HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP201700010 Review Comments Special Use Permit 2017-09-08���pti.4lRnjq
�'IRGSD}L�
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
September 8, 2017
Steve Driver
2374 Stuarts Draft Highway
Stuarts Draft, VA 24477
SDRIVER@TERRAENGINEERING.NET
RE: SP201700010 City Church — Revised July 28, 2017
Dear Mr. Driver:
County and State staff have reviewed your submittal with a revision date of July 28, 2017 for the above
referenced special use permit application. We would be glad to meet with you to discuss any of the
comments below.
Comments from all reviewers are provided below. The major questions/issues that need to be addressed
before moving forward to the Planning Commission are:
Planning
Initial comments on how your proposal generally relates to the Comprehensive Plan are provided below.
Comments on conformity with the Comprehensive Plan are provided to the Planning Commission and
Board of Supervisors as part of the staff report.
Comprehensive Plan
This parcel is designated Urban Density Residential in the Places29 Master Plan, which calls for
residential uses at a density between 6.01— 34 units/ acre, with supporting uses such as religious
institutions, schools, commercial, office and service uses.
Neighborhood Model
Projects located within the Development Areas are typically reviewed for consistency with each
of the Neighborhood Model Principles found in the Comprehensive Plan (see Objective 2 in the
Development Areas chapter). Since the proposal expands an existing use, a full Neighborhood
Model analysis is not provided; however, preliminary analysis is provided for the aspects of the
Neighborhood Model that do apply to your request.
Pedestrian Orientation
The site layout does not show new sidewalks being installed along Rio Road on the island that
located between the two access drives. Installation of sidewalks in this area will be necessary,
please show a sidewalk on the next submittal. Additionally, it would be preferable if a sidewalk
connection could be made to the side of the building that faces Rio Road. Please consider adding
1
a sidewalk that leads to that building face from Rio Road. Rev 1: Comment addressed.
Interconnected Streets and Transportation Networks
There are no interconnections to adjoining parcels shown on the plan. Staff recommends that an
interconnection be provided to the CATEC property. The proposal calls for new pavement and
travel ways at the rear of the property that will be adjacent to an existing paved travel way on the
CATEC property. The site layout could show a future interconnection between the parcels south
of the cell tower near the new parking spaces. This will help satisfy Fire and Rescue requirements
for safety and the interconnection objectives of the Neighborhood Model. Rev. 1: Comment
addressed.
Multimodal Transportation Opportunities — This principle is met by providing the bike rack on the
property.
Parks, Recreational Amenities, and Open Space
Most of the site is covered in building or parking. Most religious facilities have a small outdoor
area as a gathering or sitting area. Is there an opportunity to provide an outdoor amenity area?
Providing such an area would not preclude the approval of a Special Use Permit should the church
seek to operate a private school at the church in the future. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. Staff
acknowledges the applicant's response to this initial comment. Space is limited on the property
and no amenity area is shown on the concept plan. Passive space may be provided with the
final site plan if space is available after all other regulatory requirements are met.
Buildings and Spaces of Human Scale
It appears that two sides of the building will face Rio Road but no information regarding
architectural features has been provided. Building articulation will be necessary to make stories
clear and break up the massing of such a large building. Staff understands that no elevations have
been created yet; however, indicating (as a note on the drawings or otherwise) that those two
sides will provide features such as windows, doors, or and/or changes in plane to the building
faces will bring the plan closer to meeting the Neighborhood Model Principle for buildings and
spaces of human scale. Additional information on form, massing, and proportion can be found in
Appendix 8 of the Comprehensive Plan. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Architectural
elevations have not been provided to staff. No notes have been provided on the concept plan
regarding architectural features on the two building sides that will face Rio Road. Please submit
information on the proposed architectural as previously requested.
The concept plan shows building footprint dimensions on the new church as 130'+/- by 160'+/-.
This brings the building footprint to an approximate total of 20,800 square feet, which is
inconsistent with the maximum 20,000 square foot building footprint recommended for
institutional uses as stated in Table LU2 — Land Use Designations in Areas Around Centers in
Chapter 4 of the Places29 Master Plan. However, staff does not see this as a major concern
because the additional square footage is not significant.
