HomeMy WebLinkAboutCherry Lane Christian Church CUPWILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk
JANICE L. SMITH, City Treasurer
GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer
BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt.
JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt.
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator
PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
~
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY COUNCIL MEMBERS
A GOO(I P1aCe t0 L1Ve WALT W. MORROW, President
CITY OF MERIDIAN RONALD R. TOLSMA
EE
C
GLENN R. BENTLEY
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 P & Z COMMISSION
Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
Public WorksBuilding Deparunent (208) 887-2211 GREG OSLUND
Motor Vehicle/Ddvers License (208) 888-4443 MALCOLM MACCOY
KEITH BORUP
ROBERT D. CORRIE RON MANNING
Mayor
TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian
Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to
Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: June 3.1997
TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5/21/97 HEARING DATE: 6/10/97
REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for addition of Family Life Center - 2511 W. Cherry Lane
BY: Cherry Lane Christian Church
LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: Section 11, T.3N. R.1W Boise Meridian, Ada
JIM JOHNSON, P/Z
MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z
RON MANNING, P/Z
BYRON SMITH, P/Z
KEITH BORUP, P/Z
BOB CORRIE, MAYOR
RONALD TOLSMA, C/C
CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C
WALT MORROW, C/C
GLENN BENTLEY, C/C
WATER DEPARTMENT
SEWER DEPARTMENT
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
FII2E DEPARTMENT
POLICE DEPARTMENT
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY ENGINEER
CITY PLANNER
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE (PRELIM. & FINAL PLAT)
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH
NAMPA MERIDIAN IItRIGATION DISTRICT
SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT
IDAHO POWER CO. (PRELIM. & FINAL PLAT)
U.S. WEST (PRELIM. & FINAL PLAT)
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS (PRELIM. & FINAL PLAT)
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION (PRELIM. & FINAL PLAT)
CITY FILES
OTHER:
YOUR CONCISE REMARKS:
•
CITY OF MERIDIAN
APPLICATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERI~+fIT
NAME: CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH pHpl~: 888-3101
ADDRESS: 2511 W. CHERRY LANE
GENERAL LOCATION:. CHERRY LANE, EAST OF TEN MILE, SOUTH SIDE OF ROAD.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE: sAME usE w/ ADDITION of FAMILY
LIFE CENTER BUILDING
ZONING CLASSIFICATION: R4
ALAN: A plan of the proposed site for the conditional use showing the location of all
buildings, parking and loading areas, traffic access and traffic circulation, open spaces,
landscaping, refuse and service areas, utilities, signs and yards (submit 35 copies)..
I certify that the information contained herein is true and correct.
r
Y I ~f
Signature of Applicant ~' ~-~-~
Social Security Number ~- -
LEGAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Pursuant to established procedure, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Meridian Planning and
Zoning Commission will hold a Public Hearing in the Meridian City Hall on
at _.m. The purpose of the Hearing is to consider a
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT submitted by
for the property generally described as located at
SUBDIVISION, BLOCK
,LOT TO
1
r ' , ~ • ~
015on & a55ociate5 ~-rchitect5, p~,
Stan Olson, AIA • Russ Phillips, AIA • Dana Kauffman, AIA • Doug Houston, AIA
May 9, 1997
Board of Commissioners
Planning & Zoning Department
City of Meridian
33 E. Idaho Ave.
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Re: Application for Conditional Use Permit
Commissioners:
The following information is provided pursuant to the contents requirement for a Conditional
Use Permit Application:
Applicant(s) Owner:
Cherry Lane Christian Church
2511 W. Cherry Lane
Meridian, Idaho 83642
c/o Michael L. Anderson
Secretary, Cherry Lane Christian Church
(ph) 888-3101
Architect: Olson & Associates Architects, P.A.
14 - 12th Ave. So, Ste. 210
Nampa, Idaho 83651
c/o Dana Kauffman, AIA
(ph) 466-2212
Subject Property: Cherry Lane Christian Church
2511 W. Cherry Lane
Meridian, Idaho 83642
(ph) 888-3101
Description of Existing Use: The property is currently in use as a place of worship and
education.
Proposed Use: The existing use will continue. This CUP application
applies to the addition of a Family Life Center containing
gymnasium, fellowship, and classroom space, to expand
upon and enhance the existing use.
NAMPA: 14 12th Avenue South ^ Suite 210 ^ Nampa, lD 83651 ^ 208-466-2212 ^ (FAX: 208-466-6787)
BOISE: 1789 Broadway Avenue ^ Boise, lD 83706 ^ 208-338-9080 ^ (FAX.• 208-338-9067)
• •
Present Zoning: The site is currently zoned R4.
Desirable Characteristics: The current site and building location easily allows for the
expansion of facilities. As the site is limited from further
physical expansion due to residential development to the
west and south, Cherry Lane to the north, and Nine Mile
Creek to the east, any development mustremain internal to
the site. This development will prompt the completion of
the currently unfinished areas of the site. The church's
location is central to the surrounding community, and
access to site and facilities is plentiful.
Vicinity Map: Thirty (30) 8" - 1/2" copies of a vicinity map included in
this application package.
Plan: Thirty-five (35) 24" x 36" copies of architectural schematic
plans (site, floor plan, elevations), and thirty-five (35) 8-
1/2" x 11" of a reduced site plan are included in this
application package.
Statement: "The owner/user of the property agrees to pay any
additional sewer, water, or trash fees or charges, if any,
associated with the use, whether that use be residential,
commercial, or industrial".
Agreement: "The owner/user agrees that the property will be posted one
(1) week prior to the conditional use permit hearing stating
that they have applied for a conditional use permit."
The undersigned have viewed and read the contents of this Application and verify that the
information contained herein is true and correct.
Architects, P.A.
C.
Michael L. Anderson -
Secretary, Cherry Lane Christian Church
FIRST CfiVRCl1 OF CHRIST
P.o. Box 671 • 2511 West Cherry Lane.
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone 888-3101
STEVE MOORS, Prrvu~lrin,~ :1lirriah•r • Res. 888-1128
EDDIE HARROD, Edrriafiun Mirri~tcr • Res. 888-6689
GREG FOLKINS, ti1r•rnhrrslrip ,tilirrisfcr • Res. 377-9339
January 17, 1992
IRS
P O BOX 2350
ROOM 5127
LOS ANGELES, CA 90053
ATTENTION EOMF,
Please be informed that on September 16, 1991, at our annual meeting a motion was made and
unanimously passed to change the name of this congregation to Cherry Lane Christian Church.
You will find enclosed a copy of the amendment to the articles of incorporation reflecting this
change. We appreciate your cooperation in updating your records,. with this change.
Sincerely,
Vana McCoy
„' Secretary
. _-- ~- ,
~>,~ ..
;~' ..
;c .' ,,f-
EMPLOYER ID # 82-6008963
r ~ a" -
.~~ ~t,
~, ,;. ..
r ~,; ~^,~
y ' t _ ~ ~"~ , .. ~~4
~y
.. t~~p ,~~ :d i a 7 1. ~.~
~.` a ~ . 1
=y'~ ~ ~u22~ ~ S
fJ .
r t .~ x
yz 4~i:r, t
~i, .
~~:
.:>-'
t
WE WAnT TO MEET YOUR nEEDS
r
.. ~~
;a ..O
:,~ • ~ ~~~
WV~~
h
~~ "
Amendment to the Articles of Incorporation First Church of Christ, Inc. located at Meridian,
Idaho, approved unanimously at a Congregational meeting held September 16, 1991.
Article I shall read as follows:
That the name of this corporation is "Cherry Lane Christian Church, Inc."
~~
Signed
Vice-Chairman
Secretary
. I/ 1 r ....... rnd lur .-le Lr SYnu-. ollt wu.vu.,~. ~,. .. uau
~a~U
(Optional) S~a3~Ej -II
Recorded ^ Platted Key Punched ^ To Treasurer
Microfilmed ^ Deed Card ^ Maste4 Flle ^ ^
Indexed ^ Compared ^ Abstracted ^
iN NOT rfNlTt AWVt TNlfl LINN)
~VARR~N~Y DEED 1
LEE R. STU.CY.EK & FEM. ST CKE TRUST, ee R. Stucker &Fae M.
Stucker, ~KA ~eeeRoy & Mark & Nettie M. Burnham, Husband and Wi{~
/ A Fae Marie Stucker CT'KANTOR(S)
of Meridian ounty of Ada State of Idaho
hereby CONVEYS, GRANTS and WARRANTS TO THE FIRST CHURCH OF CHRIST, INC.
GRANTEE (S)
of Meridian Couatyof Ada State of Idaho
for the sum of Forty Eight Thousand One Hundred Fifty ---- Dollars ($ 48,150.OfJ
the following described tract(s) of sand in Ada County, State of Idaho:
A parcel of land located in Sec. 11, T3N, R1W, Boise
Meridian (B.M.), Ada County, Idaho more fully .described
as follows: '
Beginning at the Nth 1/4 corner, Sec. 11, T3N,. R1W,
B.M.; Thence running N89°03'40"W along the section
line a distance of 70.0 ft. to the "Real Point of
Beginning";
Thence 'running N89°03'40"W along the section line
a distance of 348 .3 ft to a point;
Thence running S00 56'20"W a distance of 40.0 ft.
to a point;
;Thence running:,S15°05'E a distance of 286.46 ft.
' to a point;
Thence running S27°15'E a distance of. 231.35 ft.
to a point;,
Thence running S02°21'E a distance of 32.77 ft.
to a point;.
Thence running N82°40'E a distance of 166.85 ft.
to a point;
Thence running N00°10'E a distance of 528.00 ft.
to the "Real Point of Beginning".
The above described property contains 3.41 acres more
or leas and is subject to easements and rights-of=way
of record and in use. .• -
. - sTnrF of ioaNO, couim ~ now, tx PIONEER TITLE 0
ad'g~ llCafd 8~~
in. pa o M. this dJy of i
~ roNN RASi1011. Rocadta
Locatiop of above described property ~01 ridian,~ Meridian, •~rd~`t'ie' /
. Horse No. , ! d I I ~ 118trest
W NESS the ha f s id Grantors this •~ ; day o €Augus t A.D. 18 80
.. ~ ~ -
7.e uc c e ar u n a /
s tee a a_e ur
fNOTANY scAL) State of Idaho
Countyef Ada. }"~• on the 20th say of August A.D.le80
a'iy•
personally appeared before me Lee R. &Fae M..,,.~!'~i~C191"};~)r ~ ,$t:eea,
and F. Mark & Nettie M. Burnham,; hus~ac}Sl..~and.,~t'~g,.
the signer(s) of the within insttvmsgt, who duly ~eel~~agwledB a tha£ ~dte•~
executed the same. ~ ft' ``
Residing atyyy
1
MAIL DEED TC:
~L
.. ~;: .1~0 ar K ,
.lam'' ~ .
My Commiesio~ex~r1~ ~ a • ~ .
.~
. . ` •.
MA/IL!TA7C/N'~OTICII•TA,j ~'~ ,~~ ~~
Namo YI~ l,IIr_>~ nC• ~!}.hiSY••~-„rT.
T
Address ~ t ~P.P,tst /oat
City ds State ~AAOOs esAtJ S'Aj~_... ~ip~e-~v
1 .. ~. .~}.~...
~~~~'.~1 ~' (i1, I-~ ~/ ~ 1~ rvt l ~„p~.
. _ ~ U 1rl~~AlM L L~~ ~I ~ T 1'. I ~I~I' ' _" _-
J. DAVID NA' RO
First Church of Christ Inc. RECORDER ~c~
For Value Received "O
No Consideration '92 JUL 13 Pal 3 5®
do hereby convey, releaso, remise and Iorever quit claim unto
Cherry Lane Christian Church Inc. ~Sj~. ~ ~ i~~/c,L.~../ ~j~pfL~i.
the following described premises, to•wit: Parcel "C "
A parcel of land located in Section 11, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise
Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more fully described as follows:
Beginning at the North quarter corner, Section 11, Township 3 North, Range 1
West, Boise Meridian, thence running
North 89°03'40" West along the section line a distance of 70.0 feet to the
real poir3t of beginning, thence running.
North 89°03'40" West along the section line a distance of 348.23 feet to a
point; thence running
South 00°56'20" West a distance of 40.0 feet to a point; thence running
South 15°05' East a distance of 286.46 feet to a point; thence running
South 27°15' East a distance of 231.35 feet to a point; thence running
South 02°21' East a distance of 32.77 feet to a point; thence running
North 82°40" East a distance of 166.85 feet to a point; thence running
North 00°10' East a distance of 528.0 feet to the real point of beginning.
P72423 EXHIBIT A
A tract of land situated in the Northeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of
Section 11, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise-Meridian, Ada County, Idaho
Being more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the one-quarter section corner common to Sections 2 and 11,
Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise-Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, from which
The Northwest corner of said Section 11 bears
North 89°03'40" West 2653.48 feet; thence
North 89°03'40" West along the section line common to said Sections 2 and 11
a distance of 34.3 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNINGr thence
North 89°03'40" West along said section line 35.7 feet to apoint; thence
South 0°10' West 528.0 feet to a point; thence
North 82°40' East 36.01 feet to a point lying fifty feet Westerly of the
centerline of Nine Mile Creek; thence
North 0°10' East along a line parallel with and fifty feet from the centerlin
of said Nine Mile Creek, 522.82 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING.
together with titelr appurtenancet-.
Dated: Ju 5, 1992
rBrent .Adamson-¢Ihairman
Mike AndersA -Secretary
ce `chairman
S1A1E OF IdAllO, COUNTY OF
Qn this c75~' day of J•u.,nG 19 9oZ
Ir..fore me, a notary public In end for said Stele, person•
ally appeared fare,-It Ad nm sari ,
nl.e N emu) b err , a-r'+ d
M rke f}n~ersor7
known 14 ine fb he the persons who nemeS sub•
seriy~ti `to' the itilihln Instrument, and acknowledged to
rnatfiel ~ --th~:~.• executed theteme.
~} Q Notary Public
`lleslrtb,g ar M er ~ d iau'- Idaho
Comhr.,Explres~l,~f'3' =~q~(3
,. p7 ~.
9v
Faes
Mall
T ~ SHOPS ~
Order No. •
DEED
FOR VALUE RECEIVED, S. I. Development, Inc., an Idaho Corporation
s corporation duly organized and existing under the laws o4 the State o4 Idaho, grantor, dose hereby Grant.
Bargain, Sell and Convey unto
Cherry Lane Christian Church
grantee whose current address to 3350 Americana Terrace, Suite ik200, Boise, $3706
the following described real estate, to-wit:
Lot 2 Block 1 HAVEN COVE NO. 1 '
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD The said premises. with their appurtenances unto the said Grantee
heirs and assigns forever
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The Grantor, pursuant to a resolution o4 its Board o4 Directors has caused
its corporate name to be hereunto subscribed by its President and its corporate seal to be a8lxed by its
Secretary this 15th day of December, 1992
By
eo Blaser
i-" ce President
Lee Roy Stucker get,
ST.4TG OF IDAHO~~~ ss.
COUNTY Ot= '-I•
On this ~ ~/~gnq-$tni~ Qli~lJ"JC//in the
y/~e~alr 19~~ Z- 1~~b1}e~f~,gd~~ ~•~ ~ ~ Perso ly yap~fpYi~~ed~
knmrn "r O~itTf~ta m o IN~ej. tY1`j~~~slulsta[7
ol'thc corporation=1t~'e coved the n i r6nt or the person
uho executed thel7nsu rent d11s+ afF~ef r n, and
acknowledged to tt~ 1ha s 8 ~ i e cut~t a sam
'is ???
~ /i~ •
it,~ d. Np~ • ~ ir~~rm~
sna .. .... .. ..........•
vttwettoot
yy
"A
O
G
r/
LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR
ID~i]HIT 'A'
Commencing at the North ~ Corner of Section 11, T.3 N., R.1 W., B.M. ,. A,da
County, Idaho, thence S. 85 23'16" W. 419.94 feet to a point which bears
S. 88 01'12" E. 2235.80 feet from the N .W. Cornea of said Section 11, said
point being the POIIal'-OF-BEGIla]ING of the following description:
thence S. 15 05'00" E. 285.81 feet to a point,
thence S. 27 15'00" E. 231.35 feet to a point,
thence S. 02 20'59" E. 32.77 feet to a point,
thence S. 82 40'00" W. 15.06 feet to a point,
thence N. 02 20'59" W. 30.77 feet to a point,
thence N. 27 15'00" W. 229.64 feet to a point,
thence N. 15 05'00" W. 292.37 feet to a point,
thence S. 86 48'19" E. 15.77 feet to a point,
thence S. 00 ZO' 32" E. 0.62 feet to theP0IDT1`-~+-B~E~IIJIr1G,
containing 8275.15 square feet (0.1900 acres), more ar less.
j ~' 4
S
ws.. hx4 ~ ~ y .. , ..
~ ~.
,`
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: SEPTEMBER 16.1997
APPLICANT: CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH ITEM NUMBER: 11
REQUEST: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR CUP FOR,~AMILY LIFE CENTER
A ENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HfGHWAY DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS;
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
COMMENTS
!~ ~, t
!' r
OTHER:
All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
•
BEFORE T8S MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
CONDITIONAL USS PERMIT FOR FAMILY LIFE CSNTSR BUILDING
2511 WSST CHERRY LANE
SOUTH OF CHERRY LANE AND WEST OF CINDER ROAD
MERIDIAN. IDA8O
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The above entitled matter having come on for public hearing on
June 18, 1997, at the hour of 6:00 o'clock p.m., the Applicant
appearing through its representative, Richard Bugatsch, the
Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian having duly
considered the evidence and the matter makes the following Findings
of Fact and Conclusions of Law:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. A notice of a public hearing on the Conditional Use
Permit was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to said
public hearing scheduled on June 18,.1997, the first publication of
which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter
was duly considered at the June 18, 1997, hearing; that the public
was given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence;
and that copies of all notices were available to newspaper, radio
and television stations.
2. The property is located at 2511 West Cherry Lane and
described in the application which description is incorporated
herein. The Applicant is the owner of record of the property.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS 0~' LAW - Page 1.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
• •
3. The property is zoned (R-4) Low Density Residential
District.
4. Pursuant to the application, the proposed land use is to
continue as a church, but with the construction of a family life
center building on the property. The family life center building
provides a gymnasium, fellowship and classroom space, and expand
upon and enhance the existing use as a church..
5. Pursuant to the application, the Applicant agrees to pay
any additional sewer, water and trash fees or charges, if any,
associated with the proposed use of the property.
6. Richard Bugatsch, the representative of the Applicant,
testified and explained substantially as follows. This application
is for the construction of a 12,536 square foot family life center
to add to the existing facilities at Cherry Lane Christian Church.
The Applicant has reviewed the comments of City staff, and, in
general, does not have a problem meeting the requirements of the
City's zoning ordinance. However, the Applicant has a major
concern, at the present time, with landscaping and parking
requirements. Although the existing parking lot has been in place
since 1983. He understands that the current zoning ordinance was
adopted in April of 1994. Consequently, many of the present
requirements .did not apply in 1983. The Applicant recognizes that
adding a fairly major project to the property imposes some
requirements upon it; however, the .Applicant would like some
latitude in how it approaches the landscaping and parking problems
identified by City staff. The Applicant would be required to have
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCL:7SIONS OF LAW - Page 2.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
one three inch caliper tree for every 1,500 square feet of parking
which is 57 trees. The Applicant would like the City to consider
a reduction in the caliper size or perhaps reduce the number of
trees required, and give the Applicant some latitude in the time
frame to meet the changes which are required. In addition.to the
issue with the trees, City staff provides that the parking striping
and drainage needs to be revamped. The existing drainage system
collects water and presently discharges into Nine Mile Creek. The
Central District Health Department requests that the run-off
collect and run through a landscape swell prior to discharge. The
Applicant does not have an objection to addressing such parking
requirement at some later point in time. The Applicant would like
to look at alternative methods of water retention, for example,
perhaps some French drains, but, .again, the time frame is of the
essence. The Applicant's request is to look at the landscaping and
parking requirements as it relates to the present development of
the property. The Applicant proposes to landscape around the new
structure, deal with the parking situation in the new structure
area and implement a phasing schedule to deal with the rest of the
site. The Applicant will comply with the City's requirements,
whatever such requirements may be, in order to make the proposed
project move .forward. However, it would like the consideration of
the time and economics involved in updating the whole facility to
accommodate a development that only encompasses approximately one-
third of the property.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 3.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
7. In response to questions of Commissioner McCoy, the
Applicant's representative testified substantially as follows. The
Applicant will comply with all of the mandates of the American with
Disabilities Act, building codes, fire codes and any other
requirements that are related to it. In the City's staff report,
there is a comment concerning fire access.. The Applicant met with
the Fire Marshall and building department. They suggested that
fire access be provided through a rear access; however, the
Applicant needs to investigate whether such access is feasible. If
not, the other option is to locate a new fire hydrant in the rear
location. There exist details which need to be worked out. The
approach to this development is to work with the City and make it
affordable for the Applicant, and the type of development which
fits the community and the aims of the City's zoning ordinance.
The preliminary drawing was prepared for presentation to the
Planning and Zoning Commission to determine whether the Applicant
is meeting the aims and goals of the zoning ordinance, to address
the concerns raised by Shari Stiles, the Planning and Zoning
Administrator, and to resolve what requirements will be imposed,
prior to developing detailed documents. The exterior of the upper
part of the building will be synthetic stucco and the siding of the
lower portion will be standard construction for this area. The
roof will be metal. The proposed building will be a little
different from the existing building in style and color. The color
of the roof on the new building will be brown and the siding an off
brown. The color will be conservative. A comparable structure is
FINDINGS OF FACT P,ND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 4.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
i ~
the Rarcher Church of the Nazarene in Nampa, Idaho. That structure
was used as a basis for the type of building the Applicant desired.
There is existing parking lot lighting in place. The Applicant
will evaluate whether more will be required with the building
placement. Usually, additional lighting is placed at the rear for
security purposes.. It will be designed so as not to intrude into
neighboring areas.
8. In response to questions of Commissioner Borup, the
Applicant's representative testified substantially as follows. The
current parking lot is striped; however, the striping is not in
compliance with the City's current zoning ordinance. In the area
immediately surrounding the building, the Applicant has revamped
the proposed parking area to accommodate the new building. If
necessary, the Applicant will implement a schedule to restripe the
rest of the parking lot. With regard to the area between the
existing pavement and the drainage right-of-way, he understands
that there exists 12 feet before the right-of-way. The Applicant
believes the right-of-way is federally owned land and will
landscape accordingly. The Applicant is proposing the 28 trees
shown on the submitted plan. The number of trees will be increased
if required. The Applicant is concerned with the caliper 'size
requirement., The- Applicant would prefer to go to 1~ to 2 inch
caliper trees, and will work with the City to determine the
required number of trees versus the size of the trees. The
Applicant presently has approximately three times the amount of
parking which is required. The Applicant anticipates a maximum
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 5.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
U
L J
membership of approximately 359 people. The parking lot currently
has 125 stalls, but the presented plan illustrates 159 stalls.
