201600010—Cornerstone Community Church
Planning Commission:August 23, 2016
Page 2
Nearly the entire site, including the existing church and parking lot, is located in the stream buffer established by
the Water Protection Ordinance(WPO).Normally,new construction would not be allowed within a required stream
buffer.However,the County's stream buffer regulations were established many years after the construction of the
3 existing church and parking area.The church building qualifies as a"pre-existing"building under section 17-
603(A) of the WPO and is permitted to remain,as it was built before the adoption date of the WPO(February 11,
1998).
Under the Zoning Ordinance,the building technically would be considered nonconforming, as its building site
includes stream buffer. In most cases,nonconforming structures are not permitted to expand. However, in the case
of pre-existing buildings that are non-conforming solely because they are located in a WPO stream buffer, section
18-4.2.6(a)of the Zoning Ordinance says that they"may be expanded, enlarged,extended,modified and/or
reconstructed as though such structure were a conforming structure."Therefore it is possible for the County to
1 permit the proposed building expansion on this site,despite its location in the stream buffer.
In its application,the church has said that 1.68 acres of the stream buffer are already impacted by existing
I development,and that only an additional 0.24 acres(10,500 square feet)would be disturbed for the proposed
expansion.Most of this disturbance is for the parking expansion.At present,there are no water-quality
Al improvement measures on the site,but the proposed expansion would provide biofilters to slow and filter runoff
water.
REGULATORY CONTEXT:
This proposal is subject to the First Amendment's Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses and the Religious Land
Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000("RLUIPA"). One key provision of RLUIPA states:
No government shall impose or implement a land use regulation in a manner that imposes a substantial
burden on the religious exercise of a person, including a religious assembly or institution,unless the
government demonstrates that imposition of the burden on that person, assembly, or institution—(A)is in
4 furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and(B)is the least restrictive means of furthering that
compelling governmental interest.
42 U.S.C. § 2000cc(a)(1).RLUIPA also requires that land use regulations: (1)treat a religious assembly or
institution on equal terms with nonreligious assemblies and institutions;(2)not discriminate against any assembly
or institution on the basis of religion or religious denomination; and(3)not totally exclude religious assemblies, or
Iunreasonably limit religious assemblies,institutions or structures,from the locality.42 U.S.C. § 2000cc(b).
COMMUNITY MEETING:
The community meeting was held in the existing church building on May 5,2016. Several members of the public
attended the meeting.Concerns expressed by the attendees largely focused on the addition of traffic from the
a expanded church onto Earlysville Road.
ANALYSIS OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST
Section 33.8 of the Zoning Ordinance states that the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors shall
reasonably consider the following factors when reviewing and acting upon an application for a special use permit:
No substantial detriment. The proposed special use will not be a substantial detriment to adjacent lots.
Approval of this special use permit would permit an expansion of the level of use on the site and bring an
existing church into conformity with the Zoning Ordinance. The church building site and parkingwould remain
{
in generally the same area,with some expansion of parking toward Earlysville Road.No substantial detriment to
adjacent lots is expected.
SP201600010 Cornerstone Community Church
Planning Commission:August 23, 2016
Page 3
a2
44,
The property is adjacent to the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir,the main surface-water supply for the
Development Areas and the City of Charlottesville.At present,there are no water-quality protection measures
on the site.As part of this special use permit request,the applicant has requested asked for a parking-lot
expansion that would include six spaces that would impact currently-wooded areas adjacent to the reservoir.
1 While such a request would typically not receive a favorable recommendation,the applicant is proposing to
provide several biofilters between the existing disturbed area and the reservoir. These measures would help to
slow and filter runoff from the site before it reaches the reservoir. Without the expansion request,the County
have no mechanism to require water-quality measures for the existing development. If the expansion of the
church is approved,detailed requirements for stormwater management would be established as part of the
subsequent site development plan review for the site.
ICharacter of district unchanged. The character of the district will not be changed by the proposed special
use.
This portion of the Rural Areas district has both a residential and a rural character due to the amount of nearby
1 residential development.Expansion of an existing church in that residential context will not significantly change
the character of the district.
Harmony. The proposed special use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter,
Religious land uses are not specifically addressed in the purpose or intent of the zoning ordinance. However,
they have generally been considered as compatible land uses in rural and residential areas.
...with the uses permitted by right in the district
Religious land uses are not specifically addressed in the purpose or intent of the zoning ordinance. However,
they have generally been considered as compatible land uses in rural and residential areas. Churches are
common in the RA and VR zoning districts,and have generally been considered in harmony with agricultural
land uses and with residential uses.
1
...with the regulations provided in section 5 as applicable,
There are no additional regulations in section 5 for churches.
1 ...and with the public health,safety and general welfare.
i
The site is located on Earlysville Road just north of the bridge over the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir. The
speed limit on this road is 45 miles per hour(40 miles per hour for trucks).Access to the site is via a paved
entrance with a right-turn lane and taper approximately 200 feet long.
1 To follow up on concerns about road safety near the site as expressed by members of the public at the
i community meeting, staff obtained Police Department data on recent vehicle accidents near the site. From 2013
to 2015,there were fourteen crashes on Earlysville Road within a half-mile of the church site. Of those,a
1 majority(8 of 14,or 57%)occurred near Ivy Creek Natural Area,on the opposite side of the reservoir bridge.