Relegated Parking - This principle is met with parking to the side of, behind, and under the
proposed sanctuary.
Redevelopment — This principle is met by removing and replacing buildings which allows the site
to take advantage of existing infrastructure and make greater use of an existing lot in the
Development Areas.
2
Site Planning that Respects Terrain
Staff acknowledges that the property is a unique shape and the application has attempted to
avoid impacts to the terrain at the rear of the parcel. Is there any possibility that the building
could be moved closer to Rio Road so that less grading occurs in those areas at the rear? Rev. 1:
Staff acknowledges the applicant's response to the original comment.
Community Meeting
The meeting held on June 27, 2017 at the existing City Church property, 1010 Rio Rd. E satisfied
the requirements for a community meeting as described in Section 33.4 of the Zoning Ordinance.
The Planning Division also comments on the conceptual plan and other requirements of County Code.
These comments are provided below.
Conceptual Plan
• Please provide a Legend with all symbols, linetypes, and abbreviations shown. Rev. 1:
Comment addressed.
• Please provide a site data table on Sheet C2.0 detailing the proposed building square footage,
building height, and number of parking spaces proposed. Please include a parking space
calculation in compliance with Section 4.12 of the Zoning Ordinance. Rev. 1: Comment
addressed.
• On Sheet C2.0, please turn off the existing conditions layer that shows all existing
improvements, including those that will be demolished. Sheet C2.0 should only show existing
features and conditions that will remain once the new building is constructed. Rev. 1:
Comment addressed.
• Please state the zoning district, and all applicable overlay districts on the property. Please
amend Note 9 on Sheet 1 so that it clarifies whether the shaded areas represent Managed
or Preserved Critical Steep Slopes. As stated in the pre -application meeting Memorandum
sent to Steve Driver dated April 5, 2017, disturbance of Managed Steep Slopes must comply
with the design standards of Section 30.7.5. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. On Sheet
C1.0, please amend Note #10 so that the correct zoning district is listed. The property is
zoned R-4. Please amend Note #11 on Sheet C1.0 — the property lies in the Airport Impact
Area, and Steep Slopes — Managed Overlay Districts.
Please provide additional information on the directions and flow of parking circulation near
the building entrance. Additional comments from VDOT regarding internal circulation are
provided. Rev. 1: Comment not addressed. Please refer to VDOT comments regarding the
revised parking lot layout. As shown, the revised parking lot circulation does not meet VDOT
standards. The circulation should be shown on the concept plan in compliance with VDOT
requirements prior to scheduling a public hearing with the Planning Commission.
• Please label the screen hedge in front of the proposed bike rack. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
As stated in the pre -application meeting Memorandum sent to Steve Driver dated April 5,
2017, VDOT recommended closing one of the two existing entrances onto Rio Road E due to
traffic safety concerns. Both entrances are shown as remaining on the Concept Plan. Please
refer to VDOT comments regarding approval of an Access Management Exception for the
3
second egress only entrance onto Rio Road East. Please provide a note on the application plan
stating that "the egress only entrance onto Rio Road East is subject to approval of an Access
Management Exception by VDOT." Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
As stated in the pre -application meeting Memorandum sent to Steve Driver dated April S,
2017, staff recommended that a connection be made between TMP 06100-00-00-153A1 and
the CATEC property to the south (TMP 06100-00-00-15300). The proposal calls for new
pavement and travel ways at the rear of the property that will be adjacent to an existing paved
travel way on the CATEC property. Staff recommends showing an area for a future
interconnection between the parcels near south of the cell tower near the new parking
spaces. This will help satisfy Fire and Rescue requirements for safety and the interconnection
objectives of the Neighborhood Model. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Please be advised that a major site plan amendment application will need to be submitted to
the County for review and approval in order to commence construction on the property
following the Special Use Permit. Rev. 1: As stated in the Action after Receipt of Comments
section, staff will recommend approval of the special use permit with a condition that a
major site plan amendment be submitted to the County for review and approval in order to
commence construction on the property following approval of the Special Use Permit.
Engineering — Frank Pohl, 434-296-5832, ext. 7914, fpohl@albemarle.org
• No comments or objections.