9. Commissioner Smith commented that he would prefer the
Applicant have three inch caliper trees, or increasing the caliper
size of the tree if the three inch caliper trees are difficult to
locate. In response to the comments of Commissioner Smith, the
Applicant's representative testified that the Applicant's approach
is to view this development in the sense of a grandfather clause by
mediating the initial impact and scope which it has upon the
Applicant in terms of cost and a time frame in which to comply.
10. At the Meridian City Council Meeting held on August 5,
1997, Larry Woodard, an Blder at Cherry Lane Christian Church
stated as follows:
We now have 22,000 square feet of educational worship
space. It will contain a gym for youth, classrooms for
instruction to young married couples, classrooms for religious
instruction and places where those having addiction problems
can meet. Our primary focus will be towards youth. We are
now are looking at starting construction next March. Concerns
range from the size of the building, the proximity to
neighbors, the security lighting, the lack of landscaping,
general upkeep of our property and the loss of view by the
neighbors to the west. We have met with many of the neighbors
who directly abut our property and found that most have no
objections to this proposal. We agreed to place two gates to
keep people from parking behind the building except when
capacity crowds are expected. We have lowered the height of
the facility to minimize the impact on view. We agreed to
obtain a better idea of the effect of the building on the
sunlight in the yards of two neighbors and we have reduced our
parking to the barest minimum possible to accommodate the
landscaping requirements. Landscaping requirements represent
one of the more difficult aspects of meeting City
requirements.
11. Also at the City Council hearing Dana Kaufman, the
architect for the Church stated as follows:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 6.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCB
• •
With regard to the lighting. some concern has been
expressed that we do not light their backyards we light the
parking lot. We will not put any lights on the building
itself. They will be either a 20 to 25 foot high parking lot
light directed away from the property owners back towards the
building and in some cases they will provide ballard lighting
to landscape below the light line below the six foot fencing
line. The building height, at the ridge, is approximately 29
feet 8 inches, the eve heights-will be 21 feet. The parking,
on site will provided 139 parking spaces. One response to the
problem with parking behind the building at night, we are
going to provide gates with locks for the fire department so
they will have access behind. The stickler is the
landscaping. We propose to meet those requirements by the
addition of approximately 57 trees to the site. The west side
of the property abuts the Rutledge lateral and it has been
tiled. Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District will not allow
landscaping other than grass over the top of this lateral. We
have offered to landscape the west side of the fence of the
property owners next to the Rutledge Lateral to help alleviate
some of their concerns with the building. The church has
agreed to eliminate some of their parking spaces and provide
trees on our side to help screen the building.
12. In response to questions from the City Councilmen Mr.
Woodward and Mr. Kaufman stated as follows:
The addition will be compatible in the sense of the color. We
will not have brick but will have synthetic stucco, stucco
panels, and metal panel will be used for construction but they
will have the appearance of stucco.
13. Thomas Jewell testified again at the City Council hearing
as follows:
When we purchased our house approximately 3 1/2 years ago
we bought it as an unobstructed view of the mountains. We
believe that we paid extra for that view. When this building
goes in we will lose entirely our view to the east, we will no
longer be able to see Bogus Basin, we will no longer be able
to see the sunrise. We feel that because of the obstruction
to that view and the proximity of the building to our fence
that we will see a substantial "decrease" in property value.
Part of why we bought this home was as an investment towards
our retirement to lose property value will impact us
significantly in that area. I requested a survey be done to
see how much shadow from that building would be cast on our
home and into our yard. I received back from the architect a
draft in which it shows in the morning when the sun would be
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 7.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
•
the, the shadow would be the longest that the shadow line from
the building would equal the shadow line and be right along
the same shadow line as our six foot fence which would be
approximately 7 feet onto our property. So two days after I
got the survey I~went out and I measured the shadow. My house
is 43 feet from my property line and the shadow from my six
foot fence was four feet up the side of my house. Given that
the building is going to be 30 feet tall, 29 feet 9 inches,
and is 25 feet from my fence that. would cast a shadow clear
across the street on the opposite side of my home. I believe
that would cut my sunlight down, unobstructed sun light down
in my backyard to probably about 3 hours a day. Here again
too it is a significant impact on my property. The
landscaping was mentioned during our meeting however I did not
agree to it. They talked about putting 8 foot arborvitaes on
my side of the fence which is all fine and good except that it
would decrease the usable square footage of my backyard
substantially. It would require even though they would pay
for it and install it, it would require me to maintain it.
Also I would have to relocate my sprinkler system, pull out
the existing landscaping which was just put in. This would
all have to be done at my expense, I think it is rather unfair
to ask me to do that. I do have some considerable concerns
about the parking. With their growth over there they are
currently running three services, their parking right now is
just about to maximum. Their services overlap in that they
have 15 minutes between their worship services so you have
people coming in and people going out at the same time. They
are also running Sunday school services at the same time as
their worship service and with the expansion I do not believe
that the parking would meet code. So I really feel that this
needs to be looked at again.
14. Judy Chavez, representing a neighboring property owner,
testified at the City Council hearing as follows:
I am here in support of Renee and Ford Grigg who will probably
be most affected by this new structure. I am here with many
others in support like I said of Ford and Renee. They. weren't
able to make it tonight and they composed a letter that they
asked that I read. And it goes,
"Dear Mayor, City Council members and representatives of
the Cherry Lane Christian Church, Unfortunately my wife
and I aren't able to attend the hearing tonight. We
however had this notarized letter on record. We oppose
the construction of the family life center. As residents
of Meridian we are aware of the vast growth. We
recognize the impact of the growth on the churches and
the community. We are sensits.ve to the desire of the
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 8.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
! •
Cherry Lane Christian Church to have a recreation center.
But feel that the particular plan as proposed is
unacceptable for an established neighborhood. We have
worked hard to make our home and back yard a pleasant
place for our family and quests. At present when we
walk into our back yard we have a panoramic view of the
mountains. This adds charm and desirability to our
home." Renee put together some pictures of her house as
it is without the structure. See, there is a little
explanation here of what she did, let me just read that
to you. "According to the architects of the proposed
Cherry Lane Christian Church this structure, though not
exact is very similar to the one to be built. The
picture of our back yard was taken from our deck. I then
placed the distance between the deck and the back corner
of the proposed building.. The picture of the gym was by
pacing the same distances from the back corner of the
Nazarene gym. I also use the same angle of my lens so
that everything would be the same scale. Although
placement could potentially be off by a few feet one way
or another this should be a fair of what we will be
looking at if this building goes in. If you would like
(inaudible) If a home were to go up on the proposed site
we would be sad to lose our view but we would accept
this. If this building is built our mountain view will
be replaced not simply by another home but by a gymnasium
with a large plain stucco wall and aluminum roofing. The
architects have presented a very nicely drawn and color
plan of the proposed front of this building.
Unfortunately we live behind the proposed structure and
the back side is a very large, unappealing warehouse type
building. To make. matters worse we are informed that
there will be no landscaping between our property and the
proposed structure to help camouflage the warehouse image
of this building because of an existing easement which
the church is building right up to. When we have tried
to express our concern about this to the church we were
informed that 'change is hard'. They are totally
insensitive to the impact that they have on us. We feel
that this building will interfere with our basic
enjoyment of property, lessen our current property Salue
and severely limit future oppartunity to sell our
property. Before the Planning and Zoning meeting we
collected signatures representing 100 households in the
affected subdivision. These people feel that the
proposed structure is not appropriate as submitted for an
already established neighborhood. We have made
suggestions to the church about alternatives. One we
have suggested that they remodel the original building
and place the gymnasium where the foyer is currently
located. This would place the structure more central to
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LATi/ - Page 9.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
•
the lot, create more parking and insulate the
neighborhood from noise and lighting. This idea has been
rejected because. according to the church it would be
inconvenient. Two, we have suggested that they redesign
the family life center to be more aesthetically pleasing,
using the same brick as in the original structure and
perhaps adding some windows in the rear to break up the
monotony of the building. This has been rejected because
they say the cost is too prohibitive. Three, we have
suggested that they build it on a different location on
the lot, .they have rejected this ,stating that it would be
inconvenient because of the drainage and the work that
would have to be done to make it adhere to regulations.
Four, we have suggested that they search for a new piece
of land that would meet the needs of their expanding
congregation .and all of the foreseeable future needs
without disrupting an already existing neighborhood.
This was out right dismissed even though the pastor
admits that although the proposed changes will meet all
of their needs now member growth is so large that beyond
a few years they may have to go look for additional land
anyway. We have been informed by the church that given
the location of our lot in respect to the proposed
building we "will not really be affected". If one were
only to look at the plat that would be an easy assumption
to make. A piece of paper cannot fully convey the
reality of the impact this building will have on our
home. Because of the angle of our property, positioning
of our home, size of the building and lack of landscaping
it will literally be like living behind a warehouse in a
commercial area instead of the wonderful neighborhood
atmosphere that we now enjoy. We are not opposed to
progress and change, but awning and maintaining a home is
the American dream and maintaining the standards to
afford us to enjoy our home is one of the reasons there
are zoning laws. We are asking the City Council to
postpone this project until mediation can occur to lessen
the impact on and devaluation of our homes involved".
She has just a few more pictures that she would like to
submit of the property directly behind her home, right behind
the fences and of the church building presently.
In response to a question from the Meridian City Attorney,
which question was: You said that if they move the building and
put it in a different location or angled it in a different fashion,
that would be better for those people whose letter you read? And
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 10.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURC$
C~
if it is moved wouldn't it interfere with another property owners
view? To which Mrs. Chavez responded as follows:
Just the angle you are asking me? I am not sure that is
exactly what they meant as far as angle. I know that Renee
and Ford have expressed that they would, they don't see say
the structure itself cannot be added to the existing structure
altogether. It is my understanding of how they want the
structure.
I assume that it would.
15. James McSpadden, a neighboring property owner, testified
at the City Council hearing as follows:
I live across the street and behind the current location of
the church. I just wanted to voice my opinion, I agree with
the Griggs in the aspect that the construction materials that
are being chosen here would not go along with the current
buildings that are surrounding this facility and would not
upgrade the existing community, the homes that are in the
existing community. I think the construction materials, if it
is going to be built, should be built in accordance with the
existing facility that is there.
16. James McSpadden, a neighboring property owner, testified
at the City Council hearing as follows:
I live across the street and behind the current location
of the church. I just wanted•to voice my opinion. I agree
with the Griggs in the aspect that the construction materials
that are being chosen here would not go along with the current
buildings that are surrounding this facility and would not
upgrade the existing community, the homes that are in the
existing community. I think the construction materials should
be in accordance with the existing facility that is there.
17. Todd Anderson, a neighboring property owner, testified at
the City Council hearing as follows:
I give my support of that petition at this time for the
following reasons. The structure is large and it does not
blend or follow the current structures in the neighborhood.
It would be an eyesore to the close residents whose property
value would be decreased by thousands but the architectural
design does not blend in with any of the current structures.
The design as it is now is not acceptable for development in
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUS:tONS OF LAW - Page 11.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
•
our community. Griggs have mentioned some other options one
is to move the structure closer to the center of the lot.
They say they might have problems, engineering wise, to do
that but that would move it away from residential properties
and make it more, they could use parking in the back lots then
put in a structure so close to residential. Another
opportunity was to make the gym fit in where the foyer area is
which would blend in with the current design of the building.
I think that both of these may be valid paths to choose but I
think we need to get together and have some concessions done
on both sides. because I don't think that as a community it
would be an opening for bringing bad architectural design to
the community. I don't want a warehouse in every corner of
every subdivision that I go around. I think that they should
keep the design fairly close to the current design that is
already there.
18. Seth Myer, a neighboring property owner, testified at the
City Council hearing as follows:
I just want to say that I agree with Todd and Jim
McSpadden test~anonies.
19. Seth Myer, a neighboring property owner, testified at the
City Council hearing as follows:
In regards to the landscaping going up on my property, in
effect what we would have is them moving their property into
my back yard with no compensation to me. They would then be
past the easement as it stands. Also, one thing that I would
really like the City Council.to consider is that as this
church grows which it is going to do and I am very happy that
it is growing, I do support that. But in 3 to 5 years they
are going to be waxed out they will leave and then they will
leave that building behind. It is not going to go away so we
really need to consider. Also, I asked Planning and Zoning a
question I also asked all of the members of the congregation
of Cherry Lane Christian Church the same question. Would they
like this building in their back yard. Not once did I get a
yes answer, not once did I get an answer that says I really
wouldn't want it there but I wouldn't mind. So the very
people that are building this particular building don't want
it in their back yard either. So I ask that you consider that
as well.
20. Thomas Jewell also testified as follows:
In regards to the landscaping going up on my property, in
effect what we would have is them moving their property into
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 12.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
my back yard with no compensation to me. They would then be
past the easement as it stands. Also, one thing that I would
really like the City Council to consider is that as this
church grows which it is going to do and I am very happy that
it is growing, I do support that. But in 3 to 5 years they
are going to be waxed out they will leave and then they will
leave that building behind. It is not going to go away so we
really need to consider. Also, I asked Planning and Zoning a
question I also asked all of the members of the congregation
of Cherry Lane Christian Church the same question. Would they
like this building in their back yard. Not once did I get a
yes answer, not once did I get an answer that says I really
wouldn't want it there but I wouldn't mind. So the vary
peopple that are building this particular building don't want
it in their back yard either. So I ask that you consider that
as well.
21. Richard Dees, a neighboring property owner testified as
follows:
It is called NIMBY you just heard it this evening, not in
my back yard. Now all of these objections you have heard from
our neighbors are typical NIMBYisms. They are wrought with
emotion and sometimes there is little logic for what is right
for the community. This one doesn't hold much water. I will
call on Mr. and Mrs. Griggs because they are the ones who
presented the list of 100 households and it was the other lady
that did .testify, but in their interest. We understand they
presented a list of 100 households noting objections to our
proposed facility. I call your attention to a couple of items
about the list. First of all there are only 65 households in
the impact area according to Ada County. We sent notices to
all of those 65 people. Secondly, when we talked with the
neighbors as has been pointed out the ones most affected
abutting our property the ones that responded to us and were
home were all supportive except for one and that was Mr. and
Mrs. Jewell. We took it a step further we had an open house
to discuss the items with each of the 100 households, only
three families showed up. One were supporters, and the other
two were the Griggs and the Jewells . View, the Griggs and
everyone has talked about a large structure blocking their
view of ,the mountains, and about the outside treatments that
don't match. Griggs own a two story, it is as tall if not
taller than the proposed facility. They are blocking our view
of the Owyhee Mountains. They are in our back yard. At the
P & A hearing the issue of protecting the view was not a staff
consideration, nor part of the legal findings of fact passed
by P & A, and therefore should not be a consideration as a
conditional use permit. The campus will be tastefully
integrated with color matching exterior finishes,
FINDINGS OF FACT AN'D CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 13.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
•
architectural relief and consistency of design philosophy.
The use of modern building materials which are not only more
efficient that those is 1983 but are more attractive. It will
match. Griggs have a white picket fence, and the only one in
the area, all other properties have hodge podge fence types
but fit the area, in fact, Griggs fence sticks out like a sore
thumb.
22. Todd Anderson testified as follows:
I don't like the categorization of me or anybody else as
NIMHY, someone who is emotionally distraught. In Haven Cove,
the structure affects more than just 65 people, it affects
everybody who drives along Cherry Lane. They see a warehouse
in the back of the church. Need time to review and have some
reconsideration on their plans.
23. Suzanne Johnson testified as follows:
What kind of ordinances or zoning prevent the building
and structure to be used as anything different than a church
after it has been abandoned by the. current owners? Could
there be a warehouse move behind us?
To Which Councilman Walt Morrow responded, it is operating
under a conditional use permit. In a conditional use permit if
there is a change in ownership or usage the CUP ceases to exist.
Any new use or proposed user has to come before the CC and P & Z
through the conditional use process..
24. Faye Jewel, also a neighboring property owner testified
as follows:
Jewell - Responding to Mr. Dees comment about the P & Z
Committee. We they purchased their house they were given a
flyer that stated that, they have an unobstructed view of the
mountains, and submitted it to Council.
24. Seth Myer testified again as follows:
The church needs to sit down with those people who oppose
it and try and come up with some resolutions. It sounds like
there are two differences of opinion. Maybe if they can just
talk it over together they can come up with a solution that is
workable.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 14.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
•
25. Mr. Woodward of the Church testified again as follows:
About us leaving the property when we max out. We would
take part of our congregation and start a second congregation
and there would always be a congregation here.
26. Before the Planning and Zoning Commission, Richard
Bugatsch testified that Mr. Jewell made the assertion that we move.
We were wisely informed by CC to build our church on Cherry Lane in
1983. We did and survived and as CC pointed out it was the right
thing to do. We are being consistent with what we started in 1983.
We did not concede to suggestions that would have been
inappropriate because of life safety issues, code issues, issues
that would have significantly decreased our utility of our facility
or those that would not meet your standards. We are open to making
changes from an aesthetic point of view and engineering standpoint
and did so for another neighbor through reasonable exchange of
ideas.. We have offered to install landscaping on the other
people's property abutting us to help mask the building. We are
building a facility for the entire community. Right now used for
community activities, such as park and ride, voting and drug and
alcohol programs. With the expansion we can offer a lot more.
This is an example of private money being expended for the public
good. We are sensitive to our neighbors, and we have been a part
of this community for a long time. We are operating within the
rules established in the public forum.
27. The following testimony was given before the Planning and
Zoning Commission and the following evidence was also given to the
Commission:
FINDINGS JF-FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 15.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
Angela Renee Grigg testified substantially as follows.
She is in opposition to the application. She has observed the
growth in the community and the impact such growth has on
churches in the .area. She is not insensitive to the desires
of the Applicant and its application. She can see the benefit
of the proposed structure, but the proposed structure is not
acceptable for her neighborhood. She has viewed the
comparable building in Nampa, Idaho. On paper, the proposed
project appears reasonable; however, the proposed building is
very large and obtrusive. Her view of the building will be
from the rear, which presents a plain, large and high wall.
The building will be 30 feet tall and approximately 20 feet
from the fence line of her residence. The color of the
existing structure is an off white yellowish brick. Last year
or the year before, the Applicant built an addition, the color
of which does not match the color of the original structure.
The appearance from her view is unappealing. In addition to
the unappealing appearance, she has a concern of noise from
the air conditioning unit. Based upon the discussion with
people who live behind the new library in Meridian, the noise
from the air conditioning units is loud and disturbing. She
is also concerned about lighting of the premises. There
presently exists between the Applicant and the neighboring
residence concerning the existing lighting. She is concerned
the building will be used for more activities than activities
on Sunday. As proposed the structure would overshadow the
homes in the immediate eastern vicinity. The homes will not
receive full daylight sun until noon, because the building
will block the sunlight. Presently, from her backyard, she
has a panoramic view of the mountains. The construction of
the proposed structure will eliminate this view. Although she
would lose her view if houses were built, the construction of
a warehouse type of structure is completely different than the
construction of houses. The construction of the proposed
structure interferes with the enjoyment of her home. It will
lessen the current property value and severely limit the
future opportunity to sell the home. She has collected
signatures of people in her subdivision who support her
position and testimony. The signatures represent 100
households that do not believe the proposed structure is
appropriate for the neighborhood. Approximately nine people
with whom she spoke declined to sign the document in support
of her Qosition and testimony. One of the primary concerns
that she and her husband have are landscaping and lot
maintenance. The Applicant does not control the weeds behind
their property, and material is piled at the rear of the
property. The Applicant has been asked over a period of
several years to remove the material piled at the rear of the
property, but they have not done so. She is concerned that an
expensive structure will expend the Applicant's money, and it
will not be able to afford to maintain the property. She
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 16.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
would prefer that the Applicant. remodel the existing
structure, rather than building as proposed. A remodel of the
existing structure would accommodate the Applicant's needs and
not impact the Surrounding neighborhood as severely.. Based
upon the fact that kids presently gather at the rear of the
property, the construction of the building -will create
security problems unless flood lights are located at the rear
of the property. Consideration must be made for the impact
upon the surrounding neighborhood. and its protection..
She presented a document signed by numerous individuals
whom, according to Ms. Grigg, reside in the adjacent
residential area and object to the application. This document
is hereby incorporated herein as if set forth in full and
provides as follows:
We ask that you do not allow the construction
proposed by the Cherry Lane Christian Church. We
are opposed to building a structure rising 30 ft so
close to homes in our neighborhood. Such a
structure should be constructed on land where it
would not interfere with already developed
neighborhoods.
A project such as this is designed for activities
attracting large. groups of people. This facility will
disrupt the quiet neighborhood atmosphere that we now
enjoy.
Back yard noise from air conditioning is a concern
as is additional lighting at night. Currently there is
an ongoing issue with existing lighting and homes. As
proposed, the structure would totally cut off the
mountain view to some home owners, morning shading of the
sun is a major issue of concern, some homes will be
totally overshadowed by this structure thus interfering
with basic enjoyment of property.
We also feel that this structure would lessen the current
property value and would severely limit opportunities to sell
the homes directly involved.
Below are signatures of concerned neighbors who ask that
you not allow this structure to be constructed in our
neighborhood.
Thomas F. Juul testified substantially as follows: He
purchased his house approximately three and a half years ago.
Based upon his prior experiences, his concerns include not
having an.unobstructed view of the mountains, light shining
directly into his bedroom window and other parts of his house,
the Applicant's insensitivity to the neighbors and the impact
it has upon the neighborhood, and the noise created from the
air conditioners. Mr. Juul presented a flier prepared for the
marketing and amenities of the residence he purchased, which
includes the phrase "unobstructed view of mountains." This
flier is hereby incorporated herein as if set forth in full.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 17.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
Linda Rupe testified substantially as follows. Her
property borders approximately 200 feet of the Applicant's
property. Based upon the gathering of kids at the rear of the
property, she has a concern that the proposed building will
create a more secluded area for the kids to gather. The
lights which the Applicant presently have shine into the
neighboring houses, including the bedroom of her house. She
has asked the Applicant to remove debris from the rear of the
building, but the Applicant has failed to remove the debris.
Based upon the type of neighbor the Applicant has been in the
past, she is concerned about its future response and actions
with regard to the impact upon her and the surrounding
neighbors.
28. The Applicant's representative at the Planning and Zoning
Commission, Richard Bugatsch, further testified substantially as
follows. The family life center is best defined as a multi-use
building. It will be used for all aspects of church activity
including social, recreational, services, and educational classes.
He also testified that from the southeast corner of the
property, there is approximately 30 feet to the proposed building.
The length of the parking lot is approximately 20 feet. The side
of the building facing the neighbors will be synthetic stucco. The
eve height will be 21 feet high, as compared to the building in
Nampa, Idaho which is either 27 feet or 29 feet tall. It is
similar in height to a two story residence. Plans have not been
developed to designate the location of the air conditioning units.
There may be an air conditioning unit by the mechanical room on the
west side of the proposed building. The Applicant does not intend
to cool for occupants in the entire building, only in the perimeter
portions of building in which the classroom and fellowship hall are
located. Preferably, the air conditioning units will mount on the
side walls of the structure itself.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAF~ - Page 18.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
28. Also at the P&Z hearing, in response to questions of
Commissioner Borup, Mr. Richard Bugatsch, testified substantially
as follows. The easement for the Rutledge Lateral is 10 feet from
the centerline toward the existing fence line and 25 feet from
centerline to the existing edge of the easement on the west side.
Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District will permit the Applicant to
come within 10 feet of the centerline of the .pipe if it needs to.
The plan presented-shows the encroachment on the easement, and the
Applicant does not intend to encroach any further than depicted on
the plan. With regard to fire access, he believes 26 feet of clear
space from the edge of the building or any .impediment to vehicular
traffic is required.
29. And in response to a question from Commissioner Smith,
the Applicant's representative, Richard Bugatsch, testified that a
four foot landscaping strip is planned around the entire periphery
of the property, which will shift the aisles and parking stalls by
four feet. He further testified that incorporating the proposed
building in the central area of the existing building cannot be
done for life safety reasons, and remodeling the entire building
becomes economically infeasible.
30. Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to the City Engineer; and
Shari Stiles,. Planning and Zoning Administrator, submitted comments
which comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full.
Their comments included the following:
a. The project site is located in an L-O sic) zone,
which currently does not allow churches as a permitted
use. Expansion of this non-conforming use, plus the
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 19.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
i ~!
addition of a building on the site, is only allowed under
the conditional use process;
b. As Cherry Lane has been recently reconstructed and
no change in access is proposed, it is not anticipated
the Ada County Highway District will have any
requirements of the project, with the exception of
payment of impact fees;
c. Residential properties surround this project site.
City Ordinance Section 11-2-414 D 2. c. states that
whenever a commercial off-street parking area is located
in or adjacent to a residential district, it shall be
effectively screened on all sides which adjoin or face
any property used for residential uses by a wall, fence,
or planting screen that is not less than four feet (4')
in height plus a planting strip of four feet ( 4' ) minimum
width or in an alternate arrangement as approved by the
Commission. Due to noise and other potential negative
impacts of the project, additional landscape setbacks may
need to be imposed. Suitable landscaping and ground
cover shall be provided and maintained on a continuing
basis within the planting strips;
d. The site presently contains a vast island of
pavement that has never been adequately landscaped.
Although the proposed plan is an improvement, if falls
far short of the minimum of one (1) three-inch (3")
caliper tree per 1,500 square feet of asphalt as required
per City Ordinance Section 11-2-414 D. The Applicant is
to provide calculations of asphalt areas and locate
appropriate trees on a revised site plan;
e. The site is adjacent to Nine Mile Creek, which is
identified in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan for
enhancement. Additional trees and landscaping should be
provided adjacent to the easement of the creek, as well
as adjacent to all residential areas. Detailed
landscaped plans are needed;
f. The Applicant is to provide fire access and hydrant
locations in accordance with the Uniform Fire Code and
Meridian Fire Department policies. The site plan
erroneously shows a Fire Department access at the
southwest corner of the site. This access lines up with
an existing City sewer easement and easement for the
Rutledge Lateral. These easements were not ever intended
to be used as Fire Department access to the church site;
g. If the existing trash area is not currently
screened, or additional trash area is anticipated, the
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 20.
C$ERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
Applicant. is to provide enclosures per City Ordinance
Section 11-2-414 A 3. The Applicant is to provide
details and location on a revised site plan. The
Applicant is to coordinate dumpster site locations with
the City's solid waste contractor, and locate dumpsters
so as not to impede fire access;
h. As Cherry Lane is identified as an entrance corridor
in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, a thirty five feet
(35') landscape setback beyond-the required right-of-way
is encouraged. The fact that the area directly in front
of the building is landscaped 60 feet back of the
existing sidewalk should allow for the additional
planting areas as shown. Parking may not be closer than
four feet (4') to an existing right-of-way. The
Applicant is to provide detailed landscape plan,
including berming details, for approval prior to
obtaining building permits;
i. The Applicant is to provide curbing and underground
sprinkler system for all landscaped areas;
j. The Applicant is to provide temporary fencing to
contain debris during construction, particularly to
protect Nine Mile Creek;
k. All driveway parking areas shall be paved, with all
driveway accesses approved by the Ada County Highway
District. Paving,- striping and signage.of the parking
lot is to be in accordance with Meridian City ordinance
and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Driveway widths
and parking stall lengths shall meet the requirements of
City Ordinance Section .11-2-414, i.e. 25 feet wide
driveway aisles with 9' x 19' stalls (or as otherwise
dimensioned for angled parking). Graveled driveways,
parking, and access are not permitted. A drainage plan
designed by a state of Idaho licensed architect or
engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City
Engineer with calculations for all off street parking
areas. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed
of on-site;
1. The Applicant is to obtain a Certificate of
Occupancy prior to occupying the building;
m. All signage shall be in accordance with the
standards set forth in Section 11-2-415 of the .City of
Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance, the Uniform
Sign Code, and shall receive design approval of the
Planning and Zoning Department. A-frame and other
temporary signs will not be permitted and will be removed
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 21.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
upon three days notice to the Applicant. Sign permits
are needed for all signage;
n. All building construction shall be in compliance
with all required Uniform Codes;
o. The Applicant shall supply the- Public Works
Department with anticipated sewer and water usage for
analysis in determining whether additional assessment
fees should be charged. Assessment fees will be
determined during the plan review process. A re-
assessment agreement will be entered into with the
Applicant prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy;
p. The Applicant is to provide parking lot lighting
plans to the Meridian Public Works Department.
Illumination of the site shall be designed not to cause
glare or adversely impact neighboring residential
properties, as determined by the City of Meridian;
q. Sewer service to the project is proposed to a new
service line to be installed south of the new building.
Service lines to the project will be reviewed during the
plan review process. The treatment capacity of the
Meridian Wastewater Treatment Plant is currently being
evaluated. Approval of this application needs to be
contingent -upon the City's ability to accept the
additional sanitary sewage generated by this project;
r. Water service to the project will be via an
extension of the existing service lines to the church.
Service lines to the site shall be reviewed during the
plan review process. Water service to this project is
contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic
analysis by the City's computer model;
s. The existing irrigation ditch has been tiled on the
westerly boundary of the property. Nine Mile Creek is
designated as a natural drain and may not be tiled. Any
other irrigation/drainage ditches that may cross of lie
adjacent to the property shall be tiled per City
Ordinance 11-9-605 M. Plans will need to be approved by
the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral
users association, with written confirmation of the said
approval submitted to the Public Works Department;
t. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems
within this project will have to be removed from their
domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 22.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
•
Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as
landscape irrigation;
u. The Applicant is to provide a revised site plan
meeting all staff and agency requirements prior to action
by the Planning and Zoning Commission, or, at a minimum,
prior to being scheduled for a public hearing at City
Council level, as determined by the Planning and Zoning
Commission;
v. All uses/buildings shall be reviewed under the
conditional use permit process. No details have been
submitted; and
w. The conditional use, if approved, shall be subject
to review upon notice to the Applicant.
31. The Meridian Police Department submitted comments, which
comments are hereby incorporated herein as if set forth in full.
32. The Meridian Fire Department submitted comments, which
comments are hereby incorporated. herein as if set forth in full;
that all codes will need to be met; that it does not know the
identity of the owner of the property designated for fire access
(it has flowers and trees growing on it); and that a fire hydrant
might need to be added.
33. The Meridian Sewer Department submitted comments on the
subject application, which comments are hereby incorporated herein
as if set forth in full; that the kitchen will require a 1, 000
gallon grease interceptor as a minimum external to the building.
34. The Central District Health Department submitted comments
on the subject application, which comments are hereby incorporated
herein as if set forth in full. Its comments included that after
written approval from appropriate entities are submitted, it can
approve the proposal for central sewage and central water; that
FINDINGS OF '.FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 23.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
•
runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem; that
stormwater runoff should flow into a grassy swale before
discharging to seepage beds.
35. The Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District submitted
comments, and such comments are hereby incorporated herein as if
set forth in full. Its comments included the following:
a. The District's Rutledge Lateral courses along the
west boundary of the project. The right-of-way of the
Rutledge Lateral is 40 feet; 25 feet to the right and 15
feet to the left facing downstream;
b. The Nine Mile Drain is a contract drain and also
courses through this project. The District's. right-of-
way of the Nine Mile Drain is l00 feet; 50 feet from the
center each way;
c. The Applicant must contact the District for approval
before any encroachment or change of right-of-way occurs;
d. The District requires a Land Use Change/Site
Development application be filed for review prior to
final platting;
e. All laterals and waste ways must be protected;
f. All municipal surface drainage must be retained on
site;
g. If any surface drainage leaves the site, the
District must review drainage plans;
h. The Applicant must comply with Idaho Code Section
31-3805; and
i. It is recommended that irrigation water be made
available to all developments with the District.
36. The Ada County Highway District has or may submit
comments, and such comments are hereby incorporated herein as if
set forth in full or shall be incorporated herein as if set forth
in full when submitted.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page a4.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
i
C~
37. In the ZONING SCHEDULE OF USE CONTROL, Sections 11-2-409
B. Connnercial, Churches are not listed as a conditional use in the
R-4 District.
38. The R-4, Residential District is described in the Zoning
Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 3 as follows:
~R-41 Low Density Residential District: Only single-
family dwellings shall be permitted and no conditional
uses shall be permitted except for Planned Residential
Development and public schools. The .purpose of the (R-4)
District is to permit the establishment of low density
single-family dwellings, and to delineate those areas
where predominantly residential development has, or is
likely to occur in accord with the Comprehensive Plan of
the City, and to protect the integrity of residential
areas by prohibiting the intrusion of incompatible non-
residential uses. The (R-4) District allows for a
maximum of four (4) dwelling units per acre and requires
connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of
the City of Meridian.
39. Section 11-2-406 A of the City of Meridian Zoning and
Development Ordinance provides:
It is the intent of this Ordinance to permit conforming
uses. All applications for the enlargement, expansion,
extension of non-conforming uses or all applications for
the addition of other structures or uses prohibited
elsewhere in the same district shall be subject to the
Conditional Use procedures of Section 2-418 of this
Ordinance.
40. Conditional Use Permit is defined in the Zoning And
Development Ordinance, City of Meridian, Idaho as .follows:
"Permits allowing an exception to the uses authorized by this
Ordinance in a zoning district."
41. A conditional use permit would be and is required for the
construction of a family life center building on the property.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 25.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
•
42. There were no other comments by the public regarding this
application.
corrcLUSioNS of Lpw
1. All the procedural requirements of the Local Planning Act
and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met,
including the mailing of notice to owners of property within 300
feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's property.
2. The City of Meridian has authority to grant conditional
uses pursuant to Idaho Code Section 67-6512 and pursuant to 11-2-
418 of the Zoning And Development Ordinance of the City of
Meridian.
3. The City has the authority to take judicial notice of its
own ordinances, other governmental statutes and ordinances, and of
actual conditions existing within the City and the State.
4. The City of Meridian has authority to place conditions on
a conditional use permit and the use of the property pursuant to
Idaho Code Section 67-6512 and pursuant to that section conditions
minimizing the adverse impact on other development, controlling the
duration of development, assuring the development is maintained
properly, and on-site or off-site facilities may be attached to the
permit; that 11-2-418 D authorizes the City to prescribe a set' time
period for which a conditional use may be in existence.
5. Section 11-2-418 D. states as follows:
In approving any Conditional Use, the Commission and
Council may prescribe appropriate conditions, bonds, and
safeguards in conformity with this Ordinance. Violations
of such conditions, bonds or safeguards, when made apart
of the terms under which the Conditional Use is granted,
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 26.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
•
shall be deemed a violation of the Ordinance and grounds
to revoke the Conditional. Use. -The Commission and
Council may prescribe a set time period for which a
Conditional Use may be in existence.
6. The City has judged this Application for a conditional
use upon the basis of guidelines contained in Section 11-2-418 of
the Zoning And Development Ordinance of the City of Meridian and
upon the basis of the Local Planning Act of 1975, Title 67 Chapter
65, Idaho Code, the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, and
the record submitted to it and the things of which it may take
judicial notice.
7. Section 11-2-418 C of the Zoning And Development
Ordinance of the City of Meridian sets forth the standards under
which the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council shall
review applications for Conditional Use Permits. Upon a review of
those requirements and a review of the facts presented and the
conditions of the area, assuming that the above conditions or
similar ones thereto would be attached to the conditional use, the
Planning and Zoning Commission concludes as follows:
a. The use, would in fact, constitute a conditional use and
a conditional use permit would be required by ordinance;
b. The use would be harmonious with and in accordance with
the Comprehensive Plan but the Zoning Ordinance requires a
conditional use permit to allow the use; ~ '
c. The use, if designed and constructed properly, would be
harmonious in appearance with the character of the general
vicinity; that if the conditions set forth herein are complied
with the use should be operated and maintained to be
harmonious with the intended character of the general vicinity
and should not change the essential character of the area;
d. The use would .not be hazardous nor should it be
disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses if the
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 27.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
conditions are met; however, traffic may increase, but the
development will have vehicular approaches to the property
which shall be designed to decrease interference with traffic
on surrounding public streets;
e. The Applicant should be able to provide adequately for
the essential public facilities and services such as streets,
police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse
disposal, water and sewer, but Applicant. may have to pay
additional fees for the use;
f. The use would not create excessive additional
requirements at public cost for public facilities and services
and the use would not be detrimental to the economic welfare
of the community;
g. If the conditions are met, the use should not involve a
use, activity, process, material, equipment or conditions of
operation that would be detrimental to person, property or the
general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,
noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors;.
h. Sufficient parking for the proposed use will be required
to meet the requirements of the City ordinance; and
i. The development and uses will not result in the
destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of
major importance.
11. Because conditions may be placed upon the grant of a
conditional use permit to minimize adverse impact on other
development, it is recommended by the Planning and Zoning
Commission that the following conditions of the grant of the
conditional use be required, to wit:
a. The conditional use, pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance,
shall not be transferable to another owner or lessbr of
the subject property or to another property;
b. The conditional use shall not be restricted to a period
of authorization but may be reviewed annually, or more
often if conditions warrant, upon notice to the
Applicant, for violation of any conditions imposed herein
and other conditional use applications;
c. The Applicant shall meet the comments, recommendations
and requirements of the City Engineer's office and the
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 28.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
Planning and Zoning Administrator, which include, but are
not limited to the following:
(1) As residential properties surround this project
site and the commercial off-street parking area is
located in or adjacent to the residential district,
the parking area shall be effectively screened on
all sides which adjoin or face any property used
for residential uses by a wall, fence, or planting
screen which is not less than four feet (4') in
height plus a planting strip of not less than four
feet (4') in width. Appropriate landscaping and
ground cover, as determined by the City, shall be
provided and maintained on a continuous basis
within the planting strips;
(2) The Applicant shall provide calculations of asphalt
areas and shall locate the appropriate number and
size trees in accordance with City Ordinance
Section 11-2-414 D. The Applicant shall provide to
the City a detailed landscape plan of the property,
including berming details, for approval prior to
obtaining building permits;
(3) As the site is adjacent to Nine Mile Creek, which
is identified in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan
for enhancement, the Applicant shall provide
additional trees and landscaping adjacent to the
easement of the Nine Mile Creek., as well as
adjacent to all residential areas;
(4) The Applicant shall provide fire access and hydrant
locations in accordance with the Uniform Fire Code
and Meridian Fire Department policies;
(5) The Applicant shall provide screening for existing
trash area(s) and any additional trash area(s).
The Applicant shall coordinate dumpster site
locations with the City's solid waste contractor,
and locate dumpsters so as not to impede fire
access. The Applicant shall provide details and
the location(s) of the screened trash area(s) on a
revised site plan;
(6) As Cherry Lane is identified as an entrance
corridor in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, the
Applicant shall provide a thirty five feet (35')
landscape setback beyond the required right-of-way;
(7) Parking shall not be closer than four feet (4') to
any existing right-of-way;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 29.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
• •
(8) The Applicant shall provide curbing and underground
sprinkler system for all landscaped areas;
(9) The Applicant shall provide temporary fencing to
contain debris during construction;
(10) All driveway parking areas shall be paved, with all
driveway accesses approved by the Ada County
Highway District;
(11) Paving, striping and signage of the parking lot
shall be in accordance with Meridian City
ordinances and the Americans with Disabilities Act;
(12) Driveway widths and parking stall lengths shall
meet the requirements of City Ordinance Section 11-
2-414;
(13) Graveled driveways, parking, and access shall not
be permitted;
(14) The Applicant shall cause to be prepared a drainage
plan designed by a state of Idaho licensed
architect or engineer, and shall submit such plan
to the City Engineer with calculations for all off
street parking areas. All site drainage shall be
contained and disposed of on-site;
(15) The Applicant shall obtain a Certificate of
Occupancy prior to occupying the building;
(16) All signage shall be in accordance with the
standards set forth in Section 11-2-415 of the City
of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance, the
Uniform Sign Code, and shall receive design
approval of the Planning and Zoning Department. A-
frame and other temporary signs shall not be
permitted and will be removed upon three (3) days
notice to the Applicant. Sign permits shall be
required for all signage;
(17) All building construction shall be in compliance
with all required Uniform Codes and the Americans
with Disabilities Act;
(18) The Applicant shall provide the Public Works
Department with anticipated sewer and water usage
-for analysis in determining whether additional
assessment fees should be charged. Assessment fees
will be determined during the plan review process.
The Applicant shall enter into a re-assessment
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 30.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
•
agreement prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy;
(19) The Applicant shall provide parking lot lighting
plans to the Meridian Public Works Department. All
lighting and illumination of the site shall be
designed and operated so as not to cause glare or
adversely impact neighboring residential
properties, as determined by the City of Meridian;
(20) The location of sewer service lines to the project
shall be reviewed during the plan review process;
(21) As the treatment capacity of the Meridian
Wastewater Treatment Plant is currently being
evaluated, the grant of the Conditional Use Permit
pursuant to this application shall be contingent
upon the City's ability to accept the additional
sanitary sewage generated by this project;
(22) The location of water service lines to the project
shall be reviewed during the plan review process.
Water service to this project shall be contingent
upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis by
the City's computer model;
(23) As Nine Mile Creek is designated as a natural
drain, it may not be tiled. Any other irrigation/
drainage ditches which cross or.lie adjacent to the
property shall be tiled. Plans will need to be
approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage
district, or lateral users association, with
written confirmation. of the said approval submitted
to the Public Works Department;
(24) Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems
within this project shall be removed from domestic
service. Wells may be used for non-domestic
purposes such as landscape irrigation; and
(25) The Applicant-shall provide a revised site 'plan
meeting all staff and agency requirements prior to
the application being scheduled for a public
hearing before the City Council.
d. The Applicant shall meet and comply with the comments,
recommendations and requirements of the Meridian Police
Department, the Meridian Fire Department, the Meridian
Sewer Department, the Central District Health Department,
the Ada County Highway District, the Nampa & Meridian
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 31.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
Irrigation District, and all other governmental agencies
submitting or hereafter submitting comments.
e. Proper and adequate access to the property is available
and shall be maintained, with appropriate buffering to
residential properties and traffic on Cherry Lane and
surrounding residential areas; and
f. All ordinances of the City of .Meridian shall be met,
including but not limited to, the Uniform Building Code,
Uniform Fire Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, the Fire and
Life Safety Codes, all parking and landscaping
requirements.
9. The above-conditions are concluded to be reasonable and
the Applicant shall meet these conditions.
10. It is recommended that if the Applicant meets the
conditions stated above, that the conditional use permit be granted
to the Applicant.
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The Meridian City Council hereby adopts and .approves these
Findings. of Fact and Conclusions.
ROLL CALL
COUNCILMAN MORROW VOTED
COUNCILMAN BENTLEY VOTED
COUNCILMAN ROUNTREE VOTED
COUNCILMAN TOLSMA VOTED '
MAYOR CORRIE (TIE BREAKER) VOTED
DECISION
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSI0~3S OF LAW - Page 32.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
• •
The City Council of the City of Meridian hereby decides that
the Conditional Use Permit requested by the Applicant for the
property described in the Application is approved with the
conditions set forth in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
and that the property be required to meet the water and sewer
requirements, the Fire and Life Safety Codes, Uniform Fire Code,
parking, paving and landscape-requirements, and all ordinances of
the City of Meridian. The conditional use should be subject to
review annually, or more often if conditions warrant, upon notice
to the Applicant by the City.