1 Three crashes(21.5%)happened near the intersection of Earlysville Road and Arrowhead Road,approximately
1,500 feet north of the church entrance.A further three crashes happened in the 2000 block of Earlysville Road,
1 in the general vicinity of the church. Of those latter three crashes,two involved no injuries,and one involved a
serious injury requiring EMS transportation. Staff discussed this crash information with Virginia Department of
Transportation(VDOT)staff. VDOT stated that they had performed a safety study of Route 743 this year and
found the crash and injury rate to be less than the District average.
SP201600010 Cornerstone Community Church
Planning Commission:August 23, 2016
Page 4
3
VDOT has reviewed the existing entrance and an estimate of trip generation for the expanded church, based on
the proposed increase in seats from the ITE Trip Generation Manual. This VDOT review confirmed that the
I applicant-provided traffic count on Earlysville Road is comparable to recent VDOT traffic studies, and found
that, according to Virginia Access Management Regulations(Appendix F of the Road Design Manual),a left
3 turn lane is not warranted for the proposed increase in use. They noted that"traffic control during church service
times and/or the reevaluation of the need for a left turn lane may be required in the event of significant increase
in attendance and/or capacity, further change in use and/or time, increase in Earlysville Road traffic, or if the
actual traffic proves problematic or inconsistent with the provided data."Any future expansion of the use that
might necessitate a left turn lane would require an amendment of the requested special use permit,giving the
i County the opportunity to require a left-turn lane if needed. Because of the concerns about future background
traffic increases,staff consulted with VDOT to establish whether or not a left-turn lane should be required as
part of the current amendment request.VDOT has stated that there are not enough contributing factors to justify
requiring a left turn lane for this proposed use(see Attachment D).
A representative from VDOT is expected to attend the public hearing to answer any road-related questions about
this proposal.
Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. The use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Churches and other religious institutions are not specifically addressed in the Comprehensive Plan, except in the
Rural Areas plan,where they are addressed in the context of"crossroads communities." Strategy 5c says,
"Consider amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow community centers and religious institutions at an
yI appropriate scale in designated crossroads communities without legislative review in existing structures."During
the Comprehensive Plan review,the Planning Commission recommended consideration of amending the Zoning
Ordinance to allow churches with 200 seats or fewer in the Rural Areas by right.The Board of Supervisors
narrowed that recommendation to apply on in crossroads communities.
This proposal would be similar in scale to(or smaller than) several other church facilities that have been recently
approved in the Rural Areas, including:
Church Location Seats
First Church of the Nazarene US 250 and Route 22 374
I First Christian Church US 250 and Keswick Road 306
Faith Christian Center Int'l US 250 in Shadwell 399
The inclusion of water-quality protection measures in the proposed expansion would make the site more
I consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's goals for water-quality protection.
SUMMARY:
Staff has identified the following factors favorable to this proposal:
1. The proposed site changes would include the addition of water-quality protection measures that would
help to protect the adjacent reservoir from runoff.
2. The Virginia Department of Transportation has not found that entrance improvements or a left-turn
lane are necessary.
Staff has identified no factors unfavorable to this proposal.
SP201600010 Cornerstone Community Church
Planning Commission: August 23,2016
Page 5
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Based on the findings contained in this staff report, staff recommends approval of SP201600010 Cornerstone
Community •Church with the following conditions:
1. Development and use shall be in general accord with the conceptual plan titled"Cornerstone
Community Church Addition—Application Plan"prepared by Timmons Groups and dated 7/27/2016
11 (hereafter"Conceptual Plan"), as determined by the Director of Planning and the Zoning
Administrator. To be in accord with the Conceptual Plan, development and use shall reflect the
1; following major elements within the development essential to the design of the development, as
shown on the Conceptual Plan:
building orientation
• • building size
Minor modifications to the plan which do not conflict with the elements above may be made to
ensure compliance with the Zoning Ordinance.
1 2. The area of assembly shall be limited to a maximum 250-seat sanctuary.
3. There shall be no day care center or private school on site without approval of a separate special use
permit;
4. The applicant shall obtain Virginia Department of Health approval of well and/or septic system prior
to approval of the final site plan.
5. All outdoor lighting shall be only full cut off fixtures and shielded to reflect light away from all
abutting properties. A lighting plan limiting light levels at all property lines to no greater than 0.3
2 foot candles shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator or their designee for approval.
6. If the use,structure,or activity for which this special use permit is issued is not commenced by [date
three years from Board approval],the permit shall be deemed abandoned and the authority granted
thereunder shall thereupon terminate.
I Motions:
1 A. Should the Planning Commission choose to recommend approval of this special use permit:
I move to recommend approval of SP201600010 Cornerstone Community Church with the
conditions outlined in the staff report.
B. Should the Planning Commission choose to recommend denial of this special use permit:
t
1
I move to recommend denial of SP201600010 Cornerstone Community Church. (Planning
Commission needs to give a reason for denial)
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A—Area Map
Attachment B Site Map
Attachment C—Conceptual Plan
Attachment D—E-mail from Adam Moore PE, VDOT
€ gg
SP201600010-Cornerstone Community Church
Planning Commission:August 23, 2016
Page 6
31
4 r
.� :oxrn+c�,i,�.o..w.w�dwwo-.�.•wronm+,u..a..w..a„I..w.,,r,aao �:.�.a,s.ma,
3
.1
a
3.1 5,C x Y 3
I.;
111111111p. /
4'' 44 0 ''''3,� it
),I
41P
I
a 1
y� `� ®� 4 .J j
KW \
® ® _
1 Pi ".,,,,, `\. 41‘ Ppv \\,/ .,„ -.-'a - ,. s ,
I ,r
1 vim, Wit—+. sx-.: ,{r r'"
R. /4
ani i
y
l
y� i
9
t
i
T I M M 0 N S G R 0 U P ••'�•., ""-"A."-.--.''"' 9,
CORNERSTONE COMMUNITY CHURCHREVISION DESCRIPTION
$ ma°,eaEv.:
n RgHroMMeH,�o d cm of cnaa�onemue S a% m • ",. APPLICATION PLAN
Scott,
VDOT actually performed a safety study of Route 743 this year and found the crash and injury rate to be
less than the District average. In light of this information, combined with the peak hour for the Church
unlikely to coincide with peak hour traffic of Earlysville road,as well as the expectation of a very small
I percentage of the entrance's traffic to be trucks,the Department at this time will not require a left turn
lane.
