SR 05:244 - Laserfiche WebLink

The residents who attended the neighborhood meetings proposed a linear building design. They believe that this building configuration, by removing the parking lot from the northern portion of the site, would minimize noise and other impacts from the northern parking lot on the nearby homes. Staff believes having the new sanctuary or multi-purpose building located north of the existing facility near the existing residences on Bryce Canyon Court may create a greater impact to the residents as a result of the noise created by the uses in the sanctuary (or a potential multi-purpose building). Additionally, having the sanctuary or multi-purpose building front on National Park Road may encourage parishioners to park on that street as it would be closer to the worship or multi-use area than the parking lot. Staffnotes that the clustered design would use buildings to screen the majority of the parking lot, avoid a 30-foot high cathedral-like building next to residential properties, and interrupt a linear building massing along National Park Road. From a site use and management perspective, the applicant believes that the proposed clustered design is preferable to the linear design. Church representatives believe that the proposed building configuration would facilitate a phased expansion and would cluster the buildings so that the main activity areas, the multi-purpose building, the sanctuary and preschool, would relate functionally and would be located away from the residences while locating the parking lot, with no access from National Park Road, adjacent to a residence. Staff notes that the parking lot would be buffered by fencing and landscaping. While staff understands that the building siting issue has not been resolved, staffbelieves that the proposed plan would create a reasonable interface between the Church and the neighborhood which would minimize neighborhood impacts while addressing the Church's plan for expansion. Staff's experience in similar situations is that a parking lot properly screened may be a better adjoining use than a building with a high activity level. Staff suggests that the Council consider this issue. ~rculation The appellants have stated that realistic parking should exist on site without using street parking. Staff is in agreement with this position. The parking requirement for churches is one space for every six seats. At this ratio, a total of 42 parking spaces is required for the current 250-seat worship building. Although a minor addition to the existing worship area is part of the Phase I construction, this addition does not result in an increase in seating capacity. Thus, the existing 66 parking spaces exceed the amount of parking required by code for the current congregation. Using what is perhaps a more realistic parking demand of one space per four seats (63 spaces), sufficient parking is available. Applying the same 1:6 parking ratio, a total of 75 spaces would be required for the 450-seat worship area when St. Clare's reaches build-out. The master expansion plan shows that a total of 104 parking spaces would be provided upon the completion of the new sanctuary (Phase II), which is nearly 28 percent more than what is required by the ordinance. Staffbelieves that this SR:05:154 Page 7