Albemarle County Planning Commission

October 9, 2007

                                        

The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a meeting, work session and a public hearing on Tuesday, October 9, 2007, at 6:00 p.m., at the County Office Building, Lane Auditorium, Second Floor, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.

 

Members attending were Jon Cannon, Bill Edgerton, Calvin Morris, Vice-Chairman; Marcia Joseph, Chairman; Eric Strucko; Duane Zobrist and Pete Craddock. Mr. Zobrist arrived at 6:15 p.m. Julia Monteith, AICP, Senior Land Use Planner for the University of Virginia was absent. 

 

Other officials present were John Shepherd, Chief of Current Development; Wayne Cilimberg, Planning Director; David Pennock, Principal Planner; Rebecca Ragsdale, Senior Planner; Scott Clark, Senior Planner; Allan Schuck, Senior Engineer and Greg Kamptner, Deputy County Attorney

 

Call to Order and Establish Quorum:

 

Ms. Joseph called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and established a quorum.

 

            Public Hearing Items:

 

SP-2007-00034 First Church of the Nazarene – Church (Sign # 9, 14, 41)

PROPOSED: Church with seating for 374 persons, on a 7.32-acre portion of an 865.167-acre parcel.

ZONING CATEGORY/GENERAL USAGE: RA -- Rural Areas: agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre); EC Entrance Corridor - Overlay to protect properties of historic, architectural or cultural significance from visual impacts of development along routes of tourist access

SECTION: 10.2.2.35 Church building and adjunct cemetery

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY:  Rural Areas - preserve and protect agricultural, forestal, open space, and natural, historic and scenic resources/ density (.5 unit/ acre)

ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes

LOCATION: North side of intersection of Richmond Road (US 250) and Louisa Road (Route 22), south of Interstate 64.

TAX MAP/PARCEL: Tax Map 79 Parcel 10

MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rivanna

(Scott Clark)

AND

 

SP-2007-00035 First Church of the Nazarene – Daycare

PROPOSED: Church with seating for 374 persons, on a 7.32-acre portion of an 865.167-acre parcel.

ZONING CATEGORY/GENERAL USAGE: RA -- Rural Areas: agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre); EC Entrance Corridor - Overlay to protect properties of historic, architectural or cultural significance from visual impacts of development along routes of tourist access

SECTION: 10.2.2.35 Church building and adjunct cemetery

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY:  Rural Areas - preserve and protect agricultural, forestal, open space, and natural, historic and scenic resources/ density (.5 unit/ acre)

ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes

LOCATION: North side of intersection of Richmond Road (US 250) and Louisa Road (Route 22), south of Interstate 64.

TAX MAP/PARCEL: Tax Map 79 Parcel 10

MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rivanna

(Scott Clark)

 

Mr. Clark presented a power point presentation and summarized the staff report.  (See staff report.)

 

§         The applicant requests 2 special use permits on this property.  One is for a church with a capacity of 374 on a 7 acre portion.  On the same site and in the same building is a request for an afterschool care program for 100 children.  The site is located on Route 250 at its intersection with Route 22 along the Interstate 64 corridor.  The church will be located south of the interstate and separate from the rest of the estate. There are some trees that will buffer the church from the interstate. 

§         The conceptual plan was submitted.  A right turn lane is proposed for the entrance.  The applicant has worked with VDOT to make sure that their entrance location does not cause any conflicts with the road design or with the power lines and other aspects of whatever else needs to go on there.

§         An email was received on Monday with the question about petroleum spills on this site.  There have been 2 locations shown on the map where in the past there have been petroleum spills.  One was at Stone Robinson School in the 1970’s when construction work on the site broke a fuel line and contaminated the soil.  It was an on site spill that eventually the case was closed when the spill was cleaned up.  The school was able to go on public water.  The second and closer site was the GOCO Oil Site.  Their tanks were adjacent to the railroad.  The summary report was sent today by email to the Commission regarding what has happened on these 2 sites from the Natural Resources Manager.  This is an area where the long term contamination in the ground led to the well contamination at GOCO.  They have repeated attempts to find a clean well and eventually were not able to find any more.  They were able to go onto public water to avoid the health problems on that site.  The case was closed.  The closure of that case does not mean that any clean up was done.  It simply means that at the time of closure in 2000 DEQ felt that there was no threat to existing receptors, which would be wells, basements or structures or surface water bodies. However, that closure did not imply that it was necessarily safe to add other wells near this site. Staff does not have any further information from DEQ yet to say whether or not there is a contaminant. The notes from the Service Authority extension indicate that they were not finding any kinds of contaminants off this site.  But, that data is limited and is several years old. 