Please note that Virginia Code 24VAC30-73-110 allows for VDOT to require reconstruction,
improvement (like turn lanes),or closure of entrances at the owner's cost should any number of factors
iv contribute to an unsafe condition for the roadway. This can include an increase or change in the nature
of traffic using an entrance.
However, it has been shown that providing turn lanes at entrances and intersections can reduce the
incidence of rear-end crashes.That said,there are not enough contributing g primary(peak hour trip
generation, opposing peak hour volume),or secondary(high percentage of trucks making turns, high
A operating speeds, higher classification of roadway)factors in this instance to justify requiring a left turn
lane.
Adam J.Moore,P.E. I Assistant Resident Engineer/Area Land Use Engineer
VDOT-Charlottesville Residency
4 701 \/17O':1'Way I:Charlottesville I VA
main 434,422.9782
I
a
A
a i
t i
;I'
3
Albemarle County Planning Commission
August 23 2016
The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday,
August 23, 2016, at 6:00 p.m., at the County Office Building, Lane Auditorium, Second
Floor, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
1 Members attending were Mac Lafferty, Pam Riley, Jennie More, Daphne Spain, Tim
I Keller, Chair; Karen Firehock, Vice Chair and Bill Palmer, UVA representative. Members
absent were Bruce Dotson. Ms. Firehock arrived at 6:08 p.m.
Other officials present were Rebecca Ragsdale, Senior Planner; Scott Clark, Senior
Planner; John Anderson, Engineer; J.T. Newberry, Senior Planner, Elaine Echols,
Acting Chief of Planning; David Benish, Acting Director of Planning; Sharon Taylor,
Clerk to Planning Commission and John Blair, Senior Assistant County Attorney.
Call to Order and Establish Quorum:
Mr. Keller, Chair, called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. and established a quorum.
c. SP-2016-00010 Cornerstone Community Church Addition (Sian 105)
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rio
I TAX MAP/PARCEL:045000000031 D0
LOCATION: 2001 Earlysville Rd PROPOSAL: Expansion of existing church from
180 to 250 seats.
PETITION: Church, as permitted under Section 10.2.2.35 of the Zoning Ordinance.
No dwellings proposed. ZONING: RA Rural Areas - agricultural, forestal, and fishery
uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre in development lots)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Rural Area preserve and protect agricultural, forestal,
1. open space, and natural, historic and scenic resources; residential (0.5 unit/ acre in
development lots)
Mr. Keller complemented staff on this clear delineation of the changes from the prior
special use permits, and he thinks the underlining of what is going out using basically
the track changes and the red marks to see what has been added is really a helpful
i technique.
II Mr. Clark summarized the staff report for SP-2016-00010 Cornerstone Community
Church Addition in a PowerPoint presentation.
This is a special use permit request for an existing church. The proposal is to expand
an existing church from 180 to 250 seats. This is a church that predates the zoning
requirement for special use permit for a church and so it is an existing nonconforming
church that needs a special use permit in order to expand and come into compliance
with the current ordinance.
ALBEMARLE;COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION—August 23,2016 1
16-580 Draft Partial Minutes-SP-2016-00010 Cornerstone Community Church Addition
4
The location of the church is right by the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir east of the
Earlysville Road Bridge or the reservoir. He pointed out the reservoir natural area on
the map and you can see the development area is nearby. The next slide is an aerial
view of the church showing the existing building and parking lot and the proximity of the
reservoir. This gives a better idea of the building and some of the improvements on the
site. The aerial shows the existing tapering right turn lane at the entrance, the existing
building improvements on the site and the parking, which is partially paved at the upper
end and unpaved at the lower end near the edge of the reservoir.
In summary, the details of the proposal are:
• The increase seating at the existing, non-conforming church from 180 to 250;
Increasing the building footprint from about 6,250 square feet to approximately
10,500 square feet;
Within that the interior space would increase from about 9,000 square feet to
17,800 square feet of internal space (including additional basement space);
Enlarge parking area from approximately 46 spaces (including unpaved and
unmarked area) to 97 paved spaces, and
Disturb 0.24 acres of vegetated stream buffer area adjacent to the reservoir and
part of that disturbance would be to add biofilters for water-quality management.
On the conceptual plan for the changes Mr. Clark pointed out the light gray in the center
is the existing outline of the building; the dark line is showing the expansion outward of
the building and then the new paved parking added lower on the hill and along the
entrance road closer to the entrance. Heointed out the resulting g proposed tree lines
I and then a good part of the area where all of those tree lines are going back closer to
the reservoir the bio filters are shown for storm water management. Obviously, that
i would be developed in a lot more detail if this is approved under the site development
plan for the use.
Stream Buffer
One of the big questions with this obviously is the impacts of the stream buffer.
j • The majority of the site is the only Water Protection Ordinance stream buffer as
I shown on the map in the blue cross hatching. Very little of the site is not in that
buffer area.
The building predates the adoption of Water Protection Ordinance and is
permitted as a pre-existing building.