MOTION:
APPROVE
DISAPPROVED:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 33.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
.~
~(~ y ~ ~a
88221500340
ANGEL RUSSELL L & DEBORAH S
2568 REBECCA WAY
MERIDIAN ID 83642-1159
86558780050
COOPER MARILYN A
2456 W RAINWATER CT
MERIDIAN ID 83642-1289
88221500330
MCPHAIL BERTHA C
2542 REBECCA WAY
MERIDIAN ID 83642-1159
88221500320
RODERICK SHANNON L
2512 REBECCA WAY
MERIDIAN ID 83642-1159
88221500310
CULVER JAMES D & DEBORAH M
2482 REBECCA WAY
MERIDIAN ID 83642-1 1 1 1
88221500300
ECK KENNETH L & WENDY
2462 REBECCA WAY
MERIDIAN ID 83642-1111
88221500030
BROMET PAULA & WILMA J
1662 TODD WAY
MERIDIAN ID 83642-1203
88221500020
WALKER FAMILY TRUST THE
10501 LA HONTON DR
BOISE ID 83709-0443
1632 W TODD WAY
88221500150
BEVINGTON WILSON C & WILMA L
2567 REBECCA WAY
MERIDIAN ID 83642-1160
86558780040
BELL JAMES P & NANCY L
2459 W RAINWATER CT
MERIDIAN ID 83642-1289
88221500140
POE MICHAEL W & TRACY K
2561 REBECCA WAY
MERIDIAN ID 83642-1160
86558780020
THOMPSON ERIC J & JENNIFER L
2421 W RAINWATER CT
MERIDIAN ID 83642-1289
88221500130
KOOMLER MARTIN K
2541 REBECCA WAY
MERIDIAN ID 83642-1160
88221500120
WELDIN TAMMY RANAE
2511 REBECCA WAY
MERIDIAN ID 83642-1160
88221500110
LAMBERT LARRY J & LINDA L
2481 REBECCA WAY
MERIDIAN ID 83642-1161
88221500100
POTTS DWIGHT L
2461 REBECCA WAY
MERIDIAN ID 83642-1161
86558780030
ALIDJANI HOSSEIN & MASHOUMEH
2443 W RAINWATER CT
MERIDIAN ID 83642-1289
88221500010
CLIFFORD JOHN C & ERIN L
1602 TODD WAY
MERIDIAN ID 83642-1203
• •
83508250160 83508250050
83508250010 WEHRLI BRANT L & CINDY L
HAVEN COVE HOMEOWNERS 1534 N TINA MARIE AVE
3350 AMERICANA TER STE 200 MERIDIAN ID 83642-4308
BOISE ID 83706-2502
0 N TINA MARIE AVE 89035330370
STRICHARSKIY PETER & VERA
83508250020 2357 W SONOMA CT
51211212422 MERIDIAN ID 83642-4359
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
INC 83508250220
2511 W CHERRY LN MOENCH MARY K
MERIDIAN ID 83642-1135 2601 W LEROY CT
0 N TINA MARIE AVE MERIDIAN ID 83642-4307
0 W CHERRY LANE
83508250230
83508250180 GRENIlVIlNGER WAYNE D
EVANS DANIEL MICHAEL & ADARE C 2577 W LEROY CT
2610 W LEROY CT MERIDIAN ID 83642-4307
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4307
89035330350
83508250170 MICHNO FRANK & MARY
SAYLES ROBERT THOMAS & 2331 W SONOMA CT
2580 W LEROY CT MERIDIAN ID 83642-4359
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4307
83508250060
83508250030 MCCUE DENNIS L & RHONDA J
PRESCOTT RANDY L & SUSAN L 1510 N TINA MARIE AVE
1572 N TINA MARIE AVE MERIDIAN ID 83642-4308
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4308
83508250250
89035330380 IMAINO PAUL & EIKO AND
GULL SCOTT D & GAIGH K 87 MANULELE ST
2358 W SONOMA CT HILO HI 96720-1627
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4359 2592 W LEONARD ST
89035330390 83508250240
DUPLEX HARRY & CONNIE M ELLIOTT L WAYNE & NORMA
2322 W SONOMA CT 2560 W LEONARD ST
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4359 MERIDIAN ID 83642-4309
83508250040 83508250070
ABBOTT KENNETH FREDERICK & SHIRLEY GARRY R &
1558 N TINA MARIE AVE 1472 N TINA MARIE AVE
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4308 MERIDIAN ID 83642-4311
•
89035330360
VINEYARDS HOMEOWNERS ASSOC
PO BOX 5714
BOISE ID 83705-0714
0 W SANTA CLARA DR
83508250080
MILLER KATHY L
1460 N TINA MARIE AVE
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4311
89035330320
PEREZ JANE B
2375 W SANTA CLARA DR
MERIDIAN ID 83642
89035330310
COOPER CHRIS W & DEBORAH L
2363 W SANTA CLARA DR
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4329
83508250090
JUUL THOMAS F & NELLIE FAYE
1438 N TINA MARIE AVE
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4311
83508250300
SLOCUM CRAIG A & ROBBYN Y
2581 W LEONARD ST
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4309
83508250290
JOHNSTON JAMES E & IRENE
2553 W LEONARD ST
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4309
83508250100
GRIGG FORD B & A RENEE
1426 N TINA MARIE AVE
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4311
83508250110
RUPE KENNETH T & LINDA K
1422 N RUTLEDGE AVE
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4314
U
89035330300
HERTZ PAUL C & ANGIE M
2351 W SANTA CLARA DR
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4329
83508250280
HOLLOWAY DANIEL EARNEST &
2544 W SHERYL ST
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4313
83508260200
NOEL CHRISTOPHER L & LAURA L
2562 W SHERYL ST
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4313
83508250120
WALKER JAMES D & KERRI S
1400 N RUTLEDGE AVE
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4314
89035330290
VAN OOTEGHAM STEVEN P &
2329 W SANTA CLARA DR
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4329
83508250130
CORTEZ RICARDO P & DARLA J
1378 N RUTLEDGE AVE
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4315
83508250350
GENTRY MIKE D & SHANNON MYERS
1387 N RUTLEDGE AVE
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4315
83508250360
BARTLETT STEPHEN W & RUTH L
2501 W SHERYL ST
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4313
83508250370
FRASER HAROLD GREGORY
2529 W SHERYL ST
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4313
.7
83508260210
GII~tI KIM RAE
2553 W SHERYL ST
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4313
83508250140
STREET BRET K & S JANILL
1366 N RUTLEDGE AVE
MERIDIAN ID 83642-431 S
83508250340
MC SPADDEN JAMES ALLEN &
1369 N RUTLEDGE AVE
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4315
83508260310
ACKARET GARY R & KATHERINE A
2468 W WILLARD ST
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4316
83508250150
BAILEY DONALD R & CAROL P
1342 N RUTLEDGE AVE
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4315
83508260300
KOTOWSKI JOSEPH IVAN &
2492 W WII.LARD ST
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4316
83508260290
PITZER ERIC C & LINDA J
2520 W WII,LARD ST
MERIDIAN ID 83642-4323
•
~ •
NOTICE OF HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the City of Meridian
and the Laws of the State of Idaho, that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the
City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho
Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the hour of 6:00 p.m., on June 18, 1997, for the purpose of
reviewing and considering the Application of Cherry Lane Christian Church, for a
Conditional Use Permit for land located in Section 11, T.3N, R.1 W, Boise Meridian,
Ada County, Idaho, and which property is generally located at 2511 W. Cheny Lane.
The Application requests a Conditional Use Permit for the addition of a family life
center building.
A more particular legal description of the above property is on file in the City
Clerk's office at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, and is available for inspection
during regular business hours.
A copy of the Application is available upon request. Any and all interested
persons shall be heard at said public hearing and the public is welcome and invited to
submit testimony.
Dated this 30th of May, 1997.
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY LE K
PUBLISH May 30 and June 6, 1997.
f
NOTICE OF HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the City of Meridian
and the Laws of the State of Idaho, that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold
a public hearing at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the
hour of 7:30 p.m., on August 5, 1997, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the
Application of Cherry Lane Christian Church, for a Conditional Use Permit for land
located in Section 11, T.3N, R.1 W, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and which
property is generally located at 2511 W. Cherry Lane. The Application requests a
Conditional Use Permit for the addition of a family life center building.
A more particular legal description of the above property is on file in the City
Clerk's office at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, and is available for inspection
during regular business hours.
A copy of the Application is available upon request. Any and all interested
persons shall be heard at said public hearing and the public is welcome and invited to
submit testimony.
Dated this 18th day of July, 1997.
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., I CLERK
PUBLISH July 18 and August 1, 1997.
-- - -~;--
`. i ~~ ~~
~.
,~~
i
~i.
i'
--
., ~ ~~
~.
~ \ J
`. ~.
Lg~ y,
" lJ .
~;
~r
i
W
~'~~ ~ ~.
~~t ~ w ~. Y ~ ~. ~ ~
~r
~~~ - R-q-
I~I ,g - __
to. ~
SITE PLAN -CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
6 ,p
O~ul' p~ A
F..
Nd1~
~ G. Fns ~~ 1.s~v'-r ~~
'~ • 6x~r~4 tpW. Lo~z~~t,EV~
\ ~ 6.Fir~icPr-1G~ l,lq~t~'~
~' wr+~2
gQ. pac~~.rrJ'- ~~~4
~ ~ i~: -~.. Bow
~ ~ !(o b,~rs1,~l~ ~~r!
\ 1~ P,as~-irtcf ~~wx~,~ s7-T~„aP,p,.~~4
\ ~$ ~t~~t ~ C ~r~cN¢~~SI Ig$ BE
i9 N~~~G ~P~ ~~°w)
~~S
I~:N~
1
^ ~y ~
1 2
1
t3 ~ ,
~ p
Meridian City Council •
September 2, 1997
Page 16
Corrie: Okay the motion has been made and seconded, you heard the motion, any
further discussion? Hearing~none, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #2: TABLED AUGUST 5, 1997: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ASHFORD GREENS SUBDIVISION BY
BRIGHTON CORPORATION:
Corrie: Mr. Morrow?
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, in talking .with David Turnbull he is waiting for us to resolve the
issue with respect to our new irrigation ordinance. He requested that we table this to
October 7 awaiting that ordinance to be adopted. I would move to table to October 7.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to table item #2 to October
7, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #3: TABLED AUGUST 5, 1997: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR A FAMILY LIFE CENTER BY CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH:
Corrie: Would the representative from the church please step forward?
Dale Newberry, 11908 Peconic Drive, Boise.
Newberry: Mr. Mayor and Councilmen, since August 5"' meeting we took your advice of
holding an open with our neighbors. I think the ideas presented here tonight as a result
of that meeting will show the wisdom of your action then. In addition to that public
meeting we have also had several separate meetings that have taken place with
individual neighbors. We have had many people from the neighbofiood and the
community contact us supporting the services such as athletic programs, the
recreational programs that we anticipate having available. We are concerned with the
growing community also, we are not dealing with the cars so much as we are with
people's values and where their children are going to be raised and what kind of
environment. As a_ result of the meeting and after listening to our neighbors we
addressed their concerns and came up with several solutions that those who were there
agreed would help. l would like our architect Dana Kaufman to come up and explain the
changes that he has made to our plans an the modifications that he has made on our
ground work to accommodate those concerns.
Dana Kaufman, 14 12~h Avenue S, Suite 210, Nampa.
CJ
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 17
•
Kaufman: I also have some new site plans and elevation (inaudible). As alluded to
earlier we did have a meeting with several of the neighbors, we advertised the meeting
and several came and we had quite a lively debate. Out of that we tried to address
some of the concerns of the neighbors. With that we did relocate the building 15 feet to
the east which is away from the adjoining property owners. We were able to create a
landscape strip on that .west side that would help buffer the houses. Also locating the
building 15 feet further to the east cuts down on shadows, si#e Lines and also we
addressed the desire to hide the building or conceal the building a little bit more through
the open space at this corner where this lateral has the right of way. There were some
concerns about you would see this building when driving down the street.. We have also
addressed some lighting concerns, we have included Ballard lights along the perimeter
of the project to help in security measures. Also these lights will not be taller than the
fence that currently exists there. So the shining of the lights will not go on the other side
of the fence. We have included some lights in the parking lot to help illuminate the
parking lot. We were able to maintain the prayer garden and create some landscaping
for this homeowner: We were also able to landscape the south side of the building
which was also another concern of how that might look in somebody's back yard. We
have also, if you look at the elevations that w~, that I passed out. On that south side we
have also included some panels of a contrasting color to help break up this south side
fagade and just for your information here is the type of panel that we will use on that. It
is not your regular type of metal building panel it is a textured panel as you can see.
Those will 'be incorporated on that south side to give us a different appearance. We
also added brick, if you look at the rendering over here we have also addressed brick on
threes sides of the building to help tie in with the existing facility. That was a concem on
how (inaudible) from Cherry Lane. We don't believe that we will see the building at that
level too much from Cherry Lane because of the landscaping that we are required to
put in the parking lot. We hope that you pay more attention to the street then looking off
the left to see the building. I think that with those recommendations, we also provide
scale models of the two adjoining property owners to give you a sense of scale
relationship to the building and the entire site and how that building will fit on the site. If
you have any questions I am here to answer them.
Rountree: Just again for my own information, what is the elevation of the addition?
Kaufman: It is 29 feet to this peak and 21 feet to the eve. There is also the existing
grade slopes approximately 2 '/Z feet. So these homeowners will be actually 2 '/z feet
higher finish floor level then this building. So effectively our building is 27 feet versus 29
in relationship to their house.
Corrie: Other questions? Any other comments Dale?
Newberry: (Inaudible) you can see by our artist drawing that this is a very good looking.
building. From the back side the corner that was the main concern then like Dana said
we moved it over thereby it also reduced the height or the elevation respective to their
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 18
houses. It gave more distance between them and then that enabled us to put in all of
this landscaping over here to make this a pleasant view.
Corrie: In all fairness is there anyone in the audience the last time that has some
problems with that, would you like to speak?
Thomas Juul, 1438 N. Tina Marie, Meridian.
Juul: Mr. Mayor and City Council, gentlemen thank you for hearing my testing tonight.
This is a very difficult one for me because it was my intention tonight to be testifying on
behalf of the Cherry Lane Christian Church. I was prepared to tell you that we had
reached an agreement on the matter before you. Although it was an agreement that I
was not totally happy with it was one that I felt I could live with. I felt we had come to a
meeting of minds. and this project could proceed. During our meeting on August 25~' we
made it abundantly clear to the church representatives that we supported their project
and that we were looking at ways to make it happen.. I think the changes they have
made have definitely been an improvement and we are wholeheartedly behind them.
But although we support it were looking for ways of it to have the least impact on our
neighborhood.. We made some suggestions and proposals that we felt were fair and
undemanding. We negotiated these proposals in good faith and made further
concessions. We negotiated, we came up with an agreement in principle which we
were lead to believe would be accepted by their board of elders. Mr. Dees told us and
he is an eider of the church that some of the other elders were out of the country but he
felt that the agreement that we made on that evening could be ratified with the
remaining elders and that he would leave word for us this past weekend. One point of
the agreement was that the lights and this is an example of what we are dealing with
there. One point of the agreement was the light on the south end of their building was to
be turned off. We were told that this did not have to go before the elders and it would
be taken care of. As we were leaving to go out of town on Wednesday we asked only
that it be turned off before our return on Sunday. We were having guests come back
with us and that the light affects the guest room even more than our own bedroom.
.They agreed. Pastor Moore visited our home that same evening and, we showed him
how badly the light affected us and he agreed there was indeed a problem and that it
would be taken care of. When we returned home late Sunday night with our guests the
light was still on. I called Mr. Dees Monday morning and informed him that this term of
our agreement had .not been met. He was not aware that the light was still on but that
he was meeting with the elders that day and that it would be taken care of, it was not.
Tuesday afternoon that is today, my wife called the church again to inform them that the
term of our agreement still had not been complied with. This is at 3:00 this afternoon.
She was told by Pastor Moore that the elders had met today and that in lieu of providing
us allowance for landscaping as agreed in principle so that we could hide the building
and possibly recover some of our depreciated property value they were going to move
the building an additional 7 '/ feet from what they originally told us and do the
landscaping on their property themselves which will break up the lines on the building
but it will not hide it has far as I know because I don't know what kind of landscaping is
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 19
going in there, they haven't discussed that with us. I feel it is important to interject here
that the day after our meeting with them we received word from a realtor with whom we
have been working with on the impact that this building will have on our property value.
This building could possibly cause the reduced resale value of our property as much as
$26,000. That is 20% of my property value. I don't have the actual numbers here with
me because we did not have time to get everything put together. This was a verbal
conversation we had with our realtor and she has been working with brokers and
appraisers to try and come up with an actual figure. Even after finding that we did not
call the church to renegotiate because we felt we had made an agreement with them
and that we would bite the bullet and stick to it. I think-that is called integrity. What we
agreed upon in principle-was that they would give us a $3000 allowance to landscape
our backyard. It would hide the building from view, draw the eye down into the yard
away from that building. We made it quite clear that we viewed this as an allowance and
that if we could have the job done for less money we would and the church would reap
the savings. We also told them that we could go to bat for them so that they would get
any credit due -for the trees that were planted on our property. We felt that the spirit if
not the letter of the code was being met. Of course that final determination is up to the
Council. From the very first moving the building was a suggestion that the residents of
Haven Cove and the Vineyards had made several times, including this final move to 15
feet away from the fence. Each time it was rejected off hand as being impossible. Now
after workable solutions have been reached with all of the affected parties they
suddenly find that they can move the building and we feet that this totally negates any
previous agreements that were made. We feel that to change the agreement at the last
minute virtually at the last minute demonstrates that the Cherry Lane Christian Church
and their architects have negotiated with the surrounding residents in bad faith. We
feel that they are going to do whatever it is that they are going to do without regard to
the surrounding community. That even altar agreements have been made the
neighborhood has no assurances that these agreements will be upheld. We therefore
respectively request that the Gity Council table this matter and require that this issue go
to binding arbitration before it proceeds any further. Thank you for your time.
Corrie: Any questions? Is there anybody else that was in that neighborhood that talked
to them?
Renee Griggs, 1426 N. Tina Marie Avenue, Meridian.
Griggs: We have really been frustrated over this whole issue because every time we
have made a suggestion it has been just totally flat denied all the way down the line.
When we spoke to them at this one meeting and we started talking about moving the
building again so that there could be landscaping behind the building we felt that they
were moving in the right direction. However, even though, first of all this isn't to scale
because our house is way bigger than their house, I don't know what their scale is but
this isn't correct. We felt that first of all this square footage here will be approximately
this size even though they keep saying it is the size of a tyro story home and that
sounds pretty benign. But it is like 12 two story homes all in one spot. That is a lot of
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 20
difference and they have their beautiful little picture over here that they had their artist
render. Granted we have been talking about their warehouse structure and from the
front it doesn't look like a warehouse type structure but from the rear it still looks very
much like a ware house type structure. They are going to put these little panels on the
back to try and break up the back a little bit. Which pleased us, but we haven't been
able to come to any guarantee of the type of landscaping, would it be like little low
laying shrubs or how many trees, what kind of trees. They haven't been able to discuss
this with us yet, everybody is a maybe and I think and we don't know. We hope that we
are on the right track with the church. We hope that we are headed in the right direction
with these concessions that are being talked about. But we still don't have any
guarantees and they haven't worked with us in good faith in respect to keeping their
word and making sure that we trust them. Because at this point we have no reason to
trust them. We want to know what kinds of trees are going to go and what spacing they
are going to go and how tall these trees are going to be and how much they are going to
.break up the exterior rear of this building. Because again with this particular thing the
Juul's will be immediately, this building is immediately behind them. In their back yard,
right now they have a pretty open landscape situation .where you do you look off at the
mountains and that is nice. But when this building goes in that will be gone and all that
will be left is this fence and this building. We think that it is fair, they are going to have
to move their sprinkler system, they are going to have to do some very major
landscaping to bring the focus down from that building to their yard. They will lose a lot
of money in the value of their property. We will also, however I don't feel, my husband
and I don't feel that we are as directly impacted since we are not directly behind them,
but this is still going to be our view. Again, we feel like hopefully we are working in the
right direction but we have no guarantees from them. We don't know the details and we
think that to approve it at this point without any binding arbitration we can't support that.
I can't feel that this won't impact our property values, it has to. Again I had our letter
read at the last meeting if it was a home going up behind us we would still lose the view.
But like Mr. Bentley said we have a wonderful view but if you don't own the property
between yourself an the view then you don't have much of a view. I can accept that bui
what goes up between us and our view really does have an impact on our property
value and our basic enjoyment of the property. We are not asking that they not have
their family life center. We are just asking that this situation be arbitrated so that the
impact can be lessened on the homes immediately involved and I did bring into
Planning and Zoning 100 signatures and this wasn't 50 households, this represented
100 households who said this isn't what they -felt like they wanted for an existing
neighbofiood. Those people are still in support. of us trying to lessen the impact of this
particular proposition. All along we have said that we don't oppose them having a family
life center we just appose having them have it as proposed. 1 would just ask that there
be some sort of arbitration take place so that all parties can walk away with a win win
situation. I was not at the last meeting, my husband and I were out of town but
somebody mentioned that they asked Mr. Crookston if everything met code and they
thought that he said no. I didn't know, I just found that out recently and I don't know if
that was correct or not correct. If they didn't meet code, what things didn't? Does that
sound familiar?
Meridian City Council •
September 2, 1997
Page 21
Crookston: I recall it, I did not answer that question. t don't know how a structure meets
code or what a structure has to do.
Griggs: I just hope that you will take these things into consideration thank you.
Corrie: Are there any other neighbors that were involved with this?
Ford Grigg, 1426 N. Tina Marie, Meridian.
Griggs: At our last meeting we held with the church was a week ago yesterday of which
was a good meeting. There was a lot of well we think we can do that, sure, we should
be able to do that, etc. There wasn't any details so we have been waiting and they said
they would come by before the meeting. It was just before the meeting like I haven't
even been home from work yet and I haven't met with them or seen what type of shrubs
etc. So they had quite a while to come back to us and I guess where I am coming from
is I would like it just tabled at least one more month until we can work out the details
exactly what they are doing. They presented some items to you guys, we were behind
them we couldn't see what paneling etc. We would like to have a full understanding
before it is okay. I think we are moving in a good direction for the community. Our
feeling is we don't want it there at all. They want something good for the community put
in a ball park or something and anybody can walk on and use. But we are trying to work
with them so they can have their family life center but we would like. to fully understand
the landscaping etc. and have them respect our opinion and totally give us the package
and let us agree upon it etc. before we move on. Thank you
Todd Anderson, 2492 West Willard Street, Meridian.
Anderson: I was at the meeting that we discussed about the building. I think it was a
really good meeting we accomplished a lot of good things. My opinion though is I don't
live directly next to the place. It does look very nice from the street but it doesn't show
the existing building that really crams up there. It is a tight fit onto the property and my
feeling is that if we were able to work with the church a little bit more that they, they
mentioned they weren't planning on building until next year in the spring. I feel that
maybe if we could table it a little bit longer that we would be able to make enough
strides that everybody will be happy with the outcome. As it stands right now I would
say if we had, table it another month I think that v~nould be the appropriate action.
Corrie: Are there any other neighbors?
Tammy deWeerd, 2090 West Chateau, Meridian:
DeWeerd: I just wanted to say a few words on behalf of the addition this would be to our
community. I have spoke to the church officials and have learned what their plans are
and that they are offering to open up this family facility to the community. Right now our
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 22
community is starved for a safe place for our kids to go. These kinds of facilities are
exactly what our families and children need to go to. That is something that we can go
to during the short winter days, during bad weather and all of those kinds of things. I
wish that they were building it behind my house because I won't have any say on what
obstructs my view. But it is, I think it is very encouraging that the church is willing to
work with the neighbors. It sounds like that kind of interaction will not stop regardless of
what you do. I wold like to say this is an addition, it will be a great asset to our
community having this family life center and having it open to the community on a
regular basis. That is something that they did communicate to me.
Corrie: Council?
Bentley: It seems since our last meeting there have been some good faith efforts met to
meet and they are working out these details. It looks like they are getting (End of Tape) I
think they need to possibly table this again and let them finish working to see if they
can't get the finished details worked out on their landscaping and whatever other issues
they may have.
Corrie: Anyone, else?
Tolsma:. I have been wondering here when I have been listening to the testimony and if
possibly a development agreement tike we use on the subdivisions and stuff like this
might not be in order. So everything is written down on paper and so that everybody
knows who is on first. That way everybody has an understanding and everything is
black and white of what is happening and what is going to happen.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor I believe that it is under normal circumstances appropriate for the
developer or presenter whoever the case may be to respond to comments that are
brought by the general public in testimony. I .would like to hear a response from Mr.
Newberry as a representative of the church to the comments that have been raised in
the testimony.
Newberry: Thank you, I thought I was going to a bypassed here. First of all our public
meeting went very well. There was one couple that was affected that didn't make that
meeting. We had a separate meeting individually with them. At that meeting we
presented with their concept of what was fair in the neighborhood of $10,000 to them for
recompense. Towards the end of that meeting it was reduced to $3500. These are the
details that didn't meet their demand. So to be accused of bad faith negotiation really
strikes hard, it is not true. There were no commitments made at that time, we talked
about suggestions, we talked about possibilities yes. These are the things that we
wanted to do. Rather than put the landscaping here we elected to do it around the
building where it does the most good. As far as the trees and types these things are all
(inaudible) by P & Z, by Shari Stiles and- the regulations that you have set up. We
intend to comply with them fully. We want to dress that corner up as we show and we
think this will do exactly what we talked about. I don't think it is in bad faith at all
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 23
(Inaudible) is going to be a very nice looking corner. We don't feel like we should be
tabled any further, you should go ahead and make a decision. Steve Moore also would
like to address a few issues to do with our (inaudible).
Steve Moore, 820 S. Black Cat, Meridian.