§         Staff is recommending approval of the requests with the list of conditions in the staff report.  Condition #5 would require Virginia Department of Health approval of all septic systems.  If the issue with the GOCO oil spill is of concern it could potentially modify that condition to indicate that the Health Department permission includes some consultation with DEQ to verify to some standard of accuracy that there is not expected to be a health threat from using the water on the proposed church site.   However, were there to be a health threat in the water later they could be facing a request to add that site as yet another water service from the public water line, which would normally not fit under the County’s policy for public service in the rural area. However, in the case where there is an existing use and there is a health threat it would fit their policy.  Staff has not way to estimate the likelihood that there could be any contamination on this site.  Staff cannot say whether there will or there won’t be.  But, if there was in the future that might be a concern.

§         Staff recommends approval for the child care use with 3 conditions with the limited number and the Department of Health approval that could be added.

 

Ms. Joseph said that the staff report talks about an afterschool care, but there are no recommended hours of operation in the conditions of approval.

 

Mr. Clark said that could easily be added.  The application lists the hours of operation as Monday through Friday from 1 to 6 p.m.

 

There being no further questions for staff, Ms. Joseph opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to address the Commission.

 

Norman McKnight, architect representative for the church, said that they have been working several months with staff on all of the issues that were brought forward tonight except for the potential contamination.  That was brand new issue brought up today.  They have had 3 engineering companies on the site and there is no apparent contamination.  The site is higher than the surrounding ones that did have contamination.  There is rock at roughly 6’ below the surface. That does not mean that something might not be found there.  The church is very concerned about that and will work to check any of the requirements out there particularly with the wells. From that point of view they appreciate working with the staff and their recommendation that this be approved.  They have worked very hard to meet all of the issues given to them that were important to the County in terms of the visibility and all of the other issues.  They feel that they have met them.  They have worked hard and have moved the building around.  There was a limited amount of soil that could be used for the septic system.  The entire site was checked for engineering.  Three spaces were identified and those are being used. It has taken nearly all of those spaces to accommodate the septic system. They moved the building as to Route 22 as they could without destroying those sites.  There are not sites in the back for septic.  Those sites are all on the front side.    That was how this building was determined.  The location is about mid-way into the site.  They did section cuts through the property.  The section cuts show from Route 22 and I-64.  Actually the parking will not be seen because this site is approximately 20’ higher than Route 22.  As you drive in only the upper part of the building will be seen and not the parking itself except for the driveway into the space.  The site is elevated from both of those roads. There is a large buffer between the interstate and it is heavily wooded.   Chances are the building will not be visible from I-64.  If anything, only a portion of the roof will be visible.  Due to the high embankment the building will not be visible from Route 22 until the curve.  They have worked with staff and addressed all of the issues.  They don’t know of any other outstanding issues.

 

Ms. Joseph asked if there were any questions for the applicant.

 

Mr. Strucko asked if they had seen staff’s recommended conditions in the report, particularly the reduction in the parking to 150 spots.

 

Mr. McKnight replied that they were in agreement to reduce the parking to 150.  He agreed with all of the conditions sent to them by staff.

 

Mr. Edgerton asked if he agreed with the hours of operation as stated by staff, and Mr. McKnight replied that he agreed.

 

Ms. Joseph invited public comment.