• The Zoning Ordinance specifies that non-conforming structures, whose building
site does not conform with zoning requirements, that if they are only non-
i conforming because of the stream buffer then they can't expand. There is no
flood plain or critical slopes on this building site. It is just a stream buffer issue
and so Section 18-4.2(a) says that those structures can in fact expand, which is
why we are able to consider this special use permit for an expansion.
This approval would bring an existing church into conformity with the Zoning Ordinance
and allow this proposed expansion. The building and parking would obviously expand
outward and so it will remain in general in the same area of the site and not go a lot
closer to other adjacent properties in the area. So staff is expectingnot r
substantial
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION—August 23,2016
2
16-580 Draft Partial Minutes-SP-2016-00010 Cornerstone Community Church Addition
13
1
1
I detriment to the adjacent residential lots. The other adjacent lot here, which is unusual,'
1. is sitting on the South Fork Reservoir. While the site would expand parking and the
11 building towards that reservoir about a quarter of an acre of the existing buffer will be
I disturbed a good part of that disturbance would allow for bio filters to capture a lot of the
runoff from the site, which is not happening now and would attempt to improve the water
1 quality and how the site affects the reservoir.
Another concern that came up during the review at the public meeting on the site was
road safety on Earlysville Road. There have been a fair number of crashes. In 2013 to
2015 there were fourteen crashes within a half-mile of the site. However, most of those
happened either across the reservoir on the other side near the entrance to the Ivy
Creek Natural Area, which some of you may notice is sort of an abrupt turn in the
middle of a curb that is kind of dangerous or fairlyfarther north
g of the site near
a Arrowhead Road. VDOT staff has told us that they performed a safety study of
Earlysville Road this year and found the crash and injury rate to be less than the District
average. So while we recognize there are policy concerns with an expansion of a use
on a rural road that the site here is on a road that is not atypical for safety y problems in
the rural areas.
31
I VDOT has also looked at the applicant's proposed plan and whether or not a left turn
lane is warranted. Obviously, there is already an existing right turn lane. Given the trip
generation for the site in its review it indicates that a left-turn lane is not warranted for
the proposed expansion although future larger expansions or significant amount of
increases of traffic on Earlysville Road might make that necessary. Any expansion of
11 the church for seating capacity beyond 250 would require a special use permit
41
amendment if it was shown they could address the need for a left turn lane if they
decided to do a future expansion.
41
I
Just to summarize, staff has identified the following factors favorable to this proposal:
1. While there is an expansion of the impervious area on the site we would be
4 gaining water-quality protection measures that are not there now.
2. While there are transportation concerns as always with expansion of uses in the
1 rural areas Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has not found that
1.
entrance improvements or a left-turn lane are not warranted by the current
i proposal.
1 Staff has identified no factors unfavorable to thisro o
p p sal.
i
Mr. Clark reviewed the proposed conditions and the motions. He mentioned that John
Anderson from our engineering staff and Adam Moore from VDOT are here if there are
any questions on their reviews of the stream buffer in John's case or the transportation
issues in Adam's.
Staff is recommending approval of SP-2016-00010 Cornerstone Community Church
with 6 conditions.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION—August 23,2016 3
16-580 Draft Partial Minutes-SP-2016-00010 Cornerstone Community Church Addition
A
1
ii
e
1. Development and use shall be in general accord with the conceptual plan titled
1 "Cornerstone Community Church Addition Application Plan" prepared by
:1 Timmons Groups and dated 7/27/2016 (hereafter "Conceptual Plan"), as
determined by the Director of Planning and the Zoning Administrator. To be in
accord with the Conceptual Plan, development and use shall reflect the following
major elements within the development essential to the design of the
development, as shown on the Conceptual Plan:
• building orientation
r • building size
Minor modifications to the plan which do not conflict with the elements above may be
made to ensure compliance with the Zoning Ordinance.
2. The area of assembly shall be limited to a maximum 250-seat sanctuary.
3. There shall be no day care center or private school on site without approval of a
separate special use permit;
.A, 4. The applicant shall obtain Virginia Department of Health approval of well and/or
septic system prior to approval of the final site plan.
5. All outdoor lighting shall be only full cut off fixtures and shielded to reflect light
j away from all abutting properties. A lighting plan limiting light levels at all
1 property lines to no greater than 0.3 foot candles shall be submitted to the Zoning
1 Administrator or their designee for approval. (Mr. Clark pointed out there were a
few mentions at the community meeting concerns about lighting and this
condition would address that.)
£; 6. If the use, structure, or activity for which'this special use permit is issued is not
1 commenced by [date three years from Board approval], the permit shall be
deemed abandoned and the authority granted thereunder shall thereupon
terminate
1
14 Mr. Clark said he would be happy to take any questions.
11
I Ms. Firehock noted she had questions, but they probably should be addressed to the
applicant's engineer so she will just wait.
Ms. Riley asked if any trees would be removed in the vegetative buffer. She knows
there is a very limited amount of trees there and they are providing a very good visual
buffer as well.
Mr. Clark pointed out in the photos that there are trees near the water line up to the
edge of the unpaved parking area on the site as it exists now. So on the conceptual 11
I plan there are two tree lines shown, the outer one closest to the parking is where the
I existing trees are now approximately and the line down here is the one that shows the
resulting tree line. So yes, there would be some trees removed to accommodate the
building expansion and the parking, but also to fit in the storm water measures.
