Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 3, 2002 Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 55 of 84 Wollen: Frankly, Mr. Chairman, it's something that I'm going to look at the minutes prior to the drafting the final recommendations for approval of the City Council. Borup: That's what you said the last time we had one of those types of motions. Wollen: Just because it's going to take some time to draft out, I believe, what -- as far as the ACHD portion of it, that would be something that I will certainly look at the motion itself and I'll word it how I believe Commissioner Zaremba intended it to be worded, but - Zaremba: Just for clarification, I would only add that there were three elements. One, that there was a typo on Page 1, two, 24 off-site parking spaces, and a resolution of this entrance-exit on Meridian. However those are worded, those are the subjects. Wollen: Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. Borup: We have a motion and second, All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 10. Public Hearing: RZ 02-003 Request for a Rezone of 4 acres from R-4 to L-O zones for Cherry Lane Christian Church by Cherry Lane Christian Church - 2511 West Cherry Lane: Item 11. Public Hearing: CUP 02-027 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Preschool and school to prepare children for Kindergarten and move up one grade a year in existing classrooms and existing building in a proposed L-O zone for Cherry Lane Christian Church by Cherry Lane Christian Church - 2511 West Cherry Lane: Borup: Thank you. Our last items, Number 10, and 11. Number 10 is Public Hearing RZ 02-003, a request for rezone of four acres from R-4 to L-O zone for Cherry Lane Christian Church by Cherry Lane Christian Church at 2511 West Cherry Lane and a CUP 02-027, request for a Conditional Use Permit for a preschool and school to prepare children for kindergarten, et cetera, on the same project. I'd like to open both these Public Hearings at this time and start with the staff report. McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. Again to the overhead. The site that we are talking about is located on the south side of Cherry Lane. The existing Cherry Lane Christian Church. The church use will remain. Essentially, what they are asking for is a rezone to the proper zone, Currently it's zoned R-4 and in the R-4 zone a church use is not a permitted use. They were essentially grandfathered, With the change to the L-O zone, it would become a zone that would allow for the church uses, so that can clean up on the rezone. With the rezone, finding staff has no concerns with those. Staff supports the rezone. If we can skip ahead to the Conditional Use Permit for the private school or preschool. There are a few issues that come into play on this, I'll address the issues with the private school first and then some overall site issues that we need to discuss tonight. Concerning the private day- care, preschool, kindergarten, the intent is at this time for the church to open this as a Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 55 of 84 Wollen: Frankly, Mr. Chairman, it's something that I'm going to look at the minutes prior to the drafting the final recommendations for approval of the City Council. Borup: That's what you said the last time we had one of those types of motions. Wollen: Just because it's going to take some time to draft out, I believe, what -- as far as the ACHD portion of it, that would be something that I will certainly look at the motion itself and I'll word it how I believe Commissioner Zaremba intended it to be worded, but- Zaremba: Just for clarification, I would only add that there were three elements. One, that there was a typo on Page 1, two, 24 off-site parking spaces, and a resolution of this entrance-exit on Meridian. However those are worded, those are the subjects. Wollen: Thank you, Mr, Commissioner. Borup: We have a motion and second, All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED; ALL AYES, Item 10. Public Hearing: RZ 02-003 Request for a Rezone of 4 acres from R-4 to L-O zones for Cherry Lane Christian Church by Cherry Lane Christian Church - 2511 West Cherry Lane: Item 11. Public Hearing: CUP 02-027 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Preschool and school to prepare children for Kindergarten and move up one grade a year in existing classrooms and existing building in a proposed L-O zone for Cherry Lane Christian Church by Cherry Lane Christian Church - 2511 West Cherry Lane: Borup: Thank you. Our iast items, Number 10, and 11, Number 10 is Public Hearing RZ 02-003, a request for rezone of four acres from R-4 to L-O zone for Cherry Lane Christian Church by Cherry Lane Christian Church at 2511 West Cherry Lane and a CUP 02-027, request for a Conditional Use Permit for a preschool and school to prepare children for kindergarten, et cetera, on the same project. I'd like to open both these Public Hearings at this time and start with the staff report. McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. Again to the overhead. The site that we are talking about is located on the south side of Cherry Lane, The existing Cherry Lane Christian Church. . The church use will remain. Essentially, what they are asking for is a rezone to the proper zone. Currently it's zoned R-4 and in the R-4 zone a church use is not a permitted use. They were essentially grandfathered. With the change to the L-O zone, it would become a zone that would allow for the church uses, so that can clean up on the rezone. With the rezone, finding staff has no concerns with those. Staff supports the rezone. If we can skip ahead to the Conditional Use Permit for the private school or preschool. There are a few issues that come into play on this. I'll address the issues with the private school first and then some overall site issues that we need to discuss tonight. Concerning the private day- care, preschool, kindergarten, the intent is at this time for the church to open this as a Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 56 of 84 preschool with an afternoon session and a morning session, approximately 24 to 28 children in each one of those sessions. They have two classrooms that would be dedicated for that within the church at this time. In the future, the church would like to have the opportunity to let that preschool develop into a