 

Pat Neapolitan voiced many concerns related to the proposal. Today she spoke with Todd Pensenburger of DEQ who confirmed her fears regarding the petroleum contamination.  She added that there were other flagged sites in the area.  Staff should conduct routine searches to located PC numbers for the DEQ labeled impacted sites.  The web site is just a click away.  She asked how anyone can conceivably consider placing another school next door to a mining operation.  Stone Robinson School now rests on the perimeter of the quarry.  The impact on and to that school is horrendous.  She personally knows the situation well as she taught in the school for decades.  The noise from equipment is constant.  The dust floats above and beyond the property line as anyone would observe on a drive by on Route 250.  The blasting occurs in the afternoon while children are in aftercare and still on site.  She well remembers children crying after the blast. She asked if they are concerned for the emotional physical health of children learning and playing within the shadow of a quarry.  Is it wise to create another situation whereby say children with asthma are exposed to any irritates, dust particles composed of free silica and some asbestos. To her knowledge no environmental impact study has been completed on the effects of the dust on the children and staff in the existing school.  I have personally witnessed quarry workers wearing protective masks near the school.  The children and staff in the school did not have access to protective equipment.  Albemarle County is the only municipality that she has ever heard of that promotes locating schools on the edge of mines.  She believed that quality of life for students and staff is currently being impacted.  Let’s don’t add another situation with a new school whereby children are placed in a position in that rights to breathe the best air are violated.  She disagreed with the proposal, but feel for the innocence in the church.  She appeals to those in the church family not to expose their children to possible risks.  She asked that they also respect the rural area and heed related concerns for increases in traffic with all of the connecting dangers.  The church has good intentions.  Sadly the environmental impacts at the site are beyond comprehension in the view of many.  Someone should have filled the church in before now concerning the whole story.

 

John Embrey, adjacent resident at Edgehill Farm, said that unfortunately he did not get a mailed notice of the hearing.  Therefore, he was playing catch up in trying to figure out what this is all about.  He shared the concerns of the previous speaker over these environmental issues.  These issues need to be straightened out before any approval is given.  He also had 2 other concerns which predated these environmental ones.  First is the traffic issue.  This is an extremely busy intersection.  He questioned the wisdom of adding a substantial development and traffic burden particularly so close to the intersection.  They need to think about whether there is a possibility that all of this new traffic is going to lead to additional expense to the county later on as the intersection needs to be upgraded further.  The second issue is the scale of the childcare proposal.  A 100 childcare facility is really over reaching.  It is inappropriately large for this particular site.  There were some instances cited in the staff report of comparably sized childcare facilities, but not on a continuous basis.  The real issue is if the childcare is currently being served in Charlottesville what is the point of bringing them out at rush hour and back into down during the rush hour traffic.  There will be a large number of parents dropping off and picking up these children.  Adding a medium sized school to the community needs to be done in the right location with the right concern for traffic and other issues.  He encouraged the Planning Commission to take these potential problems into account when they complete their deliberations.

 

Jeff Werner, with Piedmont Environmental Council, said that when something happens a mile from the Southwest Mountains Rural Historic District his phone rings off the hook.  Also, his emails go crazy.  He sees some folks in the audience from that area and possibly he can summarize some of what he has been hearing.  The daycare center raises some questions.  The road waives gently up and down and the line of sight is not good.  He asked why VDOT was not asking for a left hand turn lane.  He could not imagine that the proposed right hand turn lane would the direction that most of the people would be coming from.  Many people would be coming out in the 4 to the 6 p.m. traffic witching hour.  Many of the residents traveling to Fluvanna take Route 250 instead of the interstate.  He asked VDOT if it was safe to have people coming in and taking that left onto Route 22/230 on and coming to a stop at 5 p.m. and taking a left hand turn into that church.  That is a question that needs to be answered for the safety of both those who use the facility and are in this community.  He was concerned about the potential water concerns.  He asked if they were going to allow the church to be built and then determine that their water is contaminated.  One of the things they were concerned about was that there was a lot of property there just below I-64. It is still in the rural area and they don’t want to see a strip mall type of area becoming the entrance to the Southwest Mountains.  It would be wise to check the water situation before allowing the church to put a lot of money into the construction of the sanctuary and the school.  But, primarily he would ask if that turn lane is safe.  There is a lot of traffic on that road between 4 and 6 p.m.  Everybody should be concerned about traffic safety in that area.