Mr. Lafferty asked will this bring them into conformity.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION—August 23,2016 4
16-580 Draft Partial Minutes-SP-2016-00010 Cornerstone Community Church Addition
t
4
4
Mr. Clark replied yes, they can continue to operate at their current size indefinitely as
long as they don't anyway.expand the use inBut,y were it to expand seating, building
size, parking and anything like that they would have to amend the permit as they are
I doing now and were becoming in conformity with the ordinance as we do that.
M Mr. Keller opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to come forward to speak.
Craig Kotarski, with Timmons Group representing the applicant Monticello Wesleyan
Church, said he was also joined by Tony Savon the lead pastor of Cornerstone
Community Church as well as the architect Steve Davis with Thrive Architecture. What
he would like to do is quickly give a brief overview and hopefully answer some of the
questions that Ms. Firehock was going to ask as well as maybe shed a little light on Ms.
x Riley's comment with regards to the trees.
Mr. Kotarski presented a PowerPoint Presentation. He pointed out that the first slide is
just basically giving you another shot of the existing church in its current location where
they have 180 seats and as already was reported by the planner that the application is
to increase the number of seats in the sanctuary from 180 to 250. Again, just to provide
a little bit of an overview where we are situated along Earlysville Road he noted this
91
picture depicts the addition. You can see where the lighter color shade of tan is. Next
is the existing building with the darker shade representing the addition?
What he would like to draw their attention to on the tree comment is if you see where
1 you are coming in off of Earlysville Road at the top of the page there are some circles
with some lines drawn that are a little bit darker. Those represent some additional trees
9
that would bring us into conformance with the county's ordinance with regards to the
buffers as far as landscape buffer and providing separation from the existing street and
then we still meet that requirements which he believes is 20' over where the bio
1 retention areas are demonstrated on the west side of the.. plan. Hopefully to
demonstrate a little bit clearer where the impacts are in regards to the BPO buffer and
what they are for what he is trying to demonstrate with this slide is show where the
additional impacts are that are really more site related. Either there is some parking
1 being shown or some grading that is associated with the parking. You also see that he
is including those trees up on the north end of the site as well as a part of that. This in
total is around 8,000 square feet or about .2 acres of additional impacts there. Then
when we add in the areas that we are showing for bio-retention that bumps up slightly
and it is about 7,000.
1
1 He wants to address one of the things that Mr. Clark reported was an additional .24
acres of impact in the WPO buffer, and it is actually 0.33 acres. The discrepancy there
is that area on the north end, which is just within the 200' buffer. So that piece was not
in Mr. Clark's report and he just wanted to make sure clear that was clear as the
Commission looks at this.
The other thing that he just wanted to note with regards to this is on the current church's
parking lot there is only 46 to maybe 50 designated parking spaces and then a lot of it is i.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION—August 23,2016 5
16-580 Draft Partial Minutes-SP-2016-00010 Cornerstone Community Church Addition t
t;
1
4
large amounts of gravel and some asphalt that is scattered around. What we are
looking to do is sort of make that a little bit more streamlined and make that where it is a
1 little bit more efficiently done in such a way that they are getting the most for the
impervious surface that is currently on the site and then that we are added. So currently
on the site the impervious surface makes up 0.82 acres and the proposed site would
have 1.02 acres. About one-half of that is building and then about the other half is
additional parking. In general that is his presentation, but he was happy to answer any
questions.
Ms. Firehock asked what the elevation of the bio filters above the mean wire line of the
reservoir is. She was trying to understand if there was chance of them getting
inundated.
I Mr. Kotarski replied that they were outside of the 100-year floodplain so they are above
that. But, from where the water line is lookingat the contours'it is approximately pproximately 10' to
14'above.
Ms. Firehock said above the 100-year, okay.
Mr. Kotarski replied no, it was 10' to 14' above the average.
Ms. Firehock said she was trying to look at the aerial photo, but had been out that way •
many times since she used to live in Earlysville. She was trying to understand just
looking at the photograph or the aerial how many trees might be removed to put in the
bio-swales. It looks a little patchy there. She can see some open space and some
trees.
Mr. Kotarski said there are some open spaces. Some of the trees there are not
necessarily in the greatest shape. But, he did not want to oversell that. However, he
wanted to demonstrate that our intent is to come back those are not to be just grass bio-
filters; they are to be vegetative either with grasses or some combination of grasses,
trees and appropriate plantings that you would see in a well working bio-retention
facility.
Ms. Riley asked can you describe along the road and along the reservoir what the
impact is going to be on the visual buffer with the amount of vegetation you will need to
remove and what you intend to replace it.
Mr. Kotarski replied that along the road there are he believes 3 or 4 trees that are being
removed. Again, some of them are smaller in nature and we are coming back he
believed it was a total of 20 trees up on Earlysville Road to provide that buffer and
actually he thinks enhance a little bit more than what is there currently. Additionally
over where the bio-filters are shown we are proposing to trim back that tree line some.
We are maintaining the buffers that are spelled out in the county ordinance, which is
maintaining at a minimum of 20' off of the property line. Some of the trees that are
shown on that aerial actually are on the other side of the property line as well. So there
is even additional buffer there based on that. The intent would be to come back along
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION—August 23,2016 6
16-580 Draft Partial Minutes-SP-2016-00010 Cornerstone Community Church Addition
with this and also use some plantings and trees. He is not a landscape architect so he
won't start to put that on you. But, as far as what goes in and what is planted in those
bio-retention facilities we would have a landscape architect look at that and there would
be additional trees that would come back and be planted there.