VDOT —Adam Moore, 434-422-9782, adam.moore@vdot.virginia.gov
• Please refer to the attached comment letter from VDOT dated September 6, 2017.
Fire/Rescue — Robbie Gilmer, 434-296-5833, rgilmer@albemarle.org
• No comments or objections.
Zoning — Francis MacCall, 434-296-5832, ext. 3418, fmaccall@albemarle.org
• No comments or objections.
Inspections — Michael Dellinger, 434-972-4179, ext. 3228, mdellinger@albemarle.org
• No comments or objections.
Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA) — Alex Morrison, amorrison@serviceauthority.org
• 1 have reviewed the resubmitted SP and my comments are addressed. I hereby recommend
approval with the condition that an ACSA Water Construction Plan Review is required at the
final site plan stage.
Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority (RWSA) — Victoria Fort, vfort@rivanna.org
• Please see attached email dated August 2, 2017 for RWSA comments.
Action after Receipt of Comments
Staff recommends that you make the changes indicated in this letter and resubmit prior to a requesting a
Planning Commission public hearing. With the changes made that can be approved by VDOT, staff will be
able to recommend approval of your special use permit with conditions that include:
• The church's improvements and the scale and location of the improvements shall be
developed in general accord with the conceptual plan entitled, "City Church SP Application
Plan," prepared by Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, PC, including the following major
elements: location of building, parking, and pedestrian access across the frontage of the site.
• Any day care or private school use on site will require approval of a separate special use
permit.
• A major site plan amendment application will need to be submitted to the County for review
and approval in order to commence construction on the property following approval of the
Special Use Permit.
• VDOT approval of an Access Management Exception for the second egress only entrance will
be required prior to final site plan approval by the County.
• ACSA approval of an ACSA Water Construction Plan will be required prior to final site plan
approval by the County.
After you have read this letter, please take one of the actions identified on "Action After Receipt of
Comment Letter" which is attached.
Resubmittal
If you choose to resubmit, please use the attached form. There is a $1,075.00 fee for each additional
resubmittal. The resubmittal date schedule is provided for your convenience. If you choose to go to the
Planning Commission's next hearing, please be advised that the outstanding issues will prevent staff
from making a recommendation for approval.
Notification and Advertisement Fees
The next available Planning Commission hearing is October 10, 2017. Prior to scheduling a public hearing
with the Planning Commission, payment of the following fees for newspaper advertisements and
notification of adjoining owners are required:
$252.00 Cost for newspaper advertisement
$215.00 Cost for notification of adjoining owners (minimum $200 + actual postage/$1 per owner after
50 adjoining owners)
$467.00 Total amount due prior to Planning Commission public hearing
You will need to notify us no later than noon on Friday, September 15, 2017 and pay legal ad fees by
noon on Monday, September 18, 2017.
Prior to the Board of Supervisor's public hearing, payment of the newspaper advertisement for the
Board hearing is needed:
$252.00 Additional amount due prior to Board of Supervisors public hearing
$719.00 Total amount for all notifications Fees may be paid in advance. Payment for both the Planning
Commission and Board of Supervisors public hearings may be paid at the same time.
Additional notification fees will not be required unless a deferral takes place and adjoining owners need
to be notified of a new date.
Feel free to contact me if you have questions. I can be reached at blangille@albemarle.org.
Sincerely,
Cameron Cameron Langille
Senior Planner
Planning Division Enclosed: Action After Receipt of Comment Letter
5
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
F-1%11[0 iLIr_12l4:4:4X :1[2&Q&die]AI►IFiIailk 11a4:11a14.1
Within 30 days of the date of this letter, please do one of the following:
(1) Resubmit in response to review comments
(2) Request indefinite deferral
(3) Request that your Planning Commission public hearing date be set
(4) Withdraw your application
(1) Resubmittal in Response to Review Comments
If you plan to resubmit within 30 days, make sure that the resubmittal is on or before 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. Be
sure to include the resubmittal form on the top of your materials.
The application fee which you paid covers staff review of the initial submittal and one resubmittal.
Each subsequent resubmittal requires an additional fee. (See attached Fee Schedule.)