    

Jerry Lee Chiffon, resident of Cismont, said that she drives this road every day.  She urged each member of the Commission and staff to get on that road during the hours of 4 to 6 p.m. when people will be picking up their children from childcare.  In driving into town on that road frequently there are tractor trailers on the wrong side of the road coming around that turn.  If the trucks have to stop at the rate of speed that they go on that road when someone makes a left hand turn it is going to create a dangerous situation.  This road is very dangerous.  She can barely get out of Route 600 onto Route 231 that goes into Route 22 many, many times at that hour. She cannot imagine 50 or 100 parents trying to get in and out of that section.  The traffic is terrible on that road. They have been unable to limit the trucks on that road.  It is dangerous for every citizen that drives that road.  If they add to the traffic it is going to be more so.

 

There being no further public comment, Ms. Joseph closed the public hearing to place the matter before the commission.

 

Ms. Joseph agreed with Ms. Chiffon that it was dicey around that corner.  She totaled a car coming around that area because a tractor trailer was coming into her lane.  It is a bad corner there.

 

Mr. Craddock asked if they made it a requirement for a left hand turn lane would VDOT have to agree to it.  Or would it be meaningless if they said that they have to have a left hand turn lane and VDOT says that they don’t need it.

 

Mr. Cilimberg noted that ultimately VDOT makes the decision through their permitting process.  If the Commission wants that to be a condition staff would certainly take it to VDOT before this gets to the Board and determine with them whether that would be an allowable improvement.  He did not know how that would relate to the intersection improvement that will be Route 22 and 250. That is something staff would have to investigate with VDOT.

 

 

Mr. Craddock said that from his experiences on the road he felt that at a minimum they need a left hand turn lane.  He was surprised that the entrance was put on a curve.  It is a pretty quick acceleration coming from Shadwell Store.

 

Mr. Morris said that the time for pickup is really inappropriate for that section of the road.  As stated it is a very dangerous stretch of road.  Even a left hand turn lane, although it might help to some degree.  If someone is sitting there waiting to turn left and a tractor trailer or another car comes up in back of them they are not going to be able to stop.  He felt that the school is inappropriate with that particular spot as far as the entrance.  It is a bad spot.

 

Ms. Joseph noted that from reading the memo from staff about the water contamination it appears that DEQ thinks that everybody in the Stone Robinson School area is on public water, which is not true.  Therefore, she was confused.

 

Mr. Clark said that he did not think that the contamination testing went beyond the school property.  He did not know what they meant by local residents exactly. By the time they wrote the memo in 1995 the school was on public water.  Certainly the school was on public water supply at that point.  He did not know to what degree DEQ checked any of the surrounding properties.

 

Mr. Zobrist suggested that they make it a condition of site plan approval that all of the septic and water be vetted first.  He felt that Mr. Scott made a good plan.  The last thing they want to happen is to get this built out there and then find out there is no water.  Then under our policy the county would have to provide water for them.

 

Mr. Clark replied that was his concern. 

 

Mr. Zobrist asked that be vetted very early in the process.  He would also like to ask that they consider another entrance.  He was concerned about the safety.  With respect to the quarry location he felt that everybody has to make that decision themselves.  If the people don’t like it they won’t go to church there and they won’t take their children there.  That is a decision for the elders in the church as opposed to the Commission.  He was concerned with the safety and water issues.

 

Mr. Strucko asked the applicant to come forward and address the issue.

 

Mr. McKnight said that the first thing that was done when the church was looking at the property was to meet with the state and the Highway Department.  The church has worked with them extensively. A local engineer has chosen this location as the best place.  The road will be reworked with a light and an intersection that will slow that traffic down and give time for the people to get out of the driveway.  This is where the state says that this needs to be.  They have checked the visibility each way on the curve. With the reworking on the road and the elevations that it will be they say that it won’t be any problem.  This is the State Highway Department that has been working with our engineer on this.  Before they started the site plan to develop this building they gave us the location for the entrance.  The Highway Department said this is where the entrance will be and now they needed to design the building to fit the entrance.

 

Mr. Zobrist asked how long term is that planned improvement going to take.

 

Mr. McKnight referred the question to the pastor.

 

Mr. Cilimberg noted that it was a project planned to be underway, but he did not have a date.

 

Mr. McKnight noted that they have already moved all the electric poles back for this project.  It was done within the last 2 weeks.

 

Mr. Craddock said that a few years ago they had Shadwell Store before us.  The delay was Edgehill Farm and some footage over there was why the intersection had not been built yet. 