Mr. Keller said it was nice to have a plan view that shows the vegetative changes; but, it
would really be nice to have that real photograph what is coming off of the vegetation,
that sort of bird's eye view. From looking at this my sense because it is the higher
elevation is that the parking area and the church is going to be much more visible when
someone is coming down before going over the bridge and even a quarter of a mile
further up. Given the constraints of the site and the predating of the various regulations
that we have for this site it seems that we are a bit boxed in by how far we can go with
it, and staff has worked to get us to as far we can.
Ms. Firehock noted in response to that the applicant did say that he was not going to
pretend to be a landscape architect but that he knows that you can design bio-filters
with mature trees in them. A great example is at the high school on Route 20 south
where the bio-filters are planted with mature trees that are doingfantastically t Cally well So
you can design bio-filters with small shrubby things. However, since we are losing
some trees she would encourage the applicant to ask the landscape architect to include
trees that will grow to a mature height and replace some of the functionality that would
not be met by simply planting dogwood or some shrubby wispy thing in there.
Mr. Keller noted as a landscape architect he would say that the issues to me come
down to the number of parking places that were required. We all know if we took
several of those parking spaces along the way we could also get a tree cover, and then
we could have tree cover for the parking. But, he was assuming that we are working
11 under a requirement for the number of spaces based on the congregation size.
1 Mr. Clark replied not exactly. He pointed out in rural area churches when we do the
special use permits rather than going by a hard number as we might in development
1 areas we tend to ask the applicants to do a parking study to figure out what they need.
The 97 spaces on this site is probably a bit more than the minimum number we might
normally hope to get; but, the statement from the applicant said they need that number
because they have some occasional coordination events that are larger. Especially on
a site like this where there is no surrounding neighborhood to absorb overflow parking
they needed to have this number to accommodate for the bigger events of the year.
Ms. Firehock said one thing she also could not tell was whether all of the spaces are
uniform or have we varied the spacing for the smaller cars since not everyone drives a
giant truck. She was just wondering because you could actually get a lot more spaces
in smaller area by varying the spacing sizes for each parking spot._ l
Mr. Clark pointed out the site plan ordinance requires 9' X 18' spaces.
Ms. Echols noted that there are some abilities to vary. However, she did not know if the
applicant considered that because there are different sizes that can be done.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION—August 23,2016 7
16-580 Draft Partial Minutes-SP-2016-00010 Cornerstone Community Church Addition
Mr. Kotarski pointed out as they are shown the parking spaces are all 9' X 18'. The
handicap spaces are 8' X18' both in accordance with the Code. We did look at some
tandem parking up on the north end where the WPO buffer had already been infringed
upon and we were told that due to the ordinance that we could not show those. So that
is one reason why there are no tandem spaces. He explained that kind of the thought
behind that being is if there is a family there that is serving and teaching a Sunday
School class then maybe dad comes early and then mom would block his space in and
that way they would work in that regard. But, those were removed from this plan. The
one other thing he would bring up with regards to the parking is Mr. Clark sent us a few
of the projects that recently had been approved kind of all in that same corridor as the
applicant that we just saw before us. The one thing that you will notice on all of those is
that even though they are necessarily in residential or rural area we can pull off on the
side of the road they all have these long winding roads and the parking the way it is
done in certain ways is a little bit less efficient. ' He was sure there are site reasons that
you have required that. What he means by that is there may be a drive isle with parking
only on one side or there may be situations like that where if you were in a situation
3 where you needed that extra parking you would be able to pull to the side. We have all
4 seen that in schools and other situations like that. On this site we really don't have any
of those types of areas. We have one small one kind of at the southern tip of the site.
But, outside of that we don't have those opportunities on this site particularly for where
we are at and what the situation currently is here.
Ms. Firehock said she is still confused since staff mentioned that there is a possibility to
vary the sizes of the spaces; but, that has not been done in this case. She was not
saying that it would have automatically happened; but, is there any possibility to play
with the size of the spaces to pull back on the amount of encroachment into the buffer.
Ms. Echols replied that she did not know the answer to the second part of that question.
I She has been looking at the County's Design Standards Manual and there are some
different alternatives that might be able to be used to minimize the amount of
I disturbance. Staff has not looked at that so we can't fully answer that question right
now; but, it is something that can be looked into.
Mr. Kotarski said one item that he knows they could possibly look at is on the west side,
i
the side nearest the two bio-filter facilities that are shown, he believed the county
1 ordinance will allow you to instead of building an 18' deep space build a 16' deep space I
allowing for the overhang. That is a potential opportunity to reduce some impervious
surface and some of that encroachment pull the bio-retention facilities up a few feet and
that sort of thing.
Ms.Firehock asked did you consider permeable pavement for any of these.
Mr. Kotarski replied that no, they did not consider permeable pavement because it is a
steeper site. But, one of the things that we really want to be mindful of is the fact that
we are right at the reservoir and so where do we place and how do we position any
storm water treatment. We thought it was appropriate. One, to your point previously to
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION-August 23,2016 8
16-580 Draft Partial Minutes-SP-2016-00010 Cornerstone Community Church Addition
r,;
make sure that bio-retention facilities need to be kept out of the 100-year floodplain.
I. That is one of the reasons for their location. But, then the other is instead of trying to
put something say in the middle of the parking or do something underground we thought
it was a lot more appropriate particularly to be a steward of this piece of property and its
location to do something that would capture the storm water and work towards returning
it back to a cleaner state before entering the reservoir. Currently there is nothing in that
location that captures and filters the water in any way except for obviously the tree
buffer that is around it.
Mr. Keller asked if there were any other questions for the applicant. There being none,
he invited public comment. There being no public comment, the public hearing was
ki closed and the matter before the Commission for discussion.