private school with additional grade levels. You know, if they started there at preschool, they could take kindergarten and first grade there, second grade there, it would be a continuum of education at the same location with similar teaching staff in a similar location. As part of that we need to discuss a little bit about whether or not you'd like to see this project come back before you as it starts to expand as the use becomes greater than a preschool. Would you like to see this project come back to you for approval as a private school, rather than just approving it now as a preschool and a private school? That's an issue that needs to be determined tonight and if you will notice that in the site specific comments for the -- for the Conditional Use Permit, that is something that Steve has brought up and that's Item Number 6 under the private school on Page 10 of the site specific comments. Steve has written into this staff report that there be an Option A or an Option B with the students. Staff does not have a concern with the preschool at this site, However, preschools and private schools are considered separately in the schedule of use control and we would like to have your opinion concerning whether or not you would like to see this in front of you again at a future date as they expand their use. In addition to that, the number of students, which is Item Number 5 on Page 4, will obviously go up as the number of classes go up as well. That would be an item that I would like to draw to your attention, that you might want to discuss the enrollment numbers for this school. There is a demand in the City of Meridian for schools. Obviously, a private school is something that is a good alternative to the public education system if it's done right. Staff has no indication as why this would not be something that would be a well-run program. On the site there is a few issues now that I'd like to address, if we get over to the site plan. One of the major issues that we have with this site is that currently the east side of the project has a Nine Mile Canal that runs right up through this area. On the site plan in front of you, it shows that they would like to tile that Nine Mile and place parking on top of it. In addition to that, put in a pedestrian pathway and one of our multiple use pathways that would go -- traverse down the length of this ditch, which would no longer be there, so it would be essentially a pathway adjacent to the church's parking. In our Comprehensive Plan for the year 2002, which is the newest one we just adopted, we have some requirements that say that those drains and those canals, including the Nine Mile, be left wide open and that a pathway be installed along that. However, this application was submitted prior to the adoption of the 2002 Comprehensive Plan, so this falls under the auspices of the 1993 Comprehensive Plan. The 1993 Comprehensive Plan did not indicate that there should be a pathway at this location and it did not indicate that that Nine Mile Drain could not be covered. One of the required findings that you have for the Conditional Use Permit is item number I on the findings, that would be on page seven, and the question is posed to you that you have to make a finding on is if a proposed use will not be result in the destruction, loss, or damage of a natural, scenic, or historical feature considered to be of major importance. In the 2002 Comprehensive Plan, the Nine Mile Drain was considered by the city to be one of those areas and so in order for them to tile that ditch, you have to. make a finding that them tiling that ditch would not be eliminating something that's a significant, scenic, or natural importance. That's something that we need to take special consideration on. Steve has written that into his report. Again, on Page 9 of the site specific requirements, Steve has written in two separate alternatives, an Option A and an Option B for the parking lot Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 57 of 84 expansion. If you choose not to expand the parking lot, in Steve's staff report, there is a number of parking spaces that currently exist on the site that are adjacent to the Nine Mile that are not asphalted. If we go with Option Number -- Option Number A under the site specific comments, that all the parking on site, including the non-improved parking, be brought into compliance, regardless of the tiling of the ditch. I think that's something that needs to be added, because we don't want the non-improved parking to continue in its current format with just the gravel or -- and dirt that is there right now. The parking spots that they are using for that location right now are just the railroad ties. Furthermore, I will continue on with a little bit more on the site. On the east side -- excuse me, the west side of the property -- having a problem with directions. Should have learned that by now -- on the west side of the site the church has a five-foot wide buffer between the land uses. That land use buffer is not currently landscaped right now, it is just cinder rock and the City of Meridian landscape ordinance requires that there be at least one tree every 35 feet on center in that landscape buffer. After Steve had written the report and sent the report over, he found out from the applicant and from the ditch company that that's actually an easement that runs along the east side of the building for a ditch that's piped under that location and that's the reason why there are no trees in that location, because the drainage or irrigation company would not allow that to be placed within their easement and the applicant is here tonight to address that issue. Getting some nods from the applicant. Those are the major issues that we see with the site. Obviously, if you have read the staff report, you recognize that the sign that's on the site right now is a nonconforming sign, according to our Sign Ordinance. Steve has brought it out in the rezone that it should be considered a legal nonconforming use, even without requiring that, that's exactly what it is, it's a legal nonconforming use. I have laid out the major issues that Steve and I had and then Bruce has a couple issues that he'd like to address from the Public Works side of things concerning some sewer issues and the easement on the east side of the property and I will turn some time over to Bruce and then we will open ourselves up for questions. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, just one thing I wanted to point out is the City of Meridian maintains a 21 inch sewer interceptor line that runs on the east side of the Nine Mile Creek down through this area. The site plan that was submitted did not -- did not show that line, so I can't really tell exactly w here it is in relation to the improvements that they are proposing, so I just ask in the comments that they do locate that on the plan, so that we can see that impact of the landscaping and that sort of thing. We do need to - we do need to maintain an access to that sewer that has to be a year around 24-7 type access. We need to have the ability to traverse the length of the trunk line as it goes all the way down and wraps clear around down by Meridian High School. The sewer is within a 20 foot -- excuse me -- 20 foot dedicated easement through there and so, again, I need to be able to see that easement on the plan, so that we can see how the landscape would work. If you have any questions on that, I would happy to answer. Borup: Any questions for Mr. Freckleton? The sewer easement, how was that generally done? I mean is that usually from the center of the -- Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, I believe this easement is an offset easement. I think it's 15 and five. I can't remember which way the 15 goes. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 58 of 84 Borup: Hopefully it's on the east, is what you're -- Freckleton: I think it is. I think the 15 are on the east and five on the west. When we looked at it, just scaling it all out -- I didn't have a lot of reference points to look at on the construction plan, because it was installed back in the '70s, but in looking at it, it looks like it might go right through the edge of the parking lot underneath the asphalt, so -- Borup: Your easement lines? Freckleton: No. The sewer line itself. Borup: Oh, really? Freckleton: Yes because the ditch would be, what, right through here, Dave? Pretty much. Zaremba: It's over here. Freckleton: Okay so this isn't showing the additional parking? Zaremba: Right. The other-- Freckleton: Right. Okay. Sorry. Zaremba: An aisle parking wider than this -- Freckleton: Okay. I'm messed up. So, yes, the ditch would be tiled through here and there is another row of parking that looks like the sewer line might clip through the edge of it. Borup: We don't have a large scale of this, do we? Zaremba: Yes. I think it was in our revised packet that was given to us. Actually, on the landscape plan it shows the whole thing. Borup: I think we are done, unless the Commission had any other questions. Let's go ahead and have the -- did you have anything else, Bruce? Okay. Let's go ahead -- we can go ahead with the applicant -- presentation from the applicant. Zaremba: I'll ask a question while he's getting ready. Actually, two questions. For it's current use and square footage of buildings, does it comply with the required amount of parking without adding -- McKinnon: Commissioner Zaremba, Members of the Commission, this is similar to the situation we just talked about where the actual requirements of the City Code are not necessarily adequate for the use that's placed in there. They meet the minimum code requirements, but whether or not they actually meet the minimum required parking spaces for their congregation at speCific times is a question that can be answered by the applicant, but as far as code, they meet code without the additional -- Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 59 of 84 Zaremba: And the second question, this is -- the eventual discussion about the CUP, this is not a day-care center, but for day-care centers there is a formula of a certain number of square feet per child. Is there the same for schools, a certain number of square feet of classroom per child? McKinnon: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Zaremba that is correct. With the day-care it is one child for every 35 square feet and there are some calculations that take out some non-inhabitable space for a building, utility closets, bathrooms, that type of thing, are taken out a nd they can determine that. Additionally, for that in the Uniform Building Code there is a specific occupancy load for different types of structures. Typically a church building is an A type of occupancy. The A stands for assembly and there are different requirements for the amount of people in that. If this is turned into a school, it has to meet the E occupancy requirements and those are listed in the Uniform Building Code. As far as secondary education or primary education -- a day-care I don't know the difference, but for day-care or for the preschool, it would be one for 35 square feet. Calculations for parking for a day-care would be based on one parking space for every ten kids, plus one for each employee. Centers: One last question, Dave. Nine Mile, Five Mile, Ten Mile, were in the Comprehensive Plan. It stated they should be left open waterways? The '93 Comp Plan; correct? McKinnon: That's in the 2002 it's not in the 1993. Centers: Oh, it's not in the '93. McKinnon: It's in the 2000, but not in the 1993. Zaremba: Well, the '93 says in a general way that they should not be covered -- McKinnon: In a general way. Centers: Have we allowed the covering and piping of those in other areas? Have we made an exception before? McKinnon: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, just one example that came to mind from staff overhearing you talking, was Storey Park. Through Storey Park is actually a piped ditch. Which ditch is it, Brad? The Nine Mile is actually piped underneath Storey Park. Centers: That's the only example? I don't see that as a good example. A development or a commercial property, have ever allowed it? Borup: And related to that, what is the Nine Mile doing to the north and south of this property, too? McKinnon: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, without looking I can address what it's doing to the south. The property -- the Nine Mile follows -- it has a Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 60 of 84 maintenance road that runs directly behind the subdivision. It's the Vineyard Subdivision. That's on the east side of the church property. It goes along the backside of that and it continues to follow the path -- continues to follow the Nine Mile around the Meridian High School a nd that goes back onto the road, but there is a maintenance road that continues through that area. That's around by the high school, then it goes up through the subdivision, but it is open in all those locations. On the north side -- let me look for just one moment. It's continued to the north -- it actually continues all the way up to the wastewater treatment plant completely uncovered. Centers: Thank you. Borup: Go ahead. Woodard: My name is Larry Woodard. I'm one of the associate's ministers at Cherry Lane Christian. Up until a few months ago I was the chairman of the elders. I have with me tonight Steve Pardue from BRS Architects, who will be working on the final architectural plans, Cleve Cushing from Petra Construction, who is helping us with this timing issue. I have the chairman of the elders here, Dale Newberry, and Brian Doser, our children's ministry, and also Sandra Hemmer, who is our business manager. If we get into technical questions I may defer to them. We are experiencing the same kind of growth that the City of Meridian is experiencing. A few years ago we were a church of 500, now we are 1,300, and so to maximize our current campus and to accommodate the many young families and kids that are coming to our church, we are trying to formulate some adjustments here to our facility to handle that growth. Because of our location, you know, the city gets a number of uses out of our building. It has been used regularly for elections, Girl Scouts, Cub Scouts, 4-H, guide dogs for the blind, Alcoholics Anonymous, Meridian Chamber luncheons, and, of course, we have the upcoming Mayor's State of the City Luncheon hosted at our facility next week. We have offered our neighbors that live within 300 feet of our property two open houses in May on the 9th and the 15th to discuss this proposal and we had no show up and then they held another one this past Monday night about the amendment regarding Nine Mile Creek and, again, no one showed up. To date we have not heard any adverse comments regarding our proposal. My comments tonight are just going to track with the staff report, which you have before you. Just let me say this, that we are pleased with the objectivity of the staff report and except for some minor issues that I think we can negotiate at a later date, we are comfortable with the recommendations that they have given to you. Let me start on page two where it begins discussion the zoning change from R-4 to L-O. When we began talking to city planning, they recommended that we seek this change and we agree with the staff recommendation. The only problem we have had is regarding the site specific finding Number 4 regarding this buffer on the west side of the property, which they have already mentioned, which was --- when we built four years ago by our gymnasium our family life center, Shari Stiles insisted we put so many trees on our property. We purchased those trees and a number of those were to go along that west side, but when we discussed this with Nampa Irrigation District, they refused to permit those trees, so she made us put them out front towards Cherry Lane. We have actually got double the number of trees out front and so I think this is a moot issue now, because we have been through this once before and they just flat won't permit trees out there. The north and south sides of that west boundary are grass and, as the staff has indicated, in between we have a five foot cinder mulch for about, oh, Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 61 of 84 two-thirds of the length of that west side. On Page 5 the staff addresses our plan to modify our existing building to handle growth and the proposed preschool and later a private Christian School and on this drawing in front of me in purple are the three building modifications that we would propose on there. On the west side is a small area for teacher supplies. We want to expand our lobby. We are running three services on Sunday morning and trying to shuffle 250 people out and in through that small lobby has been difficult. That's the purpose of the lobby expansion and then we have a fenced tot lot out towards Cherry Lane that we would like to make all weather and just to cover that over. Those are the three building modifications and based upon staff recommendation there doesn't appear to be any problems with those. On the top of Page 9, then, the staff picks up our two school proposals -- we have had a lot of requests for a preschool use at our church. This is not a day-care center, we would hire professional staff and it would be a quality program and the only issue we have with the staff report here is item number four about capping the preschool at 56 students. Let me just clarify, because I think in our communication we got this all mixed up. We have to classrooms that we are going to start out with next fall that would have maximum of 14 students in each classroom. We have a morning shift and an afternoon shift. So we could have 28 in the morning, 28 in the afternoon. That's your 56. Those students would come on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. Then on Tuesday and Thursday there would be another morning shift and another afternoon shift. We could enroll technically over 100 students, but at anyone-day the most that would be there would be 56, see. So that's where the -- I think the question is. We would not like to have a top cap put on, but would rather have a cap that would simply say we would have no more than 14 per classroom. Next year or the year after, we may want to go to three classrooms and the year after to four classrooms and so I think that would solve it, just cap it at 14 students per classroom. We envision that if the preschool went well, we would look down the road at a Christian school and staff on the top of Page 10, Paragraph 6, have recommended that we come back before you for a CUP or a Certificate of Zoning Compliance when we get a little closer to a firmer school proposal and schedule. Frankly, we agree with that, and so -- Borup: Do you understand those two options? The one option would come back to us for a CUP. The other option was just a Zoning Certificate, which would just be working with the staff that would not come before a Public Hearing. Woodard; Well, we have good relations with your current, but I