 

Mr. McKnight said that a good portion of this property that the church would get has been given as right-of-way for several feet.  The lines have already been moved back.  He was told that they will start in the spring on this work, which will be long before the church.

 

Bill Willis, Pastor of the Nazarene Church, said that the way they understand it the light will be kind of in the Y.  They are going to move the gasoline station back.  The light will be where you currently take the left.  The traffic will come to light and one would choose to go straight on 250 or there will be a stoplight to go left on Route 22.  VDOT explained that the traffic will stop there and there will be plenty of sight line to that entrance from that direction.  Then coming from Gordonsville there will be 300’ of turn lane.  That is why the 1 turn lane was suggested to the church.  Their hours of operation will be taken care of with the new light.  Their main hours of operation would be on Sunday.  There are 2 wells existing on the property.  They have not verified that those wells are not contaminated, but that will be done in the future.  That should not be an issue.

 

Ms. Joseph asked if anything was received from the ARB Design Planner.

 

Mr. Clark replied that Attachment E had the comments from Margaret Maliszewski, Design Planner.

 

Ms. Joseph said that Ms. Maliszewski talked about consolidating the parking rather than surrounding the building with parking.  She asked if this project will go to the ARB. 

 

Mr. Clark said that the project will go to the ARB.  The expectation is that they will address the lighting and the landscaping during the site plan process.  If the building location and general layout is established with the special use permit, the ARB will not change that during the site plan review.  The ARB would then have to work within that general layout.

 

Mr. Cilimberg said that condition 1 was going to establish the basic perimeters for the plan.

 

Ms. Joseph noted that she could not support it with the parking all the way around it.  That is something that they try to discourage all of the time.  The scale is a little large.  She could not support the daycare aspect of this with 375 with the thought of increasing to 500 is a lot to ask for this parcel.  It is also a lot to ask for a rural church.

 

Mr. Morris supported the church, but not the daycare.

 

Mr. Strucko noted that the hours of operation will create a traffic situation around this church for the daycare operation.

 

Ms. Joseph opposed the request because of the daycare concern and the size and scale of the church.

 

Mr. Cannon voiced concerns that the ARB would not have the ability to work with the applicant on the parking to protect the Entrance Corridor.

 

Mr. Cilimberg noted that the ARB could work with the screening, but the location of the parking is established through condition 1.

 

Mr. Cannon reiterated that there would be screening opportunities through the ARB, but not for relocation of the parking.

 

Mr. Clark said that they proposed 180 parking spaces.  They could remove 30 parking spaces from the corner because it involves a lot of grading. 

 

Mr. Cilimberg noted that the entire frontage was on Route 22.  There is no frontage on Route 250.

 

Mr. Morris noted that churches receive special deliberations.

 

Mr. Kamptner agreed that churches are treated differently from commercial uses per the statutes.  But churches still have to comply with all safety and health regulations.  The traffic needs to be addressed as well since there is a place of assembly on the site.

 

Mr. Cannon noted that the ARUBA Act gives churches special status in land use decisions by local government.

 

Mr. Craddock said that he lived the closest to the site and was familiar with the concerns expressed.  He was concerned with the left hand turn lane and suggested that the church pursue the issue in due diligence.  He was also concerned with the county’s obligation down the road if it was approved and later it was found that the well was contaminated.

 

Mr. Zobrist said that he was sympathetic to churches.  But, he thought that the health, safety and welfare concerns limited the daycare school in our process and should meet the standards as all of the others.  He agreed that there were parking and screening issues to be worked out.  He suggested that the church find another site.  He was not sure that this was a good site for a big church, but acknowledged that it was hard to find a good church site in the county.  There are a lot of issues that he would be worried about.

 

The Planning Commission discussed the following concerns:

§         Address health, safety and welfare issues.

§         Address the issues dealing with the intersection and the entrance to the property that might not meet proper sight distance.  Staff needs to work with VDOT to make sure what they are recommending at the entrance.  The Commission strongly recommends a left hand turn lane.

§         The possible groundwater contamination, which might be out of their preview.

§         The site plan totally ignores relegated parking as noted in the Comp Plan.  Relegated parking needs to be addressed. 