Moore: I was at and I appreciated the direct question abut what was done Mr. Morrow
in terms of dealing with our neighbors. I was at the meeting a week ago Monday night.
That was an extra meeting actually. We had a meeting that we announced publicly, we
sent out mailings, in fact the course of this I guess is one of the reasons why we are a
bit frustrated with the suggestion again to table again or go to arbitration. We have gone
I have been in this community for 21 years as a minister, I have never seen a church
that has gone to the lengths personalty, I don't know of a church that has gone to the
lengths that we have gone to, to communicate with our neighborhood on any other
.project. In fact in retrospect here is what we have done. The law requires that we send
out an announcement to everyone within 300 feet of our property. We did that we then
came to Planning and Zoning commission there was a petition of 100 people against us
at that point in time. None of which those 100 people ever came to us personally with
their questions, or clarification they just came with petition. A number of those people
live beyond the 300 feet proximity which in one sense is neither here. nor there, but it is
a fact. We then had that tabled we dealt some more. Since that time because of your
wise counsel we have sent out and by the way we had already had a public meeting
three families, three households came out of aN of those. This is after the petitions had
been signed, three families came. Then we came to the City Council meeting last
month. Again the same people that are here testifying tonight are the ones that testified
then. We then sent out as you counseled us another notice. We sent this out to again all
of these people within 300 feet. The same thing, same people essentially came there
were seven people at the meeting from the same households that are here tonight and
testified against us. One other family that their one concern was lighting and they have
been very supportive. That is where it is with communication with our neighbors. I think
you heard an example of the kind of idea of negotiation here tonight when you heard
Ford say we don't want the building why don't you build a ball park. The idea it was a
matter of public record the letter that Renee Grigg submitted last month to the Council
here. I have looked at that letter and there were four specific things on it and it has been
said of us, it has been very difficult as Dafe said to have our integrity accused to Listen to
some of these accusations about not being a good neighbor. We feel we have spent a
good deal of money on this. We have moved the building, that was one of the
accusations they will not move the building. We have moved the building that was one
of the accusations. Another the second point that was made in that letter and in fact one
of the things was to place it closer right inside our sanctuary at this point. To place the
building -right here, if we did that we thought about that a long time ago. We thought
about that a year ago when we began to dream this possibility. If we did that it would be
illegal it wold impede on fire and safety codes, it would, we have a significant ministry to
handi-capped people in .our community. If we put that building there imagine the
distance to get into our worship place. It is unthinkable to us as a congregation to offer
Meridian City Council i •
September 2, 1997
Page 24
worship and exclude handicapped people and make it difficult for them to come. It
v+rould be a huge distance to~ get into the sanctuary to warship. This is part of the reason
for placing it back here. These sort of things we have talked about, and in our minds we
have responded already to everything that has been asked. Frankly when the Griggs
left the meeting they made comments about this is good, this is exact quotes were
"thank you", "the trees are what we want", and as Dale said to negotiate about what kind
of tree that is already decided as we understand it by the City code and we are happy to
abide by the requirements that the Planning and Zoning commission placed upon us.
So I don't know if that answers your question about background from our perspective on
negotiation for this and we really feel like we need a decision on this.
Corrie: Date do you have anyone further on .your side? Council, do you want to hear
anymore? What is your pleasure at this point?
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, rather than getting it back and forth .issue here, I think clearly we
have an issue of he said she said whatever and we are not going to go anyplace with
that. I think the point of my discussion Mr. Juul in response to binding arbitration that is
not something the City can require. So it is clearly outside the question. So from my
perspective I don't want to see this tabled, I want to move forward. At the very least we
are going to have to have new findings of fact and conclusions of law. If there was a
table for 30 days. or even two weeks involved that would put the final action on this
some time in November which clearly given normal building seasons and normal time
lags just isn't a doable deal. I don't also think that it is good business.to strain things out.
think that we get paid to make the tough decisions and make them in a prompt
manner. So from my perspective I am not willing to table as suggested by Mr. Bentley.
Corrie: Any further discussion?
Rountree: I think both sides have been stated.
Corrie: Hearing that I will entertain any motion that somebody would like to make and
we will run it up the flag pole.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we instruct the City Attorney to prepare findings
of fact and conclusions of law for the conditional use permit for a family life center for
Cherry Lane Christian Church.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to instruct the City Attorney
to draw up new findings of fact and conclusions of law for September 16 meeting, any
further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
•
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING:___ .SEPTEMBER 2,1997
APPLICANT: CHERRY 1~1NE CHRISTIAN CHURCH ITEM NUMBER: 3
REQUEST: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A FAMILY LIFE CENTER
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHdOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
COMMENTS
k~
~,~ k ~ l
k'tk
P`~
OTHER:
All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
I NORTH ELEVATION
- --- --- -- yew Li.e.
I EASE ELEVATION
be •1-~
0~
~-
~~
b
i
o =
~ h
° ~1
a
WEST ELEVATION
4
•~~~m~ I~~~ ~I~m~~~~~t
~I ~~
SOUTH ELEVATION --
yfl.t-e
~~~ ~
5~P-21997
Ctf Y of MERHNAN
~~
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 27
Bowcutt: No sir we have not done that. I think. we had faith in Mr. Stoppello that if we
meet his conditions that he will go along with this. That does include monetary
compensation is one of his conditions, substantial monetary compensation.
Corrie: Any further questions of Ms. Bowcutt? Thank you, anyone else from the
audience that would like to enter testimony on this preliminary plat? Council any further
questions of staff?
Morrow. Comment Mr. Mayor, I guess for point of discussion with the Council is I don't
have a particular problem with the preliminary plat but it does seem to me like a
condition of approval of the preliminary plat ought in fact to be a resolution in writing of
the easement access issue through the Stoppello property. If in fact that doesn't occur
then I would like to see the preliminary plat revisited in the public forum to discuss the
issues of sewer alignment. I think that changes the game a little bit.
Rountree: We would be premature considering any action on this until we get an
annexation ordinance approved.
Morrow. That would be correct, we can't approve the preliminary plat until in fact we
have adopted the annexation ordinance.
Crookston: That is correct.
Morrow: The motion now at the end of the public hearing would be to table it.
Corrie: I will close the public hearing and entertain that motion.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor I would move that we table the request for a preliminary plat for
Sherbrooke Hollow Subdivision by Westpark Company until the annexation ordinance
has been adopted.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion is made and seconded that we table the preliminary plat until the
annexation and zoning ordinance has been approved, any further discussion? Hearing
none, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
FIVE MINUTE BREAK
ITEM#15: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
A FAMILY LIFE CENTER BY CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH:
Corrie: Is there a representative from the Church first.
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 28
Larry Woodard, 1701 Almond, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Woodard: My name is Larry Woodard I am an elder at Cherry Lane Christian Church
and I am here tonight to just briefly give you some acquaintance with our congregation
and our plans for our final development of our campus. In 1980 we purchased these
four acres after we had been advised by the then City Council that the property that we
had earlier acquired at the NE comer of Locust Grove and Pine was in fact going to be
an industrial park. We were told to go over and locate out on Cherry Lane because that
would be where the residential growth of the City would be headed. We followed that
advice and acquired the property that we now own at 2511 W. Cherry Lane. In 1983 we
constructed our sanctuary and a small educational wing and just as the Council
predicted within five years the subdivisions begin to come in around the church. As a
result we have had substantial growth. We have added to that original facility until we
now have 22,000 square feet of educational worship space. From our initial meetings
with the Council all parties were aware that we would expand as a congregation group
very similar to the discussion you had similar with the Assembly church and their plans.
Our request before you tonight happens to be the final building that we have for our
campus. Because of the growing evidence that the family structure in this nation is
under attack and yes even here in Meridian we have opted to make the last phase of
our building a family life center where we can better address the needs of the families of
this community and our church. It will contain a gym for youth, classrooms for instruction
to our many young married couples, classrooms for religious instruction and places
where those having addiction problems can meet. We fully expect that our facility will
be used by various community groups from time to time like AA the election board and
others. But it would be safe to say that the youth of our community will be the primary
focus of this new facility. Because any major modifications to our facility require
Planning and Zoning approval we submitted our request for a conditional use permit in
June anticipating construction this fall. But considering the time that is still required to
get a building permit and the approaching winter we now are looking at starting
construction next March. At the Planning and Zoning hearing several neighbors
expressed opposition to this new facility. One neighbor had taken it upon herself to
secure a petition of 100 reported homes in our area that were opposed to it: Concerns
range from the size of the building, the proximity to neighbors, the security lighting, the
lack of landscaping, general upkeep of our property and the loss of view by the
neighbors. to the west. Since then we have met with many of the neighbors who directly
abut our property and found that most have no objections to this proposal. One man in
fact indicated his son is anxious to join our youth program as soon as the facility is
finished. We have heard their concerns and have agreed to revise our outdoor lighting
scheme, agreed to place two gates to keep people from parking behind the building
except when capacity crowds are expected. We learned during the Planning and Zoning
that some teenagers are. parking out there at night that we weren't aware of. We have
lowered the height of the facility to minimize the impact on view. We agreed to obtain a
better idea of the effect of the building on the sunlight in the yards of two neighbors and
we have reduced our parking to the barest minimum possible to accommodate the
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 29
landscaping requirements. In fact the landscaping requirements represent one of the
more difficult aspects of this of meeting City requirements but we are committed to
providing extensive planting, although the 3 inch tree size is of particular concem. We
have expanded a tree area on the southeast corner of our property at the request of the
neighbors to the south and we will make this into a prayer garden. In addition to our
personal visits we notified the 100 families who had.signed the petition and invited them
to an open use on July 28" and we had three couples which directly abut us on the
south and vest of 10. It is safe to say we were unable accommodate particularly the
suggestion by one neighbor that we move somewhere else. Because our congregation
has doubled in ten years to its present membership of 500 we are encouraged by what
the future holds for Meridian as a City and specifically our congregation as a Church to
minister to the spiritual and social needs of those of our community who will benefit from
this new building. I want to tum the podium over now to one of our architects who will
address some of the staff comments relating to the final plans for the building, its tenant
facilities such as lighting, building height, parking, gating access and landscaping. We
thank you for your consideration.
Dana Kaufmann: 14 12t" Avenue South, Nampa, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Kaufmann: As you just heard I am Dana with Olson and Associates we are the
architects for the proposed addition of Cheny Lane Christian Church. With regard to I
will just run down the list. With regard to the lighting some concern through the
neighbors has been expressed that we do not light their backyards we light the parking
lot. With that in mind we will not put any lights on the building itself. They will be either a
20 foot to a 25 foot high parking lot light directed away from the property owners back
towards the building and in some cases we will provide Ballard lighting to landscape
below the light line below the six foot fencing line. The building height at the ridge is
approximately 29 feet 8 inches, the eve heights will be 21 feet. This falls in line with
many two story homes. The parking, we have on site provided 139 parking spaces, it
exceeds the minimum required by the City statutes. One response to the problem with
parking behind the building at night we are going to provide gates with (inaudible) locks
for the fire department so they will have access behind. When we do have the gates
closed. The access around the building is provided with two existing curb cuts, we will
not be adding any more curb cuts to the facility. The stickler is the landscaping, our
parking lot as stands right now is short of the parking lot requirements for landscaping.
We propose to meet those requirements by the addition of approximately 57 trees to the
site. We would have one request would be to, if we were to add landscaping to
adjoining properties to help appease that requirement we would like to add those, have
those trees counted in our allotment. Some concerns the neighbors had was well I will
see the building from my backyard, yes this is true. We will, we have talked to several of
the neighbors about landscaping along their fence line. It is unfortunate that the one
side of the property the west side of the property abuts the Rutledge lateral and it has
been tiled. Nampa Meridian irrigation district will not allow any landscaping other than
grass over the top of this lateral. So to the adjoining property owners that are on the
west side we have offered to landscape on their side of the fence to help alleviate some
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 30
of their concerns with the building. We would ask that those landscape requirements be
counted toward the number that the City would require. Also along the south side of the
property one of the property owners has a sewer easement running on their back yard
and their back fence. It does not allow them to plant any trees on their side of the
property. The church as agreed to eliminate some of their parking spaces and provide
trees on our side to help screen the building. That is the prayer garden that was
mentioned before. That is all I have to say right now, any questions?
Bentley: I wanted to ask you, you say you have outgrown, your current membership
has outgrown your current facility capacity. What is your projection with the addition on
growth? How long before you outgrow that one?
Kaufmann: I would have to defer to Mr. Woodward on that.
Woodward: I think it is reasonable to assume with this facility completed based on
information we heard from a similar building built by the Nazarene's in Nampa that we
could experience 100 addition per year for several years. So we will experience some
substantial growth with this new facility.
Bentley: Do you have a time frame with your prediction of 100 people year of when you
would outgrow the current facility with the newest expansion.
Woodward: We already have three services each Sunday, our alternatives part of our
request will involve remodeling our present sanctuary so we can expand the size of our
worship facility. I would expect that within three to five years we will start topping out
again. At that point we will look at other church plans in the facility.
Bentley On this new addition is it going to be compatible in construction materials, the
original building?
Kaufmann: It will be compatible in the sense of the color. The materials will not be the
same, we will not have the brick we will have a synthetic stucco and a stucco panel,
metal panel that will be used for the construction. The metal panel takes the
appearance of a stucco look.
Bentley: And your first addition what is it made out of?
Kaufmann: The original structure is brick.
Bentley: Okay, but the first addition you put on?
Kaufmann: Is brick also, there is one more addition after that, that is siding residential
type siding.
Bentley: So we are going to have three different materials then?
Meridian City Council ~ •
August 5, 1997
Page 31
Kaufmann: Yes
Rountree: I had a question if you would point out on the site plan the prayer garden
location.
Tolsma: Now, the gates that you were proposing they would go probably from here?
Kaufmann: (Inaudible)
Rountree: I guess I will state for the record that you have pointed to the southeast
corner of the lot south of the proposed addition encompassing about 5 parking places.
That is all I had Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Okay, are there any others from the public that would like to enter testimony at
this time?
Thomas Jewell, 1438 N. Tina Marie, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Jewell: Mr. mayor and City Council, thank you for hearing my comments. When we
purchased our house approximately 3 '/ years ago we bought it as an unobstructed
view of the mountains. We believe that we paid extra for that view. When this building
goes in we will lose entirely our view to the east, we will no longer be able to see Bogus
Basin, we will no longer be able to see the sunrise. We feel that because of the
obstruction to that view and the proximity of the building to our fence that we will see a
substantial in property value. Part of why we bought this home was as an investment
towards our retirement to lose property value will impact us significantly in that area. I
requested a survey be done to see how much shadow from that building would be cast
on our home and into our yard. I received back from the architect a draft in which it
shows in the morning when the sun would be the, the shadow would be the longest that
the shadow line from the building would equal the shadow line and be right along the
same shadow line as our six foot fence which ~nrould be approximately 7 feet onto our
property. So two days after I got the survey I went out and I measured the shadow. My
house is 43 feet from my property Line and the shadow from my six foot fence was four
feet up the side of my house. Given that the building is going to be 30 feet tall, 29 feet 9
inches, and is 25 feet from my fence that would cast a shadow clear across the street
on the opposite side of my home. I believe that would cut my sunlight down,
unobstructed sun light down in my backyard to probably about 3 hours a day. Here
again too it is a significant impact on my property. The landscaping was mentioned
during our meeting however I did not agree to it. They talked about putting 8 foot
arborvitaes on my side of the fence which is all find and good except that it would
decrease the usable square footage of my backyard substantially. It would require even
though they would pay for it and install it, it would require me to maintain it. Also I would
have to relocate my sprinkler system, pull out the existing landscaping which was just
put in. This would all have to be done at my expense, I think it is rather unfair to ask me
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 32
to do that. I do have some considerable concerns about the parking. With their growth
over there they are currently running three services, their parking right now is just about
to maximum. Their services overlap in that they have 15 minutes between their worship
services so you have people coming in and people going out at the same time. They
are also running Sunday school services at the same time as their worship service and
with the expansion I do not believe that the parking would meet code. So I really feel
that this needs to be looked at again. I believe that is all that I have, thank you very
much.
Judy Chavez, 2621 West Santa Clara Drive, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Chavez: Thank you, I am here in support of Renee and Ford Grigg who will probably be
most affected by this new structure. 1 am here with many others in support like I said of
Ford and Renee. They weren't able to make it tonight and they composed a letter that
they asked that I read. And it goes, "Dear Mayor, .City Council members and
representatives of the Cherry Lane .Christian Church, Unfortunately my wife and I aren't
able to attend the hearing tonight. We however had this notarized letter on record. We
oppose the construction of the family life center. As residents of meridian we are aware
of the vast growth. We recognize the impact of the growth on the churches and the
community. We are sensitive to the desire of the Cherry Lane Christian church to have
a recreation center. But feel that the particular plan as proposed is unacceptable for an
established neighborhood. We have worked hard to make our home and back yard a
pleasant, place for our family and guests. At present when we walk into our backyard we
have a panoramic view of the mountains. This adds charm and desirability to our
home." Renee put together some pictures of her house as it is without the structure.
She, there is a little explanation here of what she did, let me just read that to you.
"According to the architects of the proposed Cherry Lane Christian Church this
structure, though not exact is very similar to the one to be built. The picture of our
backyard was taken from our deck. I then paced the distance between the deck and the
back corner of the proposed building. The picture of the gym was by pacing the same
distances from the back corner of the Nazarene gym. I also use the same angle of my
lens so that everything would be the same scale. Although placement could potentially
be off by a few feet one way or another this should be a fair of what we will be looking at
if this building goes in. If you would like (inaudible) If a home were to go up on the
proposed site we would be sad to lose our view but we would accept this. If this building
is built our mountain view will be replaced not simply by another home but by a
gymnasium with a large plain stucco wall and aluminum roofing. The architects have
presented a very nicely drawn and color plan of the proposed front of this building.
Unfortunately we live behind the proposed structure and the back side is a very large,
unappealing warehouse type building. To make matters worse we are informed that
there will be no landscaping between our property and the proposed structure to help
camouflage the warehouse image of this building because of an existing easement
which the church is building right up to. When we have tried to express our concern
about this to the church. we were informed that `change is hard'. They are totally
insensitive to the impact that they have on us. We feel that this building will interfere
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 33
with our basic enjoyment of property, lessen our current property value and severely
limit future opportunity to sell our property. Before the planning and Zoning meeting we
collected signatures representing 100 households in the affected subdivision. These
people feel that the proposed structure is not appropriate as submitted for an already
established neighborhood. We have made suggestions to the church about alternatives.
One we have suggested that they remodel the original building and place the
gymnasium where the foyer is currently located. This would place the structure more
central to the lot, create more parking and insulate the neighborhood from noise and
lighting. This idea has been rejected because according to the church it would be
inconvenient. Two, we have suggested that they redesign the family life center to be
more aesthetically pleasing, using the same brick as in 'the original structure and
perhaps adding some windows in the rear to break up the monotony of the building.
This has been rejected because they say the cost is too prohibitive. Three, we have
suggested that they build it on a different location on the lot, they have rejected this
stating that it would be inconvenient because of the drainage and the work that would
have to be done to make it adhere. to regulations. Four, we have suggested that they
search for a new piece of land that would meet .the needs of their expanding
congregation and all of the foreseeable future needs without disrupting an already
existing neighborhood. This was out right dismissed even though the pastor admits that
although the proposed changes will meet all of .their needs now member growth is so
large that beyond a few years they may have to go look for additional land anyway. We
have been informed by the church that given the location of our lot in respect to the
proposed building we "will not really be affected". If one were only to look at the plat
that v~rould be an easy assumption to make. Apiece of paper cannot fully convey the
reality of the impact this building will have on our home. Because of the angle of our
property, positioning of our home, size of the building and lack of landscaping it will
literally be like living behind a warehouse in a commercial area instead of the wonderful
neighborhood atmosphere that we now enjoy. We are not opposed to progress and
change, but owning and maintaining a home is the American dream and maintaining the
standards to afford us to enjoy our home is one of the reasons there are zoning laws.
We are asking the City Council to postpone this project until mediation can occur to
lessen the impact on and devaluation of our homes involved." She has just a few more
pictures that she would like to submit of the property directly behind her home, right
behind the fences and of the church building presently. Thank you
Bentley: I have one question, those pictures, is that area that they show, I saw the one
you were showing there along the fence. Is that part of the easement for the irrigation.
Chavez: I understand that is what those are.
Crookston: I have a question, you said that if they move the building and put it in a
different location or angled it in a different fashion that would be better for those people
whose letter you read?
Meridian City Council ~ .
August 5, 1997
Page 34
Chavez; Just the angle you are asking me? I am not sure that is exactly what they
meant as far as angle. I know that Renee and For have expressed that they would,
they don't see say the structure itself cannot be added to the existing structure
altogether. It is my understanding of how the want the structure.
Crookston: I certainly may have misunderstood what you said, but if the church the new
portion of the church that is to be constructed is moved and therefore it will not interfere
with the Griggs property, their home but if it is moved wouldn't it interfere with another
property owners view?
Chavez: I assume that it would.
James McSpadden, 1369 N. Rutledge Avenue, Meridian, was sworn by the City
Attorney.
McSpadden: I live across the street and behind the current location of the church that
they are proposing to add onto or the new facility they, are planning to add behind the
church. I just wanted to voice my opinion, I agree with the Griggs in the aspect that the
construction materials that are being chosen here would not go along with the current
buildings that are surrounding this facility and would not upgrade the existing
community, the homes that are in the existing community. I just wanted to voice my
opinion of that. I think the construction materials, if it is going to be built, should be built
in accordance with the existing facility that is there.
Cowie: Any questions? Anyone else that would like to issue testimony at this time?
Todd Anderson, 2492 W. Willard Street, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attomey.
Anderson: I am a Haven Cove resident who was not listed among the 100 homes that
signed the petition against the proposed building. I give my support of that petition at
this time for the following reasons. The structure is large and it does not blend or follow
the current structures in the neighborhood. It would be an eyesore not only to the close
residents whose property value would be decreased by thousands but the architectural
design does not blend in with any of the current structures. I do not wish to hinder the
development but I would ask that a more moderate solution be evaluated and adopted.
The design as it is now is not acceptable for development in our community. Griggs
have mentioned some other options one is to move the structure closer to the center of
the lot. They say they might have problems engineering wise to do that but that would
move it away from residential properties and make it more, they could use parking in the
back lots than put in a structure so close to residential. Another opportunity was to make
the gym fit in where the foyer area is which would blend in with the current design of the
building. I think that both of these may be valid paths to choose but I think we need to
get together and have some concessions done on both sides because I don't think that
as a community it would be an opening for bringing bad architectural design to the
community. I don't want a warehouse in every comer of every subdivision that I go
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 35
around. I think that they should keep the design fairly close to the current design that is
already there. These are my thoughts and that is what I would propose.
Corrie: Thank you Todd, any questions? Anyone else that would like to issue testimony
at this time?
Seth Myer, 2895 West Cheryl, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Myer: I five I the Haven Cove Subdivision also. I just want to say that I agree with what
Todd just said and what Jim McSpadden just said. I don't need to elaborate they did a
good job.
Come: Anyone else?
Jewell: In regards to the landscaping going up on my property, in effect what we would
have is them moving their property into my back yard ,with no compensation to me.