think we'd like to leave our options open, so I think what we'd like to do is just take that aspect -- Borup: So you would take the option of which way you wanted to go. Woodard: Yes. Borup: Okay. Woodard: Yes. Lastly, I think we want to focus our discussion on this Nine Mile tiling, because I think that is the bigger issue. We are short of parking and you can imagine we have 161 parking spaces and 1,300 people coming in a given week. You just do the math on that. We are currently running a bus shuttle between the Seventh Day Adventist Church, the medical facility across the street, and Albertson's there at the corner of Ten Mile and Cherry Lane to try and handle this parking situation. The map Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 62 of 84 doesn't show it here, but this one does, that the Nine Mile Creek area is to the east of our current property. This -- if we could do this, this would add 85 spaces for us and we would also provide the first 450 feet, approximately, of a bike path or pathway, as you call it, along Nine Mile Creek. From Cherry Lane up -- on the north side of Cherry Lane it's my understanding Nine Mile is already covered through those subdivisions. McKinnon: It's not. Woodard: It's not? McKinnon: It's not. Woodard: It's open? McKinnon: Open. Woodard: Okay. So-- Borup: Maybe just -- the plat -- the paper we had shows no separate lot or anything. Those lots in that subdivision go clear across Nine Mile; is that correct, David? I'm just looking at the -- I'm just looking at the vicinity map that we had in our packet. McKinnon: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. I wasn't sure I followed the question correctly, but the pathway -- or not the pathway, but the ditch is open all the way up to the Wastewater Treatment Plant and beyond. Borup: Okay. McKinnon: According to our -- it's tiled where the road goes over the top, but, obviously, that's the only coverage. Borup: The vicinity map does not show a separate lot or -- McKinnon: No, it sure doesn't. Borup: It's an easement and the property lines go -- McKinnon: As far as being open, it's very apparent from the map on the wall that is back here that it is open. Borup: Okay. Go ahead, sir. Woodard: From Cherry Lane on the north side around towards the school and ending up on Linder, that's six-tenths of a mile and we would propose to tile one-tenth. Roughly. That's what we are talking about in terms of coverage. Centers: That's 528 feet. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 63 of 84 Woodard: Okay. Well, ours isn't that far. We would be pleased to have your 2002 plan with this pathway. We think a landscape area with trees would some day shade the pathway and give the neighbors, particularly tot he east in t he Vineyard Subdivision, some shade as those trees begin to mature. Provided we obtain your approval and the Council, we would remind you that as discussed by the city engineers, we would need to get a landscape consultant and negotiate with the irrigation district and the city planner before this could be finalized. We would want an agreement that was mutually acceptable to all parties. Of course, we would also need to get our final engineering plans in place before we could cover it. The staff findings regarding tiling of Nine Mile are sprinkled through t he report, but beginning with paragraph Ion Page 7 where it addresses the 1993 Comprehensive Plan. Then on the top of page eight where it addresses the 2002 plan, we believe it would be in the best interest of Meridian to permit this tiling and to have this bike path at least started and landscaped in accordance with your latest plan. We have some photos that show pictures of this ditch through the area that we are proposing. There are some natural wetland values right near the south end of this proposal, but they are a quarter acre of willows and cattails that are in the Vineyard Subdivision and our proposal would not affect that. Then on Page 8, the staff has a series of special considerations, followed by two options, which they have mentioned, and we would support Option B, which states that it's in the best interest of the city to allow the piping of the Nine Mile Creek and approve the proposed parking lot expansion. Now we have looked at your pathway at Tully Park and we had suggested originally an eight-foot pathway -- I think your new park plan calls for 10. We have looked at that one and we would agree with the ten-foot asphalt pathway. We are assuming that there would also be a barrier at the entrance to Cherry Lane so people could not drive down that pathway once it's asphalted. That would give you access to it also. Again, we got to negotiate this out with the sewer people and also Nampa Irrigation about the -- their needs in there. I guess our only concern is is our proposed parking lot. We had a drive lane of 28 feet of length -- of width between the two sides and we are okay with the 10 foot bike path, but if you start reducing that drive path with all the SUV's, we don't want people coming to church scratching cars and coming in cussing the church because of the tight parking spot. I guess we would like to see if we couldn't maybe split the difference and get a little wider drive angle there. We may very well have to -- if you stick with the wider pathway, a 25 foot pathway, we may have to refigure our driving into a herringbone approach just to avoid what I was talking about. So we are open to any questions you might have. Centers: Mr. Chairman? Borup: Commissioner Centers. Centers: I had a note here -- is it Mr. Woodard? Woodard: Yes. Centers: -- that if we were to not allow the covering of Nine Mile, then improve existing land that is now gravel -- do you have some other property that you could make into parking? That's the question, I guess. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 64 of 84 Woodard: On the west side of Nine Mile Creek we are currently -- we have permission from Nampa-Meridian Irrigation to have a gravel parking area that's just off the edge of in this picture here and we have been using that. Centers: You don't own it? Woodard: We don't own it. Centers: Or lease it? Woodard: No. Centers: Just a written agreement to use it? Woodard: We use it. Centers: They don't need it? Woodard: They don't need it. That's right. Centers: Is that part of the parking that you referred to earlier? I have -- what did you say -- Woodard: One hundred sixty-one. No, it does not include that. Centers: How many parking spaces are there? Approximately. Woodard: About 25. Centers: If we were to eliminate the landscape buffer -- you know, the staff would like to see no more than 12 spaces in a row without a landscape planter, is that what you were referring to earlier? Woodard: No. No. Let me get over here. What they are referring to are planters like this. Centers: Yes. Woodard; And I think if we were to asphalt this area here and make additional parking, that's an appropriate thing. Centers; Okay. That's about alii had. Mathes: The five smaller classrooms that are noted in the staff report, will they hold 14 people plus staff? Woodard: Yes. They are smaller than the two that we plan to use, but they still hold 14. They are larger. Okay. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 65 of 84 Borup: Your first two are larger -- or smaller than the others? Mathes: The five that are noted smaller are actually larger? Doser: I'm Brian Doser, children's ministry of Cherry Lane Christian Church, and we have five additional rooms -- and I will point them out here. Along here, there is one large classroom that takes up this space right here. Then there is four along here and they are -- I would say specifically this one is quite a bit larger than the two that currently are right here, As well as our proposed addition would be enclosing this area, which doubles the amount of room we have there. The room space isn't really an issue and these ones have plenty of room for 14 kids. Borup: Okay. Mr. Woodard, maybe just to summarize, on the first application, that of rezone, I didn't have -- you did not -- you didn't have any problems with any of the staff comments on that area; is that true? Woodard: The only issue we have regarded tearing out the mulch on the west side -- Borup: This is on the rezone, the first application. Woodard: Yes and it's in that part of it that that issue came up. Borup: It might have been in the comments, but I don't think it's in -- I mean it might have been in the initial, but I didn't see anything in the site specific comments or special conditions. Woodard: Okay. Then if it is, we are comfortable, of course, to go with L-O. Borup: Okay. Centers: I think everything was in the CUP. Borup: Okay. That's what I wanted to clarify there. We didn't have any issues on the rezone. Then on the -- actually, the requirements start on Page 9 of the bottom paragraph, other than -- other than special consideration things, but I -- is that correct? Special consideration items for discussion, they weren't part of the staff's requirements. McKinnon: That's correct. Borup: So as far as the staff's requirements, we have item number one, which is on the parking lot expansion. The applicant prefers Option B. I think you said you're okay with a 10-foot pathway. Woodard: Yes. Item 2 of the -- right at the bottom of Page 9, I'm assuming now that that is no longer an issue. Borup: Right. Woodard: Okay. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 66 of 84 Borup: So we would need to make note of that. That was per ACHD. I mean per Nampa-Meridian? Woodard: Right. Centers: Well, on Page 9, Mr. Chairman, you know, we have to address the -- Borup: Number 1? Center: Yes Number 4 up at the -- Borup: Right. Centers: Do we want him to come back on a private school with a CUP approval? Borup: Yes that's something that we would need to include in our motion. Centers: Exactly. Borup: Well, actually, any of that is open for our discussion. Do we need -- is there anything else there that we need to have any concern on? Centers: We could leave the Public Hearing open and -- Borup: I mean under special considerations. I just thought we'd get some of this out of the way as we go. Centers: Yes. Borup: And then you are essentially saying -- you expressed your feeling on Number 1 and then 2 through -- I mean and then Number 2, I understand the Nampa-Meridian is going to allow that, so 3 through 7, did not have any concern with any of those? Woodard: Again, other than -- are you comfortable with our recommendation that if there were a cap it would be 14 per room? Borup: Yes. Woodard: Okay. Borup: Right and that's -- Woodard: Item Number 5. Borup: Assuming the rooms are equal to or larger than the rooms that this 1 4 was based on. Woodard: Yes and so Number 6 we would defer based -- or take off the table tonight. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 67 of 84 Borup: I think you're saying you would like to decide on which option yourself on, rather than have us dictate that. Woodard: Yes. Centers: Well -- and I guess the way I look at it, to be honest with you, Mr. Woodard, is that people in the future may have -- may want to voice their opinion -- Woodard: Sure. Centers: -- around your neighbor about school age children and additional traffic, et cetera, et cetera. You know, I'm leaning towards you having to come back, because when they get -- when you -- Woodard: That would fine. If you want to include your recommendation that way, that's fine. Centers: Because, you know, that's us. Woodard: Yes. Centers: And let the people have a voice and -- Borup: Well, that -- McKinnon: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, just. one thought. On Item Number 5, t he number of students, the Uniform Building Code and the Uniform Fire Code has set standards for educational facilities and assembly facilities, such with what the church has. Instead of putting a cap on 14, it may be more appropriate to say that it shall be limited to the number of children that would be allowed per the Uniform Building Code and the Uniform Fire Code, rather than arbitrarily picking a number at 14, so the applicant has some more flexibility. In addition to that, they would still have to meet the parking requirement and so if the parking requirements -- as more students get to the building, the parking standards are going to go up. I doubt that they will ever exceed the parking requirements for a school, but I think arbitrarily picking the number at 14 without knowing the size and dimensions of the rooms in question, is the wisest choice at this time. I think it might be that we would limit the number of students to those that are allowed for the Uniform Building Code occupancies. Borup: I would certainly agree with that. Woodard: Yes. Borup: So we don't find ourselves in trouble in the future. Centers: He earned his pay tonight. Borup: Okay. Any other things you wanted to add? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3. 2002 Page 68 of 84 Woodard: No. Borup: I don't know that we have any concerns on anything from any of the Commission, so I don't know if we need testimony from anyone else, unless they are feeling a real need to. Do we have anyone that wanted to -- do we have any questions from any of the Commissioners that we -- Centers: Yes. I think the only -- not the only, but the basic major decision to be made here is if you want to cover Nine Mile. That's the biggie on the table. I think that's what you have to decide. You have heard staff. It's not covered anyplace else and the applicant wants to cover it for over 500 feet, that's -- I get no parking with covering that. Borup: Right. Centers: Other than 35 spaces. Borup: You know, I think there is nice amenities to open -- to the waterways, but my feeling is I'd much rather see -- I think the pathway was more important than an open ditch with a lot of weeds. Mathes: And if you're opening a child care facility in there, it's probably going to be safer to tile that ditch. Borup: But what we have to contribute is 500 feet of pathway. How long it's going to be before the rest of it gets connected to it may be awhile, but I think there is some benefits to having a pathway, at least in that stretch down. And I don't think it's a big problem to have the open waterway and then go for 500 feet with a nice landscaped area without it. As I say, I have been a strong advocate of the pathways all along. I think that, just in my mind, answers -- Zaremba: What progress -- let's see. My recollection is that it was kind of left hanging that Nampa-Meridian -- that sort of approves the concept of it, but -- Borup: Yes. I assume it will be agreed on this Nampa-Meridian. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 69 of 64 Zaremba: And then a Iso with Public Works to make sure there aren't trees planted where the roots would grew into the sewer system and -- Borup: Well, I think the other thing that does need to be addressed is the engineering showing the exact location of the existing sewer to make sure there is going to be access for possible services that need it. Centers: I think if you don't allow the covering of Nine Mile, you don't have a project. And I -- you know, I respect their wants and desires to grow and I don't see a problem with it, to be honest with you. Zaremba: And the justification is that the '93 Comprehensive Plan, under which this application was filed, is not as specific as the new one is. Any future applicant in another area is going to be subject to the new Comprehensive Plan. So this does not set a precedent for tiling it all over the place. Centers: That's our caveat. Borup: And, Bruce, is there something specific that you would like in there on the location on the sewer line relating to this property? What would be necessary to cover your concern there? Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, all I'd like to see is the revised site plan and we can work out the details as far as landscaping. Our main concern is having large, deep-rooted trees over the top of sewer lines that we may have to dig it up. Typically, we don't allow trees to be within the 20 foot easement. If the location of the sewer ends up being close to the location of where the pathway way would be, we may be able to incorporate that pathway into more of a multi-use pathway, so it would serve as our access way over the sewer and also serve as the pathway. If that is the case, we would need a 14 foot wide travelway. Excuse me. There is several ways we can do that. I mean if they wanted to put in a ten foot wide and make the rest of it a gravel shoulder or a grass creet shoulder or something, we can work those details out, but -- Borup: Did you say 14 feet? Did we say earlier in a roadway is 12 feet? Freckleton: For sewer access, a roadway over the top of our sewer -- Borup: Yes. Freckleton: -- has always been 14. Borup: I was just curious why it would need to be 14. Freckleton: We have -- our cleaning equipment is trailer mounted. Borup: You need to be able to get-- Freckleton: So we have a truck and trailer having to maneuver down those roads. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 70 of 84 Borup: Yes. You're also driving 50 miles an hour down other roads that are narrower, for that matter. Or do you need a backhoe along the trailer to -- has that been -- Freckleton: You need operating room. Borup: In your standards? Is that the -- Freckleton: That's the standard. Correct. And then there is a manhole somewhere up in this vicinity. It's an angle point in the trunk line as it comes underneath Cherry Lane there Is an angle point and it changes directions. I think there is only -- no, I take that back. There is two manholes. There is one here up in this area on the trunk where it changes directions and then there is another manhole a little further down where a mainline from the Vineyard Subdivision dumps into the trunk. So a couple of area there that we need to be able to maintain access to. But, like I said before, it's -- from our just scaling things off, it looks like that sewer trunk might be underneath the row of parking that they are proposing over here and if that's the case, we have our access through the parking lot and we wouldn't need additional width for a travel way. Centers: Bruce, I had put a number as seven on page five. Would that be correct? The applicant identified sewer easement on plot plan. That would be appropriate? Freckleton: Yes. I thought I covered that. Centers: So you wanted the applicant to identify the location of the sewer easement on a plot plan, I was going to show as number seven on page five. Freckleton: That's fine. Centers: At the top. Freckleton: Sure. Borup: And you had mentioned in the written and I don't think it is in the written. Centers: No, it's not. He wanted it added. Freckleton: It's number seven on page ten. Centers: Oh, so you had it and didn't know? Freckleton: No. I knew it was there. Centers: You were saying earlier that -- Freckleton: I was just reiterating the point. Zaremba: May I ask the staff for a sense if -- either Bruce or David -- are the issues that are currently unresolved, are they sufficient to require a continuance of this or can we resolve them with our language? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 71 of 84 McKinnon: I think Bruce and I are in agreement they can be resolved with language when you guys make your recommendation tonight. Zaremba: The applicant working together with staff? McKinnon: The applicant can work together with -- when you do make your motion, make sure that you include the fact that Nampa-Meridian has to approve this as well. The staff language that -- number one, Option A or B, it doesn't include the language about Nampa-Meridian Irrigation being a part of that approval and if Nampa-Meridian doesn't give approval for this, then they are kind of out of luck. This is something that needs to be in place. We do have a letter that says they conceptually -- what is the word? That they conceptually -- they conceptually consider -- Zaremba: Which is warm and fuzzy, but it's a little vague on approval. McKinnon: It's a lot vague. Freckleton: The issues with that, I believe, are legal in nature. I think operationally I think the district would like to see it tiled. I mean it's less maintenance for them. So it's the legalities of making it happen, license agreements and that sort of thing. I think that's the issues. Borup: Do you want to come on up? Cushing: I can identify myself. I'm Cleve Cushing. I live at 4681 West Moon Lake Drive i n Meridian. I 'm a member 0 f Cherry Lane Christian a nd I 'm a Iso the C FO 0 f Petra Construction. I have done a little work on trying to get the ditch tiled and helping the church with that process. When we approached Nampa-Meridian Irrigation, they wholeheartedly embraced the fact that they would prefer to have it covered and the wording that we have is predicated on the fact that we haven't supplied them with about an eight or nine hundred dollar applicant fee. We didn't want to pay the money unless we knew we were going to be able to tile it. So when we get approval to tile the ditch, we can then complete the rest of the paperwork with staff and Nampa-Meridian Irrigation, and hopefully make this go forward as quickly as possible. And that would be what I'd like to add. If you got any other questions regarding that. We have procured the services of a gentleman by the name of Lonnie Fox, who is a civil engineer, who is licensed to do the water survey, so that we can meet all the requirements of Nampa- Meridian, We found an 11 foot arch that is a piece of excess pipe that we are going to be able to -- or hopefully be able to procure that will meet the zero rise requirements of the ditch and so that in the event of a 100 year flood, the water will be no higher than Cherry Lane in what it would be right now with the open ditch. So we have tried to meet all of Nampa-Meridian's concerns that they would have up front. We made sure that the engineering will work before we even brought it you. So our hope is that we have identified all of the issues that would help you have a favorable ruling on this. Borup: Okay. Cushing: Any questions? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3. 2002 Page 72 of 84 Zaremba: So the only dead lock is they are waiting for us and we are waiting for them? Cushing: It's a Mexican standoff, yes. Zaremba: So if we move ahead they would move ahead? Cushing: We would get to move ahead. Thank you. Borup: Are we clear on what we need to do? Centers: I think so. Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, I move we close the Public Hearing on both these items. Mathes: Second. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Borup: Now I think on the first item, on the rezone, there were no issues. Centers: I'll make a stab at it while it's fresh in my mind and my notes. I think we have a consensus here. I'd like to recommend approval for -- and make a motion to approve RZ 02-003, request for a rezone of four acres from R-4 to L-O zones for Cherry Lane Christian Church by Cherry Lane Christian Church, at 2511 West Cherry Lane, including all staff comments. Zaremba: Second. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Centers: Continuing on. I would like to make a motion to recommend approval to the City Council for Item 11, CUP 02-027, request for a Conditional Use Permit for a preschool and school to prepare children for kindergarten and move up one grade a year and existing classrooms and existing building in a proposed L-O zone for Cherry Lane Christian Church by Cherry Lane Christian Church at 2511 West Cherry Lane, including all staff comments and as amended. I'm going to go slow here for counsel. My motion would include the fact that the church would have to come back for a separate CUP when they intend to add or expand their school to kindergarten, first grade, et cetera. Under site specific requirements, page nine, strike Option A. Option B would be part of the motion. This would be further subject to Nampa-Meridian Irrigation approval in writing. Bottom of page nine, remove number two and all comments associated with it. Page ten, item five, number of students, 14 per classroom or per Uniform Fire Code, the more restrictive of the two. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 73 of 84 McKinnon: Mr. Chairman, if we could strike the 14 and Commissioner Centers, just -- whichever is more -- Centers: Strike the 14? McKinnon: Strike the 14. Centers: Per Uniform Fire Code. McKinnon: Uniform Building Code. Centers: Strike the 14. McKinnon: International Building Code. Centers: Item six. Has been covered. Strike both options. We would require a CUP for the higher grades. All other comments and requirements to remain as is. Anyone see anything else? Borup: No. Wollen: I just have one question and that concerns the condition that you had mentioned after site specific comment on page nine, to strike Option A and make Option B part of the motion. What was that next comment that you made? Centers: After that? Wollen: Yes. Centers: Strike number two, which refers to existing parking lot. Wollen: Okay. Centers: And all comments with number two. Borup: Okay, We have a motion. Rohm: I will second. Borup: And a second. Any discussion? All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Borup: Thank you. Okay. One other item of business. I think each of you was called about a special meeting on the 24th. Zaremba: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Commissioner.