§         The parking and adequate screening needs to be addressed including the number of parking spaces to be reduced to 150 spaces.

§         Parking needs to be reduced to 150 spaces.

 

Mr. McKnight said that the church would like to defer the child care issue and take it off the table. 

 

Mr. Morris said the he was inclined to move for approval of SP-2007-00034, with all of the conditions recommended in the staff report with the exception of Mr. Craddock’s request to have a left hand turn lane on Route 22 be strongly considered by the Board of Supervisors.

 

Mr. Strucko asked if condition 1 was subject to change.

 

Mr. Cilimberg said that they know that the plan is subject to change to drop 30 parking spaces.  But, he did not know if the condition itself needs to change.  If necessary they certainly can do that before the Board meeting.  The suggestion that a left turn lane be considered by the Board really is not a condition.  Either the Commission wants it to be a condition or not.  If the Commission thinks that it should be considered it is kind of outside of the conditions, but staff can look at it.

 

Mr. Strucko asked that the minutes reflect it.

 

Mr. Cilimberg noted that staff would also talk to VDOT before the Board meeting about that so that if in fact that is something that the Board wants to include, they would be able to have a condition for them.

 

Mr. Strucko asked if condition 1c should then read 120.

 

Mr. Cilimberg replied no, that it started as that and is now 150. 

 

Mr. Cannon asked if he had in the motion a provision amending 1c to indicate relegated parking to the extent possible.

 

Mr. Morris replied that was correct.

 

Mr. Zobrist noted that condition 5 would be a condition of site approval.

 

Mr. Morris replied that was correct.

 

Mr. Cilimberg said that there has been a request in the past by Zoning that they not be essentially restating what is already a requirement in the conditions.  It is a much understood point because site plans have to be in conformance with the special use permit.  He suggested that condition not be added although it is completely understood that it needs to be part of the process.

 

Ms. Joseph noted that it helps the applicant understand, too. 

 

Mr. Cilimberg explained that staff actually writes a letter now.  The letter includes a statement that conditions are subject to a site plan approval.

 

Action on SP-2007-00034 (Church):

 

Motion:   Mr. Morris moved, Mr. Zobrist seconded, to approve SP-2007-00034, First Church of the Nazarene- Church, with the conditions recommended in the staff report, as amended. 

 

Note:  The Planning Commission requests that a left hand turn lane on Route 22 be strongly considered by the Board of Supervisors. Prior to the Board of Supervisors meeting staff needs to work with VDOT to make sure what they are recommending.

 

  1. The church’s improvements and the scale and location of the improvements shall be developed in general accord with the conceptual plan entitled “Conceptual Master Plan, Charlottesville First Church of the Nazarene”, prepared by TCS Engineering Co., LLC, and dated “15AUG07.”, provided that:
    1. Entrance improvements shall be approved by VDOT prior to final site plan approval, and shall include a right-turn lane at the entrance.
    2. All parking setbacks and undisturbed buffers required by Zoning Ordinance section 21.7, Minimum Yard Requirements, shall apply; and
    3. The number of parking spaces shall not exceed 150 without amendment of this special use permit.  Relegated parking should be used to the greatest extent possible.
  2. The area of assembly shall be limited to a maximum 374-seat sanctuary.
  3. Facilities on the site shall be used for church activities and shall not be rented or used for separate commercial uses available to the public.
  4. All outdoor lighting shall be arranged or shielded to reflect light away from the abutting properties.
  5. Virginia Department of Health approval of well and septic systems before final site plan approval.

 

The motion passed by a vote of 5:2.  (Ms. Joseph and Mr. Edgerton voted nay.) 

 

Ms. Joseph stated that SP-2007-00035 First Church of the Nazarene will go before the Board of Supervisors on November 7, 2007 with a recommendation for approval.

 

Action on SP-2007-00035 (Daycare):

Motion:  Mr. Strucko moved, Mr. Morris seconded, to accept the applicant’s request for indefinite deferral for SP-2007-00035, First Church of the Nazarene- Daycare.

 

The motion passed by a vote of 7:0. 

 

Ms. Joseph stated that SP-2007-00035 First Church of the Nazarene – Daycare was indefinitely deferred.

 

Return to exec summary