(2) Request Indefinite Deferral
If you plan to resubmit after 30 days from the date of the comment letter, you need to request an
indefinite deferral. Please provide a written request 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.)
(3) Request Planning Commission Public Hearing Date be Set
At this time, you may schedule a public hearing with the Planning Commission. However, we do
not advise that you go directly to public hearing if staff has identified issues in need of resolution
that can be addressed with a resubmittal.
After outstanding issues have been resolved and/or when you are ready to request a public
hearing, staff will set your public hearing date for the Planning Commission in accordance with the
Planning Commission's published schedule and as mutually agreed by you and the County. The
staff report and recommendation will be based on the latest information provided by you with
your initial submittal or resubmittal. Please remember that all resubmittals must be made on or
before a resubmittal date.
By no later than twenty-one (21) days before the Planning Commission's public hearing, a
newspaper advertisement fee and an adjoining owner notification fee must be paid. (See attached
Fee Schedule) Your comment letter will contain the actual fees you need to pay. Payment for an
additional newspaper advertisement is also required twenty-two (22) days prior to the Board of
Supervisors public hearing. These dates are provided on the attached Legal Ad Payments for
Public Hearings form.
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.
(4) Withdraw Your Application
If at any time you wish to withdraw your application, please provide your request in writing.
Failure to Respond
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 choices is made within 10 days, staff will schedule your
application for a public hearing based on the information provided with your original submittal or
the latest submittal staff received on a resubmittal date.
Fee Payment
Fees may be paid in cash or by check and must be paid at the Community Development Intake
Counter. Make checks payable to the County of Albemarle. Do not send checks directly to the
Review Coordinator.
7
Charles A. Kilpatrick, P.E.
Commissioner
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Road
Culpeper. Virginia 22701
September 6, 2017
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Attn: Cameron Langille
Re: City Church
SP 2017-00010
Review #2
Dear Mr. Langille:
The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use
Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan as submitted by Terra Engineering and offers
the following comments:
1. The proposed plan requires an approved Access Management Exception for the second
egress only entrance.
2. The parking Iot circulation pattern needs to be modified. This layout creates a de -facto
intersection just inside the entrance. Moving these movements farther away from the
main entrance will improve circulation and the performance of the entrance.
Please provide a copy of the revised plan along with a comment response letter. If further
information is desired, please contact Willis Bedsaul at 434-422-9866.
A VDOT Land Use Permit will be required prior to any work within the right-of-way. The
owner/developer must contact the Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use
Section at (434) 422-9399 for information pertaining to this process.
Sincerely,
�. Allot —
Adam J. Moore, P.E.
Area Land Use Engineer
Charlottesville Residency
VirginiaDOT.org
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
Cameron Langille
From: Victoria Fort <vfort@rivanna.org>
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2017 8:00 AM
To: Cameron Langille
Subject: RE: SP201700010 City Church
No capacity certification needed. Thanks.
From: Cameron Langille [mailto:blangille@albemarle.org]
Sent: Friday, August 4, 2017 3:53 PM
To: Victoria Fort <vfort@rivanna.org>
Subject: RE: SP201700010 City Church
Hi Victoria,
Thanks for sending me these comments. It looks like RWSA doesn't have any concern with the project other than getting
a capacity certification approved — is this something they can do during site plan review?
The applicant resubmitted the revised application plan this week and I sent a copy to ACSA. Does RWSA need a copy as
well?
Thanks,
Cameron
From: Victoria Fort [mailto:vfort@rivanna.org]
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2017 5:34 PM
To: Cameron Langille <blangille@albemarle.org>
Subject: SP201700010 City Church
Cameron,
I realize comments have already gone out to the applicant for SP201700010 — City Church, however, I wanted to provide
RWSA comments for your records. Below is a completed copy of the form that was provided to us by Elaine Echols for
SP & ZMA Applications.
To be filled out by RWSA for ZMA's and SP's
1. Capacity issues for sewer that may affect this proposal None Known
2. Requires Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority Capacity Certification Yes No X
3. Water flow or pressure issues that may affect this proposal None Known
4. "Red Flags" regarding service provision (Use attachments if necessary) None Known
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thank you,
Victoria
Victoria Fort, P.E.
Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority
1
695 Moores Creek Lane
Charlottesville, VA 22902
(P): (434) 977-2970 ext. 205
(F): (434) 295-1146
2017 Submittal and Review Schedule
Special Use Permits and Zoning Map Amendments
Resubmittal Schedule
Resubmittal Dates
Comments to applicant
for decision on whether
to proceed to Public
Hearing
Payment Due for Public
Hearing Legal Ad
Planning
Commission Public
Hearing No sooner than*
COB Auditorium
Monday
Friday
Monday
Tuesday
Nov 07 2016
Dec 09 2016
Dec 19 2016
Jan 10
Nov 21 2016
Dec 23 2016
Jan 09
Jan 31
Dec 05 2016
Jan 06
Jan 16
Feb 07
Dec 19 2016
Jan 20
Jan 30
Feb 21
Tue Jan 03
Feb 03
Feb 13
Mar 07
Tue Jan 17
Feb 17
Feb 27
Mar 21
Feb 06
Mar 10
Mar 13
Apr 04
Tue Feb 21
Mar 24
Mar 27
Apr 18
Mar 06
Apr 07
Apr 10
May 02
Mar 20
Apr 21
May 01
May 23
Apr 03
May 05
May 22
Jun 13
Apr 17
May 19
May 22
Jun 13
May 01
Jun 02
Jun 05
Jun 27
May 15
Jun 16
Jun 19
Jul 11
Jun 05
Jul 07
Jul 17
Aug 08
Jun 19
Jul 21
Jul 31
Aug 22
Jul 03
Aug 04
Aug 14
Sep 05
Jul 17
Aug 18
Tue Sep 05
Sep 26
Aug 07
Sep 08
Sep 18
Oct 10
Aug 21
Sep 22
Oct 02
Oct 24
Tue Sep 05
Oct 06
Oct 16
Nov 07
Sep 18
Oct 20
Oct 23
Nov 14
Oct 02
Nov 03
Nov 13
Dec 05
Oct 16
Nov 17
Nov 27
Dec 19
Oct 30
Dec 01
Jan 02 2018
Jan 23 2018
Nov 13
Dec 15
Jan 08 2018
Jan 30 2018
Dec 18
Jan 19 2018
Jan 29 2018
Feb 20 2018
Tue Dec 26
Jan 26 2018
Jan 29 2018
Feb 20 2018
Tue Jan 02 2018
Feb 02 2018
Feb 12 2018
Mar 06 2018
Tue Jan 16 2018
Feb 16 2018
Feb 26 2018
Mar 20 2018
Bold italics = submittal/meeting day is different due to a holiday.
Dates with shaded background are not 2017.
2018 dates are tentative.
*Public hearing dates have been set by the Planning Commission; however, if due to unforeseen
circumstances the Planning Commission is unable to meet on this date, your project will be moved to the
closest available agenda date.
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY SP #
Fee Amount $ Date Paid By who? Receipt # Ck# Bv:
a
Resubmittal of information for
CV � 1 T T T • i
Special use Permit �—
PROJECT NUMBER THAT HAS BEEN ASSIGNED:
Owner/Applicant Must Read and Sign
I hereby certify that the information provided with this resubmittal is what has been requested from staff
Signature of Owner, Contract Purchaser Date
Print Name Daytime phone number of Signatory
FEES to be paid after application
For original Special Use Permit fee of $1,075
❑
First resubmission (TO BE PAID WHEN THE RESUBMISSION IS MADE TO INTAKE STAFF)
Free
❑
Each additional resubmission (TO BE PAID WHEN THE RESUBMISSION IS MADE TO INTAKE STAFF)
$538
For original Special Use Permit fee of $2,000
❑
First resubmission (TO BE PAID WHEN THE RESUBMISSION IS MADE TO INTAKE STAFF)
Free
❑
Each additional resubmission (TO BE PAID WHEN THE RESUBMISSION IS MADE TO INTAKE STAFF)
$1,075
County of Albemarle Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Voice: (434) 296-5832 Fax: (434) 972-4126
Revised 11/2/2015 Page 1 of 1