They would then be past the easement as it stands. Also, one thing that I would really
like the City Council to consider is that as this church grows which it is going to do and I
am very happy that it is growing, I do support that. But in 3 to 5 years they are going to
be maxed out they will leave and then they will leave that building behind. It is not going
to go away so we really need to consider. Also, I asked Planning and Zoning a question
I also asked all of the members of the congregation of Cherry Lane Christian Church the
same question. Would they like this building in their backyard. Not once did I get a yes
answer, not once did I get an answer that says I really wouldn't' want it there but I
wouldn't mind. So the very people that are building this particular building don't want it
in their backyard either. So I ask that you consider that as well.
Corrie: Anyone else at this time?
Richard Dees, 2265 W. Sandalwood Drive, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attomey.
Dees: Mayor Corrie and Members of the council thank you very much for hearing me
this evening. It is called NIMBY you just heard it this evening, not in my backyard. Now
all of these objections you have heard from our neighbors are typical NIMBYisms. They
are wrought with emotion and sometimes there is little logic for what is right for the
community. And that is what I wanted to come and tell you this evening. This one
doesn't hold much water, Mr. and Mrs. Griggs and by the way can I see that picture that
they submitted, the big one? I will call on Mr. and Mrs. Griggs because they are the
ones who presented. the list of 100 households and it was the other lady that did testify
but in their interest. We understand they presented a list of 100 households noting
objections to our proposed facility. They talked about it this evening. I call your
attention to a couple of items about the list. First of all there are only 65 households in
the impact area according to Ada County. We sent notices to all of those 65 people.
Secondly when we talked .with the neighbors as has been pointed out the ones most
affected abutting our property the ones that responded to us and were home were all
Meridian City Council •
August 5, 1997
Page 36
supportive except for one and that was Mr. & Mrs. Jewell. We took it a step further we
had an open house to discuss the items with each of the 100 households the Griggs
has on their list, only three families showed up. One were supporters the other two were
the Griggs and the Jewells. You heard our response to these emotional charges from
our architects. I would like to submit a couple of other things. View, the Griggs talk
about a large structure, in fact everyone talks about. a large structure blocking their view
of the mountains. They also talk about buildings that don't have outside treatments that
match. Mr. and Mrs. Griggs own a two story house, it is as tall if not taller than
proposed facility. I could be petty by saying they are blocking our view of the Owyhees
Mountains but I don't it is not necessary. You see they are in our backyard. Also at the
P & Z hearings the issue of protecting the view of the neighbors was not a staff
consideration. Nor was it a part of the legal findings of fact passed by the P & Z to you
even though view arguments were presented during public testimony support our claim
that this is not nor should it in this case be a consideration as a conditional use. A P & Z
Commissioner even remarked during the right to a view during Mr. Jewell's public
testimony. As to the outside treatments, our neighbors will be able to see from our
backyard, it is clear from our drawings. And 1 don't know if we have a set of drawings or
not, do we have a set of drawings this evening. It is clear from our drawings that our
campus will be tastefully integrated with color matching exterior finishes, architectural
relief and consistency of design philosophy. We will be using modern building materials
which are not only more efficient than those in 1983 but are more attractive. In other
words it will all match. Conversely I would like to show you Mr. & Mrs. Griggs picture
they showed you. They don't practice what you preach if I could use a pun. This is Mr.
& Mrs. Griggs house it is true, if you will note the white picket fence from our backyard it
is the only white picket fence in the area, in fact it sticks out like a sore thumb. The rest
of the fences is a hodge podge of fence types but they all do indeed fit the area, this
one here does not. And they certainly didn't ask us if they wanted to erect that fence.
Now Mr. Jewell made the assertion in his public testimony at the P & Z and here this
evening that rather than building on our lot in a manor consistent with previous
construction that we move. Now this forum wisely told us to build our church on Cherry
Lane in 1983. We took a risk and moved here and quite frankly the building slow down
in the 80's was difficult for us because of our location. Happily we survived and as this
Council pointed out was the right thing to do. Again it is interesting to note that there
are two items on the agenda this evening from the very subdivision that these people
are talking about. They are asking for variances and plat approvals. Since we have
been in our location their subdivision has been renamed, replatted, and redesigned at
least once if not more times. There is no doubt that you will approve those actions this
evening but I wonder about all of the details of the variances of expansion if they were
known and revealed at a time when the plat was first put in. I doubt it and it doesn't
really matter because it is consistent with what is going on now. It makes sense to
approve it. The real world and such is the case for our construction plans. We are being
consistent with what we started in 1983. There was mention made that we were not
interested in listening to suggestions at our open house. Although it is true we did not
concede to suggestions that would have been inappropriate because of life safety
issues, code issues, issues that would have significantly decreased our utility of our
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 37
facility or those that would not meet your standards. We were open to making changes
that made sense from an aesthetic point of view and engineering standpoint and in fact
did so for another neighbor through a reasonable exchange of ideas. In fact we have
offered to install landscaping as you know on our other people's property abutting us to
help mask the building. The charges that we are insensitive it goes back to my NIMBY
statement that they are indeed emotional charges. Now I want you also to please
consider that we are building a facility for the entire community. Or 500 member
congregation is made up mostly of Meridianites we will be funding a building for this
communities use. Put another way we are building facilities for public use with private
funds. Right now our property is used for many community activities such as park and
ride, voting and drug and alcohol programs. With our expansion we will be able to offer
much more. Our project is a classic example of private money being expended for the
public good. Now it doesn't get much better than that. We are sensitive to our neighbors
and our plans show that. We are and have been part of this community for a very long
time. As part of our inherent charger we want to be able to provide for our communities
needs (End of Tape) mostly likely continue to be neighbors. This is a public meeting
and it is part of a process of an open and frank discussion that needs to take place in a
healthy society. Nobody is going to pull the ~nrool over anybody's eyes regarding our
project it is a large project. We are asking for a conditional use permit. Through working
with the City staff the conditions are set forth according to the rules adopted by this
community a community we are a part of. You and the City staff are the check and
balance holding our feet to the fire to make sure we comply with those conditions.
Therefore we are operating within the rules established in the public forum just like this.
To be sure the objections heard this evening are NIMBY and we don't fully understand
them and now we need to get on with it. We invite everyone including the Griggs and
the Jewells as welt as all of our neighbors to be part of this exciting and certainly most
worthwhile project. I urge you favorably approve our conditional use permit. Any
questions?
Corrie: Thank you, any questions?
Anderson: I just wanted to make a quick comment because I don't like the
categorization of me or anybody else as NIMBY someone who is emotionally distraught.
Maybe it is not real close to my backyard, yes I am in Haven Cove I do drive through
there. I think the structure affects more than just 65 people it affects everybody who
drives along Cherry Lane. They see a warehouse in the back of the church and that is
the fact that 1 want to bring up. It is not just a range of just 65 people and they mention
they weren't even looking at starting construction until Next March. I think that there is
plenty of time for maybe some review and maybe some reconsideration on their plans
that they may have in place.
Corrie: Any further?
Suzanne Johnson, 2424 W. Santa Clara Dr., Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Meridian City Council ~ .
August 5, 1997
Page 38
Johnson: I just have one question, what kind of ordinances or zoning prevent the
building and structure to be .used as anything different than a church after it has been
abandoned by the cun'ent owners? Could there forseeably be a warehouse move
behind us after they are done?
Morrow. I think to respond, the answer to the question is that it is operating under a
conditional use permit. In the event of a conditional -use permit there is a change in
ownership or a change in usage it ceases to exist. And so any new use or proposed
user has to come before the Council and P & Z and go through the same process that is
going on now. So it is a situation, for example a commercial warehouse is not
compatible even with the zone for the church.
Johnson: I just wanted to make sure that was clear.
Faye Jewell, 1438 N. Tina Marie Avenue, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Jewell: I just wanted to respond to Mr. Dees comment, about the Planning and Zoning
Committee. What happened was we submitted this when we purchased our house we
were given this flyer and it states that we have an unobstructed view of the mountains
and I would just like to submit this to the Council.
Corrie: Okay, anyone else at this time?
Myer: The only last comment that I wanted to make is I think the best solution to this,
obviously there could be, we could debate all night about it. I think that the church
needs to sit down with those people who oppose it and try and come up with some
resolutions. The comments you made about the life safety issues and the code issues if
you built it in a different location, I don't know if that is entirely true that you can't meet
all of the code issues if it is built in a different location. I think that you could look at that
and see if there is some other way and maybe the construction type. You say the
construction type matches but yet other people are saying that it doesn't. So I don't
know why, it sounds like there are two differences of opinion. And maybe if they can
just talk it over together they can come up with a solution that is workable.
Corrie: Thank you Seth, anyone else new here? Would you like to answer any of the
questions that may have come up?
Woodard: I guess the one comment about us leaving the property when we max out. I
think there is a misconception here that when we get to the size that we cannot
accommodate more people that we will suddenly up and leave. That is not the way we
operate, rather we would take part of our congregation and start a second congregation
and there would always be a congregation here.
Corrie: Any questions? I have just one Lany, you mentioned early that you had a taller
building and this one that you are building is 30 foot, what was the original size?
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 39
Woodard: The one at Nampa I will have to ask the architect, 36.
Corrie: So you are dropping it down 6 feet. Okay, Council questions or discussion
before I close the public hearing?
Bentley: My own personal feeling is it is good to see the churches growing, it is good to
see the public -take an interest in them. There are a lot of issues here that have been
brought up both in P & Z and before us tonight. I really would like to see this item tabled
and see the church people and the citizens that are surrounding that have these
problems to sit down and see if they can't work them out. The church has a right to
build on their property as long as they are within the uses that are prescribed by our
ordinances. I think they can work a little bit better with the public surrounding it and I
think they need to get together and see if they can't work something out.
Corrie: Any further comments? I will close the public hearing at this time. Mr.
Counselor is there any further testimony that should be in the findings of fact?
Crookston: Yes there is.
Rountree: Was that an affirmative that there is additional testimony that is different?
Crookston: Yes there was, there are different documents that have been submitted at
least.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I guess that from my perspective is that this is a tremendously
difficult issue. It seems to me that if you look at it from the standpoint of who was there
first the church was there first. But by the same token there are residences there. Mr.
Dees I understand your points in terms of (inaudible) obstruct your view. But part of the
right to the enjoyment of the American dream is to have some enjoyment of where you
live. tt is also a right to ~nrorship where you choose to worship. It seems to me that we all
ought to take and Mr. Bentley is absolutely right we ought to take another shot here at
the groups coming together and maybe a resolution of making the thing work in the
spirit of compromise. Because very candidly I think that essentially both groups are
right. The community desperately needs the church and other churches of all faiths.
The citizens that live within the community need some right to enjoyment of their
property. It seems to me like we ought to take a run at spending some time at
committees of each and seeing if we can't come to some sort of compromise before we
as a Council make a decision. I would favor in the short term although. the proper
procedure here is to require new findings of fact because of the testimony. It seems to
me like it makes some sense to have a table for 30 days given the fact that the
proposed construction is next spring and I realize that in construction matters that time
is of the essence. It seems to me that there are some overriding community issues
here. So that it might be beneficial that we table for 30 days given all the parties an
opportunity to sit down at the round table and come to some sort of agreement that will
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 40
point us in the direction that we'll be able to make a decision. Obviously an emotional
issue such as this there is never a happy part where everybody is not happy with what
decision we as a Council make. It seems to me that we try to make decisions based on
what is in the best interest of the community and the neighbors in the community. From
my perspective there is not enough guidance to take me one way or the other and I
think an honest good faith effort on the part of the church and its members and the
neighbors and their group to see if we can't come up with something that is more
pleasing to both would be time well spent. That is essentially how I feel about this Mr.
Mayor.
Rountree: Given the fact that this actually is a residential R-4 zone the Church property
is zoned R-4 and I guess I would reflect a little bit to a previous hearing we had this
evening why conditional use permits. Well I hope that particular applicant now
understands why we have conditional use permits in order to have an open discussion.
I think the issue that is pertinent to me is one of aesthetics. I appreciate the fact that the
congregation is stretching to accommodate this new life center and I have seen other
congregations and other churches in the community stretch their limits to get facilities
up and running for their folks. It seems to me that occasionally they get stretched too
much and the best desires sometimes don't get executed. I would like to see some
additional time spent with the aesthetics of this proposal. I would like at that point the
elders of the church the public relations folk deal with the issues in the neighborhood
through meetings. I do applaud your efforts I think that is an excellent effort. I think
those efforts will be successful to the extent that both parties have a full opportunity to
explore one another's issues and try to meet them. I would guess that it is probably
going to be a consensus as opposed to a general agreement amongst folks but at least
get some dialogue going along with this thing is going to look like. I would agree that
maybe we table this item for that to happen. If we can get some resolve from the
applicant in thirty days then we proceed on with action as opposed to putting us into a
position of redrafting the findings and facts and essentially being where we are right
now. That is my thoughts on the issue. It is a difficult issue and the folks that provided
you the flyer on your home when you bought the home they aren't here tonight. We
could .talk to some length about that but we can't address that issue. It is one of
somewhat buyer beware, but maybe we can address the issue of aesthetics.
Tolsma: I echo Charlie's sentiments and Mr. Bentley's sentiments and Mr. MorrovWs
sentiments. I think they have addressed everything that needs to be addressed tonight.
I think (Inaudible) just table this thing for 30 days, more of cooling off period than
anything and renegotiation period with the church folk and the neighbors and see if they
can come up with a .better solution.
Morrow. That being the case Mr. Mayor, I would move that we table this item for the
request for conditional use permit for the family life center by Cheny Lane Christian
Church until our September 2 meeting.
Rountree: Second
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 41
Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we table the conditional use permit for the
Cherry Lane Christian Church until the meeting of September 2 meeting, all those in
favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: I guess if you would Mr. Woodard be kind enough to set up some meetings with
the neighborhood and let them talk with each other and I think they can work that out.
ITEM #16: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO R-4
AND R-15 BY MERIDIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY:
Corrie: Would a representative of Meridian Land Development Company come forward
Charles Eddy, 4345 S. Timridge Way, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Eddy: I will try to make this short, we are getting late. The findings of fact and
conclusions of law accurately reflect all of technical aspects of this property. My
comments will be addressed to the concerns of the R-15 rezone request on the 3 acres.
The applicant is requesting the R-15 zone in the three acres to allow him some flexibility
in a final design of that piece of property. (Inaudible) the concept is somewhat difficult
to develop that works well with the lay .of the land and works well with getting houses in
there in an acceptable way so people will enjoy living there. The R-15 zone has several
different allowable house sizes which can be a bonus to us. The 10% maximum more
1000 square feet to 1100 square feet, the 15% maximum for 1101 to 1200 square feet
and then the 25% for 1201 to 1300 and then the 50% for larger than 1300 square feet.
We have requested in our application a concept of 15 units which would be 5 units per
acre. The zone allows for 15 units per acre but we are well below that request and just
above the R-4 allowance of 4 units per acre. Commissioner Smith at the Planning and
Zoning Commission had requested that we look at other options for. this parcel and we
have done that and have developed a concept if an R-4 zone is approved for this
particular three acres we have a concept that will work for that. I have that here for you
(inaudible). Now to answer any questions on the annexation and zoning request,
Corrie: You are requesting an R-4 or R-4 and R-15?
Eddy: We are requesting an R-4 for 80% of the property and R-15 for the 20% that lies
southwest of the canal. We have come up with a design there for an R-4 if that is what
the Council so wishes to approve on the property for the three acres.
Crookston: Excuse me that an alternative was it not. You are actually requesting R-15
for all of it but the R-4 and R-15 is an alternative.
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: August 5.1997
APPLICANT:_ _ Cherry Lane Christian Church ITEM NUMBER: 15
REQUEST: Request for a conditional use aermit for a family life center
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
COMMENTS
P & Z MINUTES FOR 6-18-97
SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS
SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
"REVIEWED"
SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS
~~~
~i-2-`~~
SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS
SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS
•
OTHER:
All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Meridian Planning & Zor~ Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 9
Johnson: A motion and a second to table the item until requirements as stated by staff
are met and I might add to that it would be imperative that we find out if the land is
actually all annexed into the City before we can act on that. If you need any, all those in
favor of the motion? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All yea
Johnson: If you have any questions on that I was just going to suggest that you discuss
that with our staff and then can, since you don't do this on a daily basis they can give
you examples of what would meet the criteria for us to proceed further on that.
Fitzgerald: For clarification the public hearing is continued to that date as well is that
correct?
Johnson: Yes, I didn't close the public hearing.
ITEM #3: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
FAMILY LIFE CENTER BY CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH:
Johnson: At this time I will open the public hearing and ask that the applicant or the
applicant's representative address the Commission at this time.
Richard Bugatsch, 508 10th Avenue, Nampa, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Bugatsch: As I am sure you are aware this application is for the addition of a 12,536
square foot family life center to the existing facilities at Cherry Lane Christian church on
Cherry Lane here in Meridian. We have reviewed the staff report and would like to
address some of the items one by one if we could. Items 1 and 2 are fairly standard
and we have no problem with. The owner in general really has no problem with meeting
the ultimate goals of the city's zoning ordinance. The major concern at this point in time
has to do with the landscaping and parking. The existing parking lot has been in place
since 1983, my understanding is Meridian did not adopt the current zoning ordinance
until April 2, 1994. So a lot of the requirements that exist now did not apply at that point
in time. We realize that adding . a fairly major project to this site does impose some
requirements upon us. The owner would like you to take a look at the best way to
approach this. They would like a little bit of latitude in how we go about landscaping and
dealing with the parking problems that the staff report identified. Currently we would be
required to have one 3 inch caliper tree for every 1500 square feet of parking that there
is. That is 57 trees. The owner would like you to consider allowing them to reduce the
caliper size or perhaps reduce the number of trees required and just give them some
latitude in time frame to implement all the changes that are required. In addition to the
tree problem staff report identifies the parking striping and drainage as needing to be
revamped. The existing drainage system collects water and presently discharges into
Meridian Planning & Zo~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 10
Nine Mile Creek. The request from Central District Health department is that all water is
collected, runs through a landscape swell prior to being retained on site. The owner
doesn't have a problem coming back at some point and working on the parking
situation. We would like to look at alternative methods of water retention. We would like
to do some underground perhaps some French drains and again the time period is of
essence. Our request to you is that we look at the landscaping and parking
requirements as it relates to the development now. Our proposal is to landscape
around the new structure, deal with the parking situation in the new structure area and
implement a phasing schedule to deal with the rest of the site. To sort of wrap it up the
owner will comply with City requirements whatever they shall. be in order to make the
project fly. But they would like you to consider some of the economic and time
considerations that are involved in making us update the whole facility to accommodate
a development that at this point only encompasses approximately 1/3 of the property.
Johnson: Questions of the applicant?
MacCoy: 1 do, it seems you already have the staff report because you are trying to
(inaudible) under item. 21 it says the applicant is to provide a revised site plan and etc.
This Commission won't deny it but (inaudible) So I have some questions that pertain to
that very same document. I did notice that the handicapped parking in your plan
Bugatsch. There is handicapped parking I believe showing existing and I believe and I
may not have striped some lots as (inaudible). We will of course comply with all of the
ADA building code, fire code and any other requirements that are related to that. That
is pretty standard stuff, we do that as a matter.of course. There was a comment on the
staff report about the fire department access easement. We illustrated towards the back
of a property. We met with the fire Marshall and building department, Shari was out of
town unfortunately and wasn't able to attend. We were looking at how best to serve this
property and actually came through the fire department, they suggested we look at this
rear access. We needed to investigate whether that access is possible. If not the other
option is locate a new hydrant there. So there still are some items to be ironed out. We
are approaching this as a development that we need to work with the City on to make it
both affordable for our client and make it the type of development that fits the
community and ultimately meets alt of the aims of City of Meridian zoning ordinance.
MacCoy: When you turn out your next issue of your plan I would like to see dimensions
shown. That left me with a question mark, just to (inaudible) ADA, such things as
walkways, doorways, lavatories, etc. Let's me know that (inaudible) yes it will be here
and the next thing you know you don't have it and we don't have it.
Bugatsch. This is a preliminary drawing that was prepared for the purposes of the
Planning and Zoning Commission to see whether we are meeting the aims and goals of
the zoning ordinance. To address the concerns that we had brought up to Shari in our
initial conversations. And really to resolve what the requirements will be at this point in
Meridian Planning & Zt~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 11
time we are going forward with the full blown construction documents and they will detail
that to an end.
MacCoy: I was a little bit, I knew what you were doing but I wish you had put some more
detail in there. For my own edification what kind of material are you going to use on this
building?
Bugatsch: The building, the exterior will be synthetic stucco, also known as (inaudible)
a portion of the larger structure in behind will have metal roofing. The lower portion will
also be metal roofing but the siding will be (inaudible) pretty standard construction for
this area.
MacCoy: Is it going to match your building when you finish?
Bugatsch: It will be a little bit different in style and color. Well that is typical of most
building additions and if you look at the existing structure it is not to one particular style
at this point either.
MacCoy: I am just curious what color of roof are you going to put on that building?
Bugatsch: This roof will probably be brown, the siding will be an off brown color.
MacCoy: You have a part that will be seen by the public.
Bugatsch: The coloring will be conservative. If anyone wants to see a similar example
they can look at Karcher church of the Nazarene in Nampa. That is what was used as a
basis for the type of building that they wanted.
MacCoy: Also on your plan you are going to show lighting I hope for your parking areas.
Bugatsch: There is existing parking light lighting in place, we will evaluate whether more
will be required with the building placement. We usually do minimal lighting on the back
for security only. (Inaudible) so we are not intruding into neighboring areas.
MacCoy: You understand about that
Bugatsch: Oh yes, that is always a concern and I don't think anyone would argue that
point.
MacCoy: 1 don't think you want the neighbors (inaudible) I thought the staff report
outlined a number of things for you to take care. If you are already involved with them 1
think that is very good.
Johnson: Anyone else?
Meridian Planning & Z~ Commission
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 12
Borup: Yes, you said the main two things you had concerns on where the landscaping
and you mentioned parking lot striping. I wasn't sure what you meant?
Bugatsch: Item 11 on the staff report, the existing parking lot is striped. The sizes are
not to current City standard. They are just slightly (inaudible) 1 believe the stalls are 8'/
feet by 18 feet long. The drive well is 24 feet, in many communities that is an acceptable
standard. It does not comply with the current zoning ordinance but it is eminently
workable. In the area immediately surrounding the building we have already revamped
the proposed parking layout to accommodate the new siding. If necessary as deemed
by the Commission we will implement a schedule to restripe the rest of the parking lot.
Borup: Staff had also made reference to some landscaping along the drain. Do you
know how much area you have between the existing paving and the drainage right of
way, is there anything there at all?
Bugatsch: My understanding is there is twelve feet.
Borup: Before the right of way?
Bugatsch: Right before the right of way and that is federally owned land. I don't have a
copy of the warranty deed for it but. in talking with one of the owners members of
building committee they feel that is the federal property there and they will landscape
accordingly.
Borup: Right now you are proposing a landscaping detail pretty much as you have
submitted it at this point?