1. Ms. Firehock said she would just note she finds this site very frustrating. She really
respect the church's need to try to accommodate their parishioners and continue to
function. Also, we have not storm water management so she understands we would be
getting some; but, they were also increasing the size of the impact. So we are not
I necessarily coming out ahead and we are taking out the tree buffer and putting in bio-
filtration to replicate some of the function either the trees provide. So she does not
know how she will vote; but, she just finds it really a frustrating site. She wished they
would have gone a little farther perhaps with other techniques for mitigating storm water
from the source such as she feels like they could have used permeable pavement on
the actual parking spaces considering that it is outside of the 100-year floodplain. She
can make her thoughts known, but she can't really require that since they have offered
what they have offered.
1 Ms. Riley said they also tried to encourage them to look at the visual buffer in terms of
mature tree replacement. Right now she thinks it is a really beautifully buffered site and
in the future she would hope they would be able to continue when you are crossing that
}
bridge not to necessarily be looking at cars in a parking lot.
Mr. Keller pointed out to do that they were going to have to add some trees within the
parking area because of the elevation of that.
Ms. More said it seemed like a couple of things had been mentioned about changing the
size of some of the parking spaces and Ms. Echols mentioned looking into that and
maybe making these along where the potential bio-filters are to have those be shorter
I spaces. She asked are we hearing those as things that are actually going to happen or
if we were to vote we are voting on what is in front of us. She said some of these
seemed like really good suggestions.
Ms. Echols pointed out the Commission can recommend conditions. She noted that
special use permits are different than rezonings in terms of what you can ask. In terms
I of rezonings an applicant if they are proffering something they have to be voluntarily
offered. But, if there are conditions to mitigate impacts the Commission can impose
conditions on a special use permit. What you could do is to recommend approval or
E whatever you want to do with certain changes taking place. The Commission may also
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION—August 23,2016 9
16-580 Draft Partial Minutes-SP-2016-00010 Cornerstone Community Church Addition
want to say you want these things to be explored and may want to have it come back to
you or if you want it to go to the Board of Supervisors with some different conditions,
you could do that, too.
II Mr. Keller asked staff to put the actions up.
Ms. Firehock moved to recommend approval of SP-2016-00010 Cornerstone
Community Church with the conditions outlined in the staff report, as amended that the
applicant use as large trees as possible in the bio-filters; that they shorten the spaces
alongside the buffer to pull back the amount of impact and encroachment into the buffer
and that they also work with staff to recalculate the parking spaces across the site to
determine whether or not they can further reduce impacts of the paved surface while
I still maintaining the same number of parking spaces and also to investigate the use of
permeable pavement of which there are several different technologies available.
Ms. More seconded the motion.
Mr. Blair said if I may could we procedurally have a vote to add that as a condition to the
special use permit (SUP) first and then if that is approved then you would vote on the
special use permit.
Mr. Keller thanked Mr. Blair and asked for a motion.
Ms. Firehock asked if it was for a motion to what she just said.
Mr. Blair said it would be a motion to amend the special use permit (SUP) to include the
condition you just stated.
Ms. Firehock asked if she did not have to state the conditions again since they had
been recorded.
Mr. Blair asked did the clerk get the condition.
Mr. Keller asked Ms. Taylor if she got the conditions, and Ms. Taylor replied yes.
Ms. Firehock made a motion to amend SP-2016-00010 Cornerstone Community Church
to include the conditions she stated previously.
Mr. Lafferty seconded the motion.
The motion passed by a vote of 6:0:1. (Dotson absent).
Mr. Keller pointed out now they have this added to the special use permit and now we
need another motion.
Mr. Blair said it would be to make a motion to approve the amended special use permit
(SUP).
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION—August 23,2016 10
16-580 Draft Partial Minutes-SP-2016-00010 Cornerstone Community Church Addition
T
Ms. Firehock made a motion to approve the amended SP-2016-00010 Cornerstone
Community Church.
3
111 Ms. More seconded the motion.
The motion passed by a vote of 6:0:1 (Dotson absent).
Mr. Keller noted this request would be going forward to the Board of Supervisors for
°. their consideration.
1
A
3
A
3
1
1
1
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION—August 23,2016 11
16-580 Draft Partial Minutes-SP-2016-00010 Cornerstone Community Church Addition
9
3
608 Preston Avenue
Suite 200 P 434.295.5624
3 TIONS GROUP
Charlottesville,VA 22902 F 434.295.8317
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS. www.timmons.com
September I6,2016
•
i
Mr.Scott Clark
Senior Planner—Rural Areas
1 Albemarle Community Development Department
Charlottesville,VA
1 RE: `SP-16-I 0 Cornerstone Community Church
Dear Mr.Clark:
i
1 During our Planning Commission meeting, regarding the Special Use Permit, associated with the additions at
s Cornerstone Church, there were a few additional conditions that were proposed. After meeting with you and
j working through some of these items, this letter serves as our formal response in an effort to work towards those
conditions.
1
• We have reduced the depth of the spaces along the perimeter of the parking area, from,I8'to 16'. This is in
accordance with the County code, as the adjacent grassy area will allow for overhang of the car. As we
reviewed there were no other feasible options to reduce the impervious surface. This, along with the
1 adjustment of grading around the site,allowed us to decrease our additional impacts into the buffer from 0.33
1 acres to 0.29 acres
i
• Per our discussion,we are accepting of the condition that the bioretention areas will include large shade trees,
taken from the County's "Large Deciduous Trees"section of the"Plant Canopy Calculations"document. As
1 we discussed,the canopy required will be equal to not less than 50%of the bioretention's floor area.
