This is the latest document from Sandy Springs:
http://www.sandysprings-ga.org/agendas/PC/2009-0716/04_RZ09001_PC071609.pdfIt contains the staff recommendation which was voted on Thursday night. Page 8 shows the following, and I have indicated the most relevant parts (imo):
Article 18.2.1 indicates parking requirements are to be calculated based upon the proportion that each use contributes to the total. For example, a building with multiple uses would be required to provide parking based upon the total parking requirement associated with each use. On the other hand, parking requirements for uses with large public assembly areas relative to the remainder of the building (i.e. meeting halls or libraries) are based upon the largest public assembly area. Normally, staff would analyze the parking needs for the Church of Scientology building relative to the size of the sanctuary. However, because proposed development will have a sanctuary which comprises less than 5% of the total net floor area, staff has instead analyzed the parking impact using an aggregate of the uses in the building (sanctuary, offices and classrooms).
The applicant has indicated that the proposed use is not a traditional place of worship. As such the applicant volunteered a parking study to show the parking needs for the proposed use. The parking study provided by the applicant examined two (2) existing sites, the current location in the City of Dunwoody, Georgia and Nashville, Tennessee. The location in Nashville has similar square footage 38,000 to the proposed 43,246 square feet at the Sandy Springs location. The Nashville location has provided 114 spaces for 38,000 square feet. This is a ratio of 3 spaces per 1000 square feet. According to this calculation the Sandy Springs site at the applicant’s request of 43,246 square feet would require one hundred and thirty 130 spaces. Eighty-three (83) spaces would be provided. There would be a deficit of forty-seven (47) parking space under the proposed use. Based on the information provided by the applicant, the proposed request of 43,246 square feet would not meet the level of parking necessary to support the proposed use. Therefore, staff concludes that there would be an inadequate amount of parking for the proposed 43,246 square feet. The site at 32,053 square feet would require ninety-seven (97) spaces. The site currently has one hundred and eleven (111) spaces. As such the staff recommends restricting the use of the subject property to 32,053 square feet with the existing one hundred and eleven (111) spaces.
The Planning Commission voted to go along with the staff recommendation above. The voting was:
Mr. Thatcher - yes
Mr. Boyken - yes
Mr. Rubenstein - yes
Mr. Rupnow - yes
Ms. Mazier -no
Mr. Pond - absent
The Chair, Mr. Duncan, doesn't vote unless it is to break a tie.
What has happened is that scientology amended the original application to drop the variance request concerning the floor load, and to include enclosing the basement parking and use the space for a chapel. That would reduce the parking spaces by 30. (They had originally intended to handle the floor load discrepancy with a sign stating such - but postulates won't hold up a floor.)
Since the chapel in the basement would be less than 5% of the total usage, the staff calculated the required parking based on multiple uses. This was not satisfactory, because with the reduction in spaces by enclosing the basement, there would not be enough spaces left, so Galloway had a study done on the Nashville org, which showed Nashville to have a ratio of 3 spaces per 1000 sq. ft. I believe Galloway wanted the study interpreted in a different way, but this was the way the department interpreted it.
This was not satisfactory either, because 3x43,000=129 spaces, and there wouldn't have been enough spaces, with the basement enclosed. Therefore, the staff decided since it wouldn't require more spaces to be added (since there is not enough room on the lot), that it would approve the request with the condition that the building remain as-is wrt enclosed sq. footage, and that the underground spaces must remain.
This will leave them without an area for the chapel, unless they reinforce the first floor to the required 100 lbs/ft. floor load rating. This will be expensive.
Here are a few more notes from the document, which are pertinent.
On page 11:
The staff is of the opinion that the proposal will not function as a traditional place of worship and therefore would require [more?, sic] parking on the site than that required for the largest place of public assembly. Specifically, the sanctuary is not proposed to be the largest portion of the building. This lack of parking could cause an excessive or burdensome use of the existing infrastructure.
On page 12:
STAFF RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS
The staff recommends APPROVAL CONDITIONAL of the rezoning from O-I (Office and Institutional District) conditional to O-I (Office and Institutional District). Where these conditions conflict with the stipulations and offerings contained in the Letter of Intent, these conditions shall supersede unless specifically stipulated by the Mayor and City Council.
1. To the owner’s agreement to restrict the use of the subject property as follows:
a. Office and/or Church and associated accessory uses in the existing structure at a density of 18,007.30 square feet per acre or 32,053 square feet, whichever is less.
b. Limit hours of operation to: 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.
c. Sidewalks will be required at time of building permit.
d. No overnight stays.
e. To prohibit any drug, alcohol, substance abuse, chemical dependence, and/or criminal rehabilitation programs.
There are more conditions which are being requested by the neighborhoods.
Corrections will come, if they are needed.