Bugatsch: Correct,
Borup: You are adding a lot of trees out in the parking area and such
Bugatsch: We have 28 trees shown on the plan that was submitted to the Commission.
Again as the Commission may require we will increase the number of trees. Again we
ask you to look at the caliper requirement. In just phoning around this afternoon three
inch caliper trees are going to be hard to get a hold of. Two inch caliper is a little more
appropriate. We would prefer to go to 1 '~ to 2 inch caliper. We will wrork with the
Planning and Zoning Commission through Shari if necessary to determine what trade
off between number of trees and size of trees you deem appropriate.
Borup: It looks like your parking, the amount of parking styles will increase by about 14,
is that con'ect?
Bugatsch: Correct, they have about 3 times as much parking now as is required
Meridian Planning & Z~g Commission
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 13
Borup: So you are really not anticipating a lot of extra usage.
Bugatsch: Right, they are looking at a maximum membership of approximately 350 and
I believe we have 159 stalls as illustrated. And the current existing parking is 125.
Smith: What is your required parking count?
Bugatsch: I would have to look at up to be honest. It is usually based on the amount of
fixed seats or pew space. Shari might be able to tell me what the ratio is off the top of
her head. (Inaudible)
Smith: I guess I would like to see you stick with the 3 inch caliper tree and if you are
having problems getting them and then maybe exceeding the minimum number of 3
inch caliper trees would be appropriate instead of reducing the number.
Bugatsch: Well our approach to this, looking at from a grandfather clause in a sense this
parking lot the way it is has existed since 1983. We are looking at mediating the initial
impact and scope of what this project is proposed to cost the owner and just looking at a
way to spread out the time to bring us up to full compliance.
Smith: Shari, so the number of trees is present and new asphalt not just new asphalt?
Stiles: It would be based on the overall project. It is one piece of property. They are
asking for a conditional use permit to add a building. Any time you issue a building
permit for a piece of property need to comply with the ordinance in effect at the time
they get that building permit.
Johnson: Anyone else? Anyone else from the public that would like to testify at this
time on this application?
Angela Renee Grigg, 1426 N. Tina Marie Ave., Meridian, was sworn by the City
Attorney.
Grigg: I wrote out my comments so that I could try to stay on track, I hope you don't
mind if I read. I am a little bit nervous. We are in opposition of the building of the family
living center proposed by the Cherry Lane Meridian church. As individuals living in the
City of Meridian we see the vast growing numbers and we know how this impacts the
many churches in the area. The need for them to expand and accommodate the
growth. However, we are not insensitive to the desire for the Cherry Lane Christian
Church to have a recreation center. While we can see the benefit that this structure
may have for the church we feel that this particular plan as proposed is not acceptable
for our neighborhood. We have contacted the architect, probably the gentleman who
spoke earlier and have viewed another church building in Nampa that he deemed very
Meridian Planning & Zo~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 14
similar. On paper this project could be perceived to be quite reasonable. However we
are talking about a very large obtrusive building being (End of Tape)- our view of this
building will be the back side which constitutes a very plain, very large, very high wall.
This building will be 30 feet tall 'and -they will be built approximately 20 feet off our fence
line. Aside from the unappealing appearance of the building which I have to say when
the comment came up about will this match the existing structure. The existing structure
of this church is kind of an off white yellowish brick which is very appealing very nice
they have some wood siding up their spire and it is a very nice structure. Last year or
the year before they built an addition which is this section here. This section is like
siding and it is kind of a beige color and it doesn't match the church. This other
structure, this part is stucco but our view of it is straight up and it is just the metal siding
that he spoke of. Very unappealing to our neighborhood. Aside from the unappealing
appearance of the building we have several other concerns. Back yard noise from air
conditioning this large structure will be a problem. We have spoken to people who live
immediately behind the new wonderful library that we love, and I know these people are
really struggling with the constant noise of those big air conditioners trying to cool that
big building. This will be an issue with us. We are also concerned about lighting, at
present there is an ongoing issue with existing lighting and homes. We are concerned
that this building will be used for more than Sunday instruction. Will it be rented out for
other functions, to whom, how often and at what hours? Surely this will disrupt our quiet
neighborhood atmosphere and we would be naive to believe otherwise. As proposed
this structure will over shadow the homes in the immediate eastern vicinity. They will
not receive full daylight sun until noon when the sun is overhead because this building
will be so close and so tall and so vast. A present we walk into our backyard and we
have a beautiful panoramic view of the mountains. This adds charm and desirability to
our homes, our collective homes. If this building is built we will walk into our backyards
to find a 30 foot tall gymnasium. Now obviously we like our present view and if someone
were to build a home we would still lose our view and we may not like that. However it is
a whole other issue and a whole other circumstance to walk out our back door and have
a warehouse type building standing virtually in our backyards. We feel that this proposal
will interfere with our basic right to enjoy our property. It will lessen the current property
value and severely limit the future opportunity we have to sell our property. Because
personally I would never buy a home that is built in the proximity of a building like this.
When we built our homes I realized that this church is not responsible for comments
made by real estate people. But to their knowledge it was a parking lot behind us and
what was vacant was to be paved and to become a parking lot and would remain a
parking lot. We had no future notice when we built our house that there would be a
gymnasium going up in our back yard. We have collected signatures that of people in
our subdivision who support us in our position. We have signatures representing 100
households who feel that this is not the atmosphere that we want for our neighborhood
nor should this stnacture be forced upon an already developed neighborhood. If they
had built their gymnasium previous to the establishment of our subdivision then we
would have the choice to build our homes in that area. This is not the case. We spoke
to of all the different households and we spoke to over 100 households we had 5 people
Meridian Planning & Z~g Commission
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 15
who declined to sign because either they or someone they knew well was a member of
this church. And that is a reasonable- position for them to maintain. We spoke to four
people who didn't sign because they were just totally indifferent, not my backyard I don't
care. Short of that these other hundred households see and support us in our position
this is not a desirable situation and they do not support the building of this family living
center as currently proposed. We are not, first of all let me go back because I wrote
down these notes also while he was talking. One of the main concerns that my
husband and I had and. have discussed is 1 took pictures of the lot and I was going to
bring them and show you what we five with as far as landscaping and lot maintenance.
I didn't bring them because I thought I don't want to start that tone at the meeting
because they don't maintain the weeds behind their lot and there is stuff piled up in their
back yard that we have asked them to remove that they have not over the last several
years. We are concerned that an expensive structure like this is going to take every
penny that they have and any landscaping money that they may have had will be
usupert to finish their project and landscaping will be a major problem for us. That they
will not consider the impact of the lack of landscaping .on the neighborhood. Having a
big huge structure like this that shoots straight up in my backyard is going to take more
than one or two little trees to make it look nice. At present the only landscaping they
have is here and that is it. They have no other landscaping. This is, also the 1983
grandfather clause thing he said that the parking lot is as is since 1983 and that is not
true. This area upfront to here is their 1983 parking lot. This parking here and all of this
pavement poured back here has been done in the last two years. So that is not a
correct statement. Until they poured this parking lot they never maintained the weeds.
They don't maintain the weeds in this area. Sometime in the late fall they come through
and bull doze them up into a big pile and leave them there for the next year to
accumulate. The people in general that I have spoken to that belong to this church are
very kind people, very good people. We don't have a problem with them going to church
here. I don't have a problem with them coming to church every Sunday in my backyard,
I knew they were there whey I built. But I do have a problem with wondering about
landscaping and noise and lighting and the disruption of our basic ability to enjoy our
property. However, we are not without suggestions, as for this plan here. I and
everyone that is on this list which is way more than 100 signatures because some
people both spouses signed however it is 100 households. So, they are opposed to this
structure , however we don't see why you can't take this same structure and reconstruct
the main building where the foyer is now sitting, reconstruct a new foyer here, build their
gymnasium in the middle of this and that would buffer the neighborhood from the noise.
That would buffer the neighborhood from the additional air conditioning because they
would top mounted away from the homes. It would buffer the neighborhood from the
additional lighting. I know we had some people that were going to testify that they live
here and already in this canal area there are kids partying back here. They don't party
here because this is a straight way to the street and it is too obvious. However you put
a building here and this is going to be their new little kegger place. Unless you put big
floodlights in here and then that is not fair to us. So we don't see why we can't move
this here and cut down on all of the lighting and noise and inconvenience problems and
Meridian Planning & Z~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 16
then they would have this whole area still to pave for additional parking. And additional
parking would not be a problem. I just want to say that this is our second home and
when we built our home I was talking to my builder about we don't ever want to move.
He says you will move in three years or five years, everybody does. When we built this
home we built this home to stay. This is our home and this is where we want to live, this
is where we want to finish raising our children, this is where we want our grandchildren
to come visit us. We feel that owning a home is the American dream. We feel that it is
something that we worked hard to make come to pass. Our homes are our sanctuaries
and our place of retreat. Progress is important in our communities. As quaint as this
picture is behind you I don't think there is anyone in this room that wishes that we still
lived this way. However we must consider all options available to us and be very
careful that we hold a very high priority in maintaining the sanctity and privacy of the
homes of the people in our City. I just want to thank you for hearing us tonight.
Johnson: You need to leave those. documents -with us, anything presented has to be
left, because we do our notes from these (inaudible).. Any questions of Mrs. Grigg?
Anyone else that would like to testify at this time?
Thomas F. Juul, 1438 N. Tina Marie, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Juul: Mr. Chairman, we purchased our house about 3 '/ years ago. One of the first
things that we noticed about the house was our (inaudible) view of the mountains. We
were told by our builder at that time that we have a church behind us you don't need to
worry there will never be anything behind you just a parking lot. On their brochure, the
very first positive thing they have to say about the house is unobstructed view of the
mountains. The day that we closed on our house was the very same day that they broke
ground for the new addition. We immediately lost a very small portion of our view but
we did lose some portion. I had kind of mixed emotions about it but I figured it is very
important that churches grow and I supported that and figured we could live with little bit
of lose of view, it is no problem. Now we have this behemoth going up behind us,
between 50 to 60 feet from my back door, is going to be a 30 foot high tall building. We
will get no morning sun, we will have no view. Trees will not hide that building, even a 3
inch tree is probably going to take 20 years to mature. With the building being that
close to my back fence I doubt that a mature tree will ever hid the building. Lighting is a
very big concern of mine. I understand that the architect says that they are going to be
sensitive to that however the church so far has not been sensitive to it. We had lights
shining directly in my bedroom window, we went to the church. We said is there
someway you can put a shield up so the light doesn't shine directly into my bedroom.
Their answer was no that is not possible, you can't expect us to change the way we do
things just because the subdivision goes up around us. Well when the addition was
finished they did take down the one pole that was shining directly in my bedroom and up
another one. Put a security light on the back of the addition, that security light shines
directly in my bedroom. The pole light shines directly in my living room. I have to get up
at 4:00 every morning to go to work it doesn't make for a good night sleep. The
Meridian Planning & Z~g Commission
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 17
landscaping behind us is non-existent. When they do spray the weeds in the back they
also manage to spray my roses. They come through and bull doze it up. They put it in a
big pile and leave it. It go so unsightly back there I just had to put up a fence. Something
I didn't want to do, I like the open and I have had to construct a 6 foot fence in the back
of my property to hide the field. So 1 have some concerns as to whether or not they will
actually be sensitive to the neighbors. I am very concemed about the sound of the air
conditioners, they are going to be right in my back yard. Would you want them in your
back yard. I think probably not. Would you want a 30 foot building up against your
fence 1 think probably not. I have no objection to the church growing, I think however
that there are other options to the location of the building on their property where it won't
be as obtrusive to the neighbors. If that can't be found I think it may have to be
determined that they have out grown their property and they may need to look for a
different location to put their gymnasium. I am concemed about noise, they have had
bands practicing over there until well after 11:00 a night loud enough to wake me up. I
am concerned that this will continue to go on. That is all I have.
Johnson: Anyone else that would like to come forward at this time?
Linda Rupe, 1422 N. Rutledge, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Rupe: Can I borrow the large map that she gave you? We share about 200 feet of
property with the church now. We live right here. We have had a lot of instances where
we do see cars late at night parked back in this area. This is the ditch along here. They
park back in there because they are quite a ways off the street. The lights that are here
shine this direction toward the Juul's house. So back along in this area is fairly dark and
teenagers and what not tend to like to come back here and park and drink beer and do
whatever they do. I have a very deep concern that if this building is put here this is
going to be a very secluded area here. It is going to be a perfect hiding place. I think
that putting lights in there again would not be the answer because that would be
shining into our homes. The lights that they have now don't shine down so much as
they shine forward. That is the kind of lights that they chose to put in. I thought most
city street lights shined down. But these seem to shine a direction. When we first
moved in we had one shining directly into our bedroom window. We were fortunate
enough to get them to turn it. So it shines more towards the building. I have a concern
that this area in here is going to be fairly dark, fairly secluded. I think it is going to be a
wonderful gathering place for trouble makers. They sit back there, they play their car
radios quite loud. I do think that if this building were put over into this area in the foyer I
think that would not make this such an interesting place to park and hide. We also have,
there was some chain link fence along here. When we moved in we put in a wood
fence. They took down the chain link fence and piled it right here where it has been for
at least two years. Along with all of the weeds that are piled there. We have asked them
to remove it. It has never been removed. Based on the types of neighbors that they
have been so far we have concerns about what kid of neighbors they will continue to be
with this large warehouse type building in our yards. Anyway that is alt I have.
Meridian Planning & Z~g Commission
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 18
Johnson: Thank you very much, is there anyone else that would like to come forward?
Don Bailey, 1342 N. Rutledge, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Bailey: I didn't sign the petition that was given to you earlier, I wanted to think about this
subject awhile. I hate to object to a church activity but one thing they are referring to this
as a family life center when as I understand it is a 30 foot high gymnasium which will be
10 to 20 feet from the adjoining property owners as -has been mentioned before. 1
hadn't thought about the noise of the air conditioners and the flood lights that will be
used to light the building. But the proximity to the street and these homes will definitely
block their view. A 30 foot high building is a tall building and it will be an eye sore from
the street, people. driving down the street. Especially those that live right behind. We
don't happen to live right behind it but we are three houses away. I am imagine it will
have a slight adverse affect on property values. The building could be placed over next
to the canal or that drain ditch, the Nine Mile- Drain ditch. If they would move it over,
back it up to that drain ditch as close as they can get then that would move it quite a
ways from these homes that are being obstructed now and leave the parking lot where it
is but just move that building over to the extreme easterly edge. The present location I
object to and think it would be a detriment to the neighborhood.
Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else?
Jane Perez; 2375 West Santa Clara Drive, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Perez: We have a lot of concerns about this 'new structure also. Probably the main
thing that we have been concerned about with the current structure is that we have 3
lights shining directly into our bedroom. This is extremely difficult to deal with. I didn't
realize that anybody else had complained about this. I thought this was something, this
was just our lot in life. So we are concemed that there are going to be more lights back
there now and we certainly don't want that. The building that they added onto the
addition to that building is not very appealing to the eye. I understand that with the
structure that they are proposing that this would be a third material used for this
building.. That would be less appealing then just the two different materials that are
there right now. We are concemed about the hours, we don't know what the hours for
that particular structure is going to be. We are concemed about the noise level, the air
conditioners definitely would cause a problem. It would block our view. It would be from
an aesthetic value it would not be a good thing to have in our backyard. The
landscaping there right now I guess about the only word I could use would be
deplorable because it is not kept up. There are weeds everywhere and we have no
reason to believe that any additional landscape would be kept up either. As far as the
structure being put over on the east side by the drainage ditch because that would not
block the view of the homes that is where we live. There are a lot of homes back there.
Meridian Planning & Z~g Commission
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 19
I can assure you that it would definitely block the view and we would be sitting in the
same situation that some of the people that live on the other side would be. Thank you.
Carol Bailey, 1342 N. Rutledge,- Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Bailey: We came to this hearing tonight for information as well as giving an opinion.
The information that I wanted was under what conditions are they asking for this permit.
Is it planning, is it zoning, is it structural. We the public have not been informed of that
at the beginning of this meeting. We know that a conditional use means not complying
with the existing ordinances. Therefore we should be entitled to know what that
condition is that they are asking for. That is mainly what I wanted to ask and see if you
would tell the public in general what it is.
Johnson: We can comment on that for you. I don't know if it would answer your
question because I am not too sure I agree with your definition of what a conditional use
permit is. Shari if you want to sum that up as to why it is a conditional use permit is
required for this structure is probably a better way to approach that.
Stiles: My first comment was that this project site is located in an LO zone, it is located
in an R-4 zone. The church was built when churches were permitted in that zone. They
no longer are according to our current ordinance. Therefore to expand an existing non-
conforming use they have to have a conditional use permit. Another reason they need a
conditional use permit is they are adding a building to one parcel of ground. So those
are the reasons they are required to apply for a conditional use permit. That is the site,
the location of the buildings, trees, utilities, that is all up for review by the Planning and
Zoning Commission and any other things they would wan to review as a condition of the
application.
Johnson: Does that help clarify?
(Inaudible)
Bailey: It answers my question except for one thing and that is the definition of a family
life center.
Johnson: Well I am not too sure we can tell what that is. The church can, I know what
the definition is for the Meridian Methodist Church which is here in town because they
call theirs a life center as well. There are a multitude of functions held in the building
one of which happens to be playing basketball. That is why I guess the gymnasium is
referred to. There are a lot of other functions held there. We can get a comment from
the applicant before we close the hearing on what his definition is. Perhaps it will help
clarify it for you. Anyone else like to testify? If the applicant would define family life
center for us please I would appreciate it.
Meridian Planning & Z ung Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 20
Bugatsch: Family life center I would best define as a multi-use building. It will be used
for all aspects of church activity including social, recreational, services, education,
classes will be taught. It is in all aspects a reflection of every day life, it will be used for
everything you can readily expect a church would want to do in a space.
Johnson: thank you, is there anyone else that would like to testify before we close the
public hearing? Any questions from the Commissioners?
Smith: I have a couple questions for the architect. There are no dimensions on the site
plan can you tell me on the south, the closest corner on the southeast corner of the site
how far that is from the property line to the building?
Bugatsch: We are approximately 30 feet at that point.
Smith: This dimension is (inaudible) then from the back the closest point to the building?
Bugatsch: (Inaudible)
Smith: I am eyeballing also because I don't have my scale either.
Bugatsch: Given that the length of the parking lot illustrated is approximately 20 feet.
Smith: You showed us the elevations which face the existing building and also the west
portion of the site or is that the east, I am sorry east. One of those who stood up in
opposition said the side that was going to be facing their houses were going to all be
metal siding.
Bugatsch: No they will not, they will be synthetic stucco.
Smith: So all of the walls will be (Inaudible)
Bugatsch: (Inaudible) except the little portion that is shown as a return lip on the roofing.
Actually it won't be on this side it has been determined just on this side of the building
will not return to (inaudible).
Smith: What is the height at the ridge of the building?
Bugatsch: Idon't -have that information right off the top of my head. The eve height
which is this point of the building will be 21 feet. Karcher Church in Nampa since they
have seen that one was either 27 feet or 29 feet as memory serves me. So we have
some down substantially in height. We are not too different from a two story residential
structure.
Meridian Planning & Z~ng Commission
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 21
Smith: Then you had testified that you are going full speed ahead into working drawings
so you can tell me where you are planning on siting your condensing units for your air
conditioners.
Bugatsch: We haven't reached that point yet.
Smith: Your mechanical room is located on the west side of the building so I would
assume that you are going to be tucking right here in this corner.
Bugatsch: That has been revised to some extent. There may. be a unit there. Cooling
load, we are just cooling building shell, we are not planning to cool for occupants in that
area. The only thing that will be fully cooled is the perimeter portion where the
classroom and fellowship hall are. Preferably we will mount those on the side walls of
the structure itself. Through wall units in the gymnasium they v~ill just pull across. They
are still working on that determining the best route and most efficient route to do that.
Smith: Were you the architect on the building addition that was referenced earlier?
Bugatsch: No
Borup: Do you know the dimension, the easement dimension of the Rutledge lateral?
Bugatsch: The Rutledge lateral, currently it is I will have to go through my files to be
sure, it is 10 feet from center line toward the existing fence line and I believe 25 feet
from centerline to the existing edge of the easement on the west side. In talking with
Nampa Meridian Irrigation they will allow us to come within 10 feet of centerline of that
pipe if we ever have to. But we need to maintain access for fire trucks around the
structure.
Borup: Does your detail show that encroachment then? The encroachment Nampa
Meridian would allow?
Bugatsch: I believe it does, a portion of it.
Borup: So originally the easement was 35 feet and you say it may be down to 25 feet?
Bugatsch: Correct, it would be down to ten feet from centerline.
Borup: But then from center line it is another 10 feet.
Bugatsch: We do not intend to encroach any closer than illustrated.
Borup: So 20 feet would be
Meridian Planning & Z~g Commission
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 22
Bugatsch: The fire department access I believe requires 26 feet clear space from edge
of building or any impediment to vehicular traffic. So there is a practical limit that we
could push to that site anyhow.
Borup: So 26 would be the max.
Bugatsch. Would be as close as you can get.
Borup: That would be to the property line.
Smith: I am sorry I do have one more question, you have shown a 4 foot landscaping
strip around the whole peripheral property, so are you going to shift the aisles and
parking stalls over 4 feet?
Bugatsch: Correct.
Grigg: I had a question to the architect, can you tell us is this building going to be
rented out for other things or will it just be an occasional Wednesday, Sunday kind of
thing. Is it going to be as many times as they can rent it out there are going to be people
there doing (inaudible). That is part of our question. Also even though they are going to
be the air conditioners are going to be mounted up where is the compressor going to
be. That is what is going to make the noise.
Johnson: I think he has already answered that question.
Grigg: I missed that. Then I couldn't tell when you were asking him questions this area
right here you can see right here that this point to here is 20 feet, it says so right there.
On another issue, my husband, did he speak to you, someone at his office, my husband
did contact them and they told us to go out and look at this structure. He asked them
specifically the dimensions and he said 22 feet to the eves, 30 feet to the peak. So
those were specific, he didn't have them here so he is guessing. But those were
numbers that were given from his office to us. Thank you
Johnson: Did you have a comment you wanted to add when he is through. Did you have
anything you want to rebut or answer?
Bugatsch: On the plan that you have illustrated, locating the building in that central area
can't be done because of life safety requirements. Exiting from the existing building
most of the main exits are to that side. (inaudible) remodeling the whole thing it would
become somewhat impractical to place the building in that location.
Johnson: This is your last shot.
Meridian Planning & Z~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 23
Grigg: This is my last shot, but I was speaking to a member of this congregation and he
said that their plans because they are totally outgrown of their building to three meetings
now and they can't seat all of their people. Their plans were to meet in this new
addition while they remodeled their current place. So they are going to be remodeling
anyway so I still think that could be a viable option that would still impact our
neighborhood to a much lesser degree.
Johnson: Is there anyone else that hasn't testified that would like to come forward? Any
further discussion before I close the hearing? I will close the public hearing at this time.
MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, I move we have the City Attomey prepare findings of fact and
conclusions of law on this project.