1 • Lastly, as we've discussed, we do not see permeable pavement (pavers or otherwise), as feasible on this site
for three reasons: I)the church wishes to use the existing pavement and/or base stone where practical,'2)the
slope of the surface is greater than 5%which does not conform to the required specification for permeable
pavement and 3)the church does not have the ability to practically maintain permeable pavement. The reason
the bioretention facilities were chosen, was to provide on-site stormwater treatment and stewardship of the
surrounding area (off site credits could have been purchased). Additionally, the bioretention areas can be
I maintained much easier by the church.
1
g
,
If you have any questions,please feel free to contact me at 434-327-1688.
Sincerely,
i
i
i
, at,/i5
Craig Kotarski, P.E.
' Sr.Project Manager
i
i
i
i
,
i
I
1
1
OV A
o$�®illy
II
IIRGI '`
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,North Wing
Charlottesville,Virginia 22902-4596
Phone(434)296-5832 Fax(434)972-4176
I
J
I
i
SP201600010 Cornerstone Community Church
4 County Engineer Comments on Permeable Pavement
The County Engineer does not recommend the use of permeable pavement on this site. He has said:
i
1 1. Stormwater management(SWM)requirements to be addressed during the site plan review
would already ensure that the site met stormwater treatment requirements,with or without
permeable paving.Stormwater treatment is not required to be provided on site.The applicant,
however,has committed to provide onsite stormwater treatment, rather than purchasing off-
site nutrient credits.Onsite treatment is a benefit for Albemarle County, especially
considering that this site drains directly to the reservoir. County Engineering does not dictate
the type of SWM measures to be used on any particular site,but instead allows applicants to
choose what is best for them and suitable for the site in accordance with State SWM
standards.
1 2. Permeable pavers require a strict maintenance program to prevent clogging, especially on a
1 site like this with many surrounding trees. Vacuuming and replacement of stone may need to
occur 3-4 times a year to maintain infiltration rates.
3. Pavers can potentially be a safety issue with the elderly, or those wearing heels or using
4 canes, depending on the type of pavers used.
1
i
1
I
1 1
I
,
1
I
I
�E I
VIII 1 ,1
M
- =\ 1I ill!
fir^, ii > t j "''"
s /� e s
i ',-. ''',,, \''4 ' 71"' 41. Olt \...,A A. ,,,'"AA,. '. . •I';:, .-' ' .m, D I
ito,
ste#
1 , . 1,, , ,-,,,,fg-fi,.,A, .4* -iii*:<y , -... :/;- '; ' Nir ;
,1,\\ •
li
Ili11
. . � If
ami
czo !!
1
I
1
1
A
i
A
A
I
A
1
A
A
1
a
1
'1,
!
A
A-
I
I 1
I
A
A I
i
1
1
3
!
,
3
i
I
3 I
9
,of AI
i4 I_'-'nll v
-,r
frIRGINZ�
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,North Wing
Charlottesville,Virginia 22902-4596
Phone(434)296-5832 Fax(434)972-4126
1
September 22, 2016
Craig Kotarski/Timmons Group
111 West High St
Charlottesville Va 22902
A
IRE: SP201600010 Cornerstone Community Church Addition
Dear Mr. Kotarski,
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meetingAugust 23,
on g2016, by a vote of 6:0:1,
3
recommended approval of the above-rioted petitions to the Board of Supervisors.
Please note that these recommendations is subject to the following conditions:
AmendedConditions
of Approval:
1. The applicant use as large trees as possible in the bio-filters;
2. The applicant shorten the spaces along the side of the buffer to pull back the amount of
1 impact and encroachment into the buffer, and
3. The applicant work with staff to recalculate the parking spaces across the site to
determine whether or not they can further reduce impacts of the paved surface while still
1 maintaining the same number of parking spaces and also to investigate the use of
permeable pavement of which there are several different technologies available.
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
1. Development and use shall be in general accord with the conceptual plan titled
"Cornerstone Community Church Addition—Application Plan" prepared by Timmons
Groups and dated 7/27/2016 (hereafter"Conceptual Plan"), as determined by the Director
of Planning and the Zoning Administrator. To be in accord with the Conceptual Plan,
development and use shall reflect the following major elements within the development
essential to the design of the development, as shown on the Conceptual Plan:
• building orientation
• building size
Minor modifications to the plan which do not conflict with the elements above may be
made to ensure compliance with the Zoning Ordinance.
2. The area of assembly shall be limited to a maximum 250-seat sanctuary.
3. There shall be
no day care center or private school on site without approval of a separate
special use permit;
4. The applicant shall obtain Virginia Department of Health approval of well and/or septic
system prior to approval of the final site plan.
,
I
I
-A
?
Ag„
i
5. All outdoor lighting shall be only full cut off fixtures and shielded to reflect light away from
1 all abutting properties. A lighting plan limiting light levels atall property lines to no
1 greater than 0.3 foot candles shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator or their
1 1 designee for approval. iii
6. If the use, structure, or activity for which this special use permit s issued s not
I. commenced by[date three years from Board approval], the permit shall be deemed
4 abandoned and the authority granted thereunder shall thereupon terminate.
A
11 If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to
A contact me at(434)296-5832.
A
I
1
1 Sinc-rely, ,
1 4 Ai//Of
1 .cott Clark
I Senior Planner
1 Planning Division
i
i
,
I
..
,..
1
1
,
1
;?..
i
3
I
1
A
1
4
I
J
,1
1
,
I
1
1
0
1
I
1
I
1
i
i
1
1
1
1
1 1
I 1
1 1
1 i
1 1
' 1
! i
!
, 1
1
1 1
i