Manning: Second
Johnson: Moved and seconded we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and
conclusions of law on the application for a family life center by Cherry Lane Christian
Church, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Johnson: Does anybody have a question about what we did? We will review findings of
fact and conclusions of law at our next meeting. It is not a public hearing, you can come
and have a copy of the findings of fact but you can't testify again. Then it moves onto
the City Council where you will have another opportunity to testify if you want to.
(Inaudible)
Johnson: July 8 if our next regularly scheduled meeting assuming the findings of fact
are done by then.
(Inaudible)
Johnson: We have closed the public hearing and we wouldn't make any
recommendations at this time. That is part of the findings of fact.
(Inaudible)
Eng. Smith: Mr. Chairman, can I ask a question on that item, we had 20 some
comments. I would like to get a response from the applicant on those comments. There
are some things that they need to respond to.
Johnson: Were you here when the meeting started, he attempted to go through those
by item. Those that he did not totally agree with or he thought he had a problem with
Meridian Planning & ~ng Commission
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 24
and the ones he specifically questioned or asked for a variance on or consideration for
were landscaping etc. That will all be part of the record. We have no written response,
he took the time to go through the items not each items but those he thought he could
not readily comply with or wanted some flexibility on.
Eng. Smith: Item #6 concerned the fire department access that is not available.
Johnson: It is a little difficult to reopen the public hearing when everybody is gone.
Eng. Smith: Well we will deal with that with him but it is part of our comments and it says
it is not available and it is not available.
Johnson: And I don't recall that being specifically addressed in the testimony.
ITEM #4: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
EXPANSION OF FACILITIES BY CLASSIC KITCHENS. INC. - BRET JONES:
Johnson: I will now open this public hearing and ask the applicant or the applicant's
representative to address the Commission.
Bret W. Jones, 1435 Loder, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Jones: Classic Kitchen Doors Inc. is a manufacturing plant here in Old Township of
Meridian south of the railroad tracks between 3`d Street and 1 gc Street, the end of 2"d
Street in Meridian. We produce, manufacture wooden products that are a raw product
that we sell to home builders, cabinet makers (inaudible) across the United States.
What we are doing here is applying for a conditional use permit to expand our facility
across 6 lots that we own there. (Inaudible) conditional use permit for all six and there
is a part of vacated 2"d Street vacated by Ada County here in Meridian. We would like to
do is add 5200 square office, some office and new manufacturing front of an old
warehouse to continue and expansion of our company and the growth.
Johnson: Questions for the applicant?
MacCoy: .You have received a copy of the staff report and have read it and gone over
it?
Jones: Yes sir
MacCoy: Do you have any problems with it?
Jones: No sir
MacCoy: (Inaudible) written response on those questions, (inaudible)
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR FAMILY LIFE CENTER BUILDING
2511 WEST CHERRY LANE
SOUTH OF CHERRY LANE AND WEST OF CINDER ROAD
MERIDIAN, IDAHO
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The above entitled matter having come on for public hearing on
June 18, 1997, at the hour of 6:00 o'clock p.m., the Applicant
appearing through its representative, Richard Bugatsch, the
Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian having duly
considered the evidence and the matter makes the following Findings
of Fact and Conclusions of Law:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. A notice of a public hearing on the Conditional Use
Permit was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to said
public hearing scheduled on June 18, 1997, the first publication of
which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter
was duly considered at the June 18, 1997, hearing; that the public
was given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence;
and that copies of all notices were available to newspaper, radio
and television stations.
2. The property is located. at 2511 West Cherry Lane and
described in the application which description is incorporated
herein. The Applicant is the owner of record of the property.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 1.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
~ ~
3. The property is zoned (R-4) Low Density Residential
District.
4. Pursuant to the application, the proposed land use is to
continue as a church, but with the construction of a family life
center building on the property. The family life center building
provides a gymnasium, fellowship and classroom space, and expand
upon and enhance the existing use as a church.
5. Pursuant to the application, the Applicant agrees to pay
any additional sewer, water and trash fees or charges, if any,
associated with the proposed use of the property.
6. Richard Bugatsch, the representative of the Applicant,
testified and explained substantially as follows. This application
is for the construction of a 12,536 square foot family life center
to add to the existing facilities at Cherry Lane Christian Church.
The Applicant has reviewed the comments of City staff, and, in
general, does not have a problem meeting the requirements of the
City's zoning ordinance. However, the Applicant has a major
concern, at the present time, with landscaping and parking
requirements. Although the existing parking lot has been in place
since 1983. He understands that the current zoning ordinance was
adopted in April of 1994. Consequently, many of the present
requirements did not apply in 1983. The Applicant recognizes that
adding a fairly major project to the property imposes some
requirements upon it; however, the Applicant would like some
latitude in how it approaches the landscaping and parking problems
identified by City staff. The Applicant would be required to have
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 2.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
one three inch caliper tree for every 1,500 square feet of parking
which is 57 trees. The Applicant would like the City to consider
a reduction in the caliper size or perhaps reduce the number of
trees required, and give the Applicant some latitude in the time
frame to meet the changes which are required. In addition to the
issue with the trees, City staff provides that the parking striping
and drainage needs to be revamped. The existing drainage system
collects water and presently discharges into Nine Mile Creek. The
Central District Health Department requests that the run-off
collect and run through a landscape swell prior to discharge. The
Applicant does not have an objection to addressing such parking
requirement at some later point in time. The Applicant would like
to look at alternative methods of .water retention, for example,
perhaps some French drains, but, again, the time frame is of the
essence. The Applicant's request is to look at the landscaping and
parking requirements as it relates to the present development of
the property. The Applicant proposes to landscape around the new
structure, deal with the parking situation in the new structure
area and implement a phasing schedule to deal with the rest of the
site. The Applicant will comply with the City's requirements,
whatever such requirements may be, in order to make the proposed
project move forward. However, it would like the consideration of
the time and economics involved in updating the whole facility to
accommodate a development that only encompasses approximately one-
third of the property.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 3.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
7. In response to questions of Commissioner McCoy, the
Applicant's representative testified substantially as follows. The
Applicant will comply with all of the mandates of the American with
Disabilities Act, building codes, fire codes and any other
requirements that are related to it. In the City's staff report,
there is a comment concerning fire access. The Applicant met with
the Fire Marshall and building department. They suggested that
fire access be provided through a rear access; however, the
Applicant needs to investigate whether such access is feasible. If
not, the other option is to locate a new fire hydrant in the rear
location. There exist details which need to be worked out. The
approach to this development is to work with the City and make it
affordable for the Applicant, and the type of development which
fits the community and the aims of the City's zoning ordinance.
The preliminary drawing was prepared for presentation to the
Planning and Zoning Commission to determine whether the Applicant
is meeting the aims and goals of the zoning ordinance, to address
the concerns raised by Shari Stiles, the Planning and Zoning
Administrator, and to resolve what requirements will be imposed,
prior to developing detailed documents. The exterior of the upper
part of the building will be synthetic stucco and the siding of the
lower portion will be standard construction for this area. The
roof will be metal. The proposed building will be a little
different from the existing building in style and color. The color
of the roof on the new building will be brown and the siding an off
brown. The color will be conservative. A comparable structure is
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 4.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
the Karcher Church of the Nazarene in Nampa, Idaho. That structure
was used as a basis for the type of building the Applicant desired.
There is existing parking lot lighting in place. The Applicant
will evaluate whether more will be required with the building
placement. Usually, additional lighting is placed at the rear for
security purposes. It will be designed so as not to intrude into
neighboring areas.
8. In response to questions of Commissioner Borup, the
Applicant's representative testified substantially as follows. The
current parking lot is striped; however, the striping is not in
compliance with the City's current zoning ordinance. In the area
immediately surrounding the building, the Applicant has revamped
the proposed parking area to accommodate the new building. If
necessary, the Applicant will implement a schedule to restripe the
rest of the parking lot. With regard to the area between the
existing pavement and the drainage right-of-way, he understands
that there exists 12 feet before the right-of-way. The Applicant
believes the right-of-way is federally owned land and will
landscape accordingly. The Applicant is proposing the 28 trees
shown on the submitted plan. The number of trees will be increased
if required. The Applicant is concerned with the caliper size
requirement. The Applicant would prefer to go to 1~ to 2 inch
caliper trees, and will work with the City to determine the
required number of trees versus the size of the trees. The
Applicant presently has approximately three times the amount of
parking which is required. The Applicant anticipates a maximum
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 5.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
membership of approximately 359 people. The parking lot currently
has 125 stalls, but the presented plan illustrates 159 stalls.
9. Commissioner Smith commented that he would prefer the
Applicant have three inch caliper trees, or increasing the caliper
size of the tree if the three inch caliper trees are difficult to
locate. In response to the comments of Commissioner Smith, the
Applicant's representative testified that the Applicant's approach
is to view this development in the sense of a grandfather clause by
mediating the initial impact and scope which it has upon the
Applicant in terms of cost and a time frame in which to comply.
10. Angela Renee Grigg testified substantially as follows.
She is in opposition to the application. She has observed the
growth in the community and the impact such growth has on churches
in the area. She is not insensitive to the desires of the
Applicant and its application. She can see the benefit of the
proposed structure, but the proposed structure is not acceptable
for her neighborhood. She has viewed the comparable building in
Nampa, Idaho. On paper, the proposed project appears reasonable;
however, the proposed building is very large and obtrusive. Her
view of the building will be from the rear, which presents a plain,
large and high wall. The building will be 30 feet tall and
approximately 20 feet from the fence line of her residence. The
color of the existing structure is an off white yellowish brick.
Last year or the year before, the Applicant built an addition, the
color of which does not match the color of the original structure.
The appearance from her view is unappealing. In addition to the
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 6.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
unappealing appearance, she has a concern of noise from the air
conditioning unit. Based upon the discussion with people who live
behind the new library in Meridian, the noise from the air
conditioning units is loud and disturbing. She is also concerned
about lighting of the premises. There presently exists between the
Applicant and the. neighboring residence concerning the existing
lighting. She is concerned the building will be used for more
activities than activities on Sunday. As proposed the structure
would overshadow the homes in the immediate eastern vicinity. The
homes will not receive full daylight sun until noon, because the
building will block the sunlight. Presently, from her backyard,
she has a panoramic view of the mountains. The construction of the
proposed structure will eliminate this view. Although she would
lose her view if houses were built, the construction of a warehouse
type of structure is completely different than the construction of
houses. The construction of the proposed structure interferes with
the enjoyment of her home. It will lessen the current property
value and severely limit the future opportunity to sell the home.
She has collected signatures of people in her subdivision who
support her position and testimony. The signatures represent 100
households that do not believe the proposed structure is
appropriate for the neighborhood. Approximately nine people with
whom she spoke declined to sign the document in support of her
position and testimony. One of the primary concerns that she and
her husband have are landscaping and lot maintenance. The
Applicant does not control the weeds behind their property, and
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 7.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
material is piled at the rear of the property. The Applicant has
been asked over a period of several years to remove the material
piled at the rear of the property, but they have not done so. She
is concerned that an expensive structure will expend the
Applicant's money, and it will not be able to afford to maintain
the property. She would prefer that the Applicant remodel the
existing structure, rather than building as proposed. A remodel of
the existing structure would accommodate the Applicant's needs and
not impact the surrounding neighborhood as severely. Based upon
the fact that kids presently gather at the rear of the property,
the construction of the building will create security problems
unless flood lights are located at the rear of the property.
Consideration must be made for the impact upon the surrounding
neighborhood and its protection.
11. Angela Renee Grigg presented a document signed by
numerous individuals whom, according to Ms. Grigg, reside in the
adjacent residential area and object to the application. This
document is hereby incorporated herein as if set forth in full and
provides as follows:
We ask that you do not allow the construction proposed by
the Cherry Lane Christian Church. We are opposed to
building a structure rising 30 ft so close to homes in
our neighborhood. Such a structure should be constructed
on land where it would not interfere with already
developed neighborhoods.
A project such as this is designed for activities
attracting large groups of people. This facility will
disrupt the quiet neighborhood atmosphere that we now
enjoy.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 8.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
Back yard noise from air conditioning is a concern. as is
additional lighting at night. Currently there is an
ongoing issue with existing lighting and homes. As
proposed, the .structure would totally cut off the
mountain view to some home owners, morning shading of the
sun is a major issue of concern, some homes will be
totally overshadowed by this structure thus interfering
with basic enjoyment of property.
We also feel that this structure would lessen the current
property value and would severely limit opportunities to
sell the homes directly involved.
Below are signatures of concerned neighbors who ask that
you not allow this structure to be constructed in our
neighborhood.
12. Thomas F. Juul testified substantially as follows. He
purchased his house approximately three and a half years ago.
Based upon his prior experiences, his concerns include not having
an unobstructed view of the mountains, light shining directly into
his bedroom window and other parts of his house, the Applicant's
insensitivity to the neighbors and the impact it has upon the
neighborhood, and the noise created from the air conditioners. Mr.
Juul presented a flier prepared for the marketing and amenities of
the residence he purchased, which includes the phrase "unobstructed
view of mountains." This flier is hereby incorporated herein as if
set forth in full.
13. Linda Rupe testified substantially as follows. Her
property borders approximately 200 feet of the Applicant's
property. Based upon the gathering of kids at the rear of the
property, she has a concern that the proposed building will create
a more secluded area for the kids to gather. The lights which the
Applicant presently have shine into the neighboring houses,
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 9.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
including the bedroom of her house. She has asked the Applicant to
remove debris from the rear of the building, but the Applicant has
failed to remove the debris. Based upon the type of neighbor the
Applicant has been in the past, she is concerned about its future
response and actions with regard to the impact upon her and the
surrounding neighbors.
14. The Applicant's representative, Richard Bugatsch, further
testified substantially as follows. The family life center is best
defined as a multi-use building. It will be used for all aspects
of church activity including social, recreational, services, and
educational classes.
15. In response to questions ~f Commissioner Smith, the
Applicant's represenative, Richard Bugatsch, testified
substantially as follows. From the southeast corner of the
property, there is approximately 30 feet to the proposed building.
The length of the parking lot is approximately 20 feet. The side
of the building facing the neighbors will be synthetic stucco. The
eve height will be 21 feet high, as compared to the building in
Nampa, Idaho which is either 27 feet or 29 feet tall. It is
similar in height to a two story residence. Plans have not been
developed to designate the location of the air conditioning units.
There may be an air conditioning unit by the mechanical room on the
west side of the proposed building. The Applicant does not intend
to cool for occupants in the entire building, only in the perimeter
portions of building in which the classroom and fellowship hall are
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 10.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
~ •
located. Preferably, the air conditioning units will mount on the
side walls of the structure itself.
16. In response to questions of Commissioner Borup, the
Applicant's represenative, Richard Bugatsch, testified
substantially as follows. The easement for the Rutledge Lateral is
10 feet from the centerline toward the existing fence line and 25
feet from centerline to the existing edge of the easement on the
west side. Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District will permit the
Applicant to come within 10 feet of the centerline of the pipe if
it needs to. The plan presented shows the encroachment on the
easement, and the Applicant does not intend to encroach any further
than depicted on the plan. With regard to fire access, he believes
26 feet of clear space from the edge of the building or any
impediment to vehicular traffic is required.
17. In response to a question of Commissioner Smith, the
Applicant's represenative, Richard Bugatsch, testified
substantially as follows. A four foot landscaping strip is planned
around the entire periphery of the property, which will shift the
aisles and parking stalls by four feet.
18. The Applicant's represenative, Richard Bugatsch, further
testified that incorporating the proposed building in the central
area of the existing building cannot be done for life safety
reasons, and remodeling the entire building becomes economically
infeasible.
19. Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to the City Engineer, and
Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, submitted comments
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 11.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
•
which comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full.
Their comments included the following:
a. The project site is located in an L-O (sic) zone,
which currently does not allow churches as a permitted
use. Expansion of this non-conforming use, plus the
addition of a building on the site, is only allowed under
the conditional use process;
b. As Cherry Lane has been recently reconstructed and
no change in access is proposed, it is not anticipated
the Ada County Highway District will have any
requirements of the project, with the exception of
payment of impact fees;
c. Residential properties surround this project site.
City Ordinance Section 11-2-414 D 2. c. states that
whenever a commercial off-street parking area is located
in or adjacent to a residential district, it shall be
effectively screened on all sides which adjoin or face
any property used for residential uses by a wall, fence,
or planting screen that is not less than four feet (4')
in height plus a planting strip of four feet ( 4' ) minimum
width or in an alternate arrangement as approved by the
Commission. Due to noise and other potential negative
impacts of the project, additional landscape setbacks may
need to be imposed. Suitable landscaping and ground
cover shall be provided and maintained on a continuing
basis within the planting strips;
d. The site presently contains a vast island of
pavement that has never been adequately landscaped.
Although the proposed plan is an improvement, if falls
far short of the minimum of one (1) three-inch (3")
caliper tree per 1, 500 square feet of asphalt as required
per City Ordinance Section 11-2-414 D. The Applicant is
to provide calculations of asphalt areas and locate
appropriate trees on a revised site plan;
e. The site is adjacent to Nine Mile Creek, which is
identified in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan for
enhancement. Additional trees and landscaping should be
provided adjacent to the easement of the creek, as well
as adjacent to all residential areas. Detailed
landscaped plans are needed;
f. The Applicant is to provide fire access and hydrant
locations in accordance with the Uniform Fire Code and
Meridian Fire Department policies. The site plan
erroneously shows a Fire Department access at the
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 12.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
L
southwest corner of the site. This access lines up with
an existing City sewer easement and easement for the
Rutledge Lateral. These easements were not ever intended
to be used .as Fire Department access to the church site;
g. If the existing trash area is not currently
screened, or additional trash area is anticipated, the
Applicant is to provide enclosures per City Ordinance
Section 11-2-414 A 3. The Applicant is to provide
details and location on a revised site plan. The
Applicant is to coordinate dumpster site locations with
the City's solid waste contractor, and locate dumpsters
so as not to impede fire access;
h. As Cherry Lane is identified as an entrance corridor
in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, a thirty five feet
(35') landscape setback beyond the required right-of-way
is encouraged. The fact that the area directly in front
of the building is landscaped 60 feet back of the
existing sidewalk should allow for the additional
planting areas as shown. Parking may not be closer than
four feet (4') to an existing right-of-way. The
Applicant is to provide detailed landscape plan,
including berming details, for approval prior to
obtaining building permits;
i. The Applicant is to provide curbing and underground
sprinkler system for all landscaped areas;
j. The Applicant is to provide temporary fencing to
contain debris during construction, particularly to
protect Nine Mile Creek;
k. All driveway parking areas shall be paved, with all
driveway accesses approved by the Ada County Highway
District. Paving, striping and signage of the parking
lot is to be in accordance with Meridian City ordinance
and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Driveway widths
and parking stall lengths shall meet the requirements of
City Ordinance Section 11-2-414, i.e. 25 feet wide
driveway aisles with 9' x 19' stalls (or as otherwise
dimensioned for angled parking). Graveled driveways,
parking, and access are not permitted. A drainage plan
designed by a state of Idaho licensed architect or
engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City
Engineer with calculations (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all
off .street parking areas. All site drainage shall be
contained and disposed of on-site;
1. The Applicant is to obtain a Certificate of
Occupancy prior to occupying the building;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 13.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
•
m. All signage shall be in accordance with the
standards set forth in Section 11-2-415 of the City of
Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance, the Uniform
Sign Code,, and shall receive design approval. of the
Planning and Zoning Department. A-frame and other
temporary signs will not be permitted and will be removed
upon three days notice to the Applicant. Sign permits
are needed for all signage;
n. All building construction shall be in compliance
with all required Uniform Codes;
o. The Applicant shall supply the Public Works
Department with anticipated sewer and water usage for
analysis in determining whether additional assessment
fees should be charged. Assessment fees will be
determined during the plan review process. A re-
assessment agreement will be entered into with the
Applicant prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy;
p. The Applicant is to provide parking lot lighting
plans to the Meridian Public Works Department.
Illumination of the site shall be designed not to cause
glare or adversely impact neighboring residential
properties, as determined by the City of Meridian;
q. Sewer service to the project is proposed to a new
service line to be installed south of the new building.
Service lines to the project will be reviewed during the
plan review process. The treatment capacity of the
Meridian Wastewater Treatment Plant is currently being
evaluated. Approval of this application needs to be
contingent upon the City's ability to accept the
additional sanitary sewage generated by this project;
r. Water service to the project will be via an
extension of the existing service lines to the church.
Service lines to the site shall be reviewed during the
plan review process. Water service to this project is
contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic
analysis by the City's computer model;
s. .The existing irrigation ditch has been tiled on the
westerly boundary of the property. Nine Mile Creek is
designated as a natural drain and may not be tiled. Any
other irrigation/drainage ditches that may cross or lie
adjacent to the property shall be tiled per City
Ordinance 11-9-605 M. Plans will need to be approved by
the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 14.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
users association, with written confirmation of the said
approval submitted to the Public Works Department;
t. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems
within this project will have to be removed from their
domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517.
Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as
landscape irrigation;
u. The Applicant is to provide a revised site plan
meeting all staff and agency requirements prior to action
by the Planning and Zoning Commission, or, at a minimum,
prior to being scheduled for a public hearing at City
Council level, as determined by the Planning and Zoning
Commission;
v. All uses/buildings shall be reviewed under the
conditional use permit process. No details have been
submitted; and
w. The conditional use, if approved, shall be subject
to review upon notice to the Applicant.
20. The Meridian Police Department submitted comments, which
comments are hereby incorporated herein as if set forth in full.
21. The Meridian Fire Department submitted comments, which
comments are hereby incorporated herein as if set forth in full;
that all codes will need to be met; that it does not know the
identity of the owner of the property designated for fire access
(it has flowers and trees growing on it); and that a fire hydrant
might need to be added.
22. The Meridian Sewer. Department submitted comments on the
subject application, which comments are hereby incorporated herein
as if set forth in full; that the kitchen will require a 1,000
gallon grease interceptor as a minimum external to the building.
23. The Central District Health Department submitted comments
on the subject application, which comments are hereby incorporated
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 15.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
•
herein as if set forth in full. Its comments included that after
written approval from appropriate entities are submitted, it can
approve the proposal for central sewage and central water; that
runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem; that
stormwater runoff should flow into a grassy swale before
discharging to seepage beds.
24. The Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District submitted
comments, and such comments are hereby incorporated herein as if
set forth in full. Its comments included the following:
a. The District's Rutledge Lateral courses along the
west boundary of the project. The right-of-way of the
Rutledge Lateral is 40 feet; 25 feet to the right and 15
feet to the left facing downstream;
b. The Nine Mile Drain is a contract drain and also
courses through this project. The District's right-of-
way of the Nine Mile Drain is 100 feet; 50 feet from the
center each way;
c. The Applicant must contact the District for approval
before any encroachment or change of right-of-way occurs;
d. The District requires a Land Use Change/Site
Development application be filed for review prior to
final platting;
e. All laterals and waste ways must be protected;
f. All municipal surface drainage must be retained on
site;
g. If any surface drainage leaves the site, the
District must review drainage plans;
h. The Applicant must comply with Idaho Code Section
31-3805; and
i. It is recommended that irrigation water be made
available to all developments with the District.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 16.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
•
•
25. The Ada County Highway District has or may submit
comments, and such comments are hereby incorporated herein as if
set forth in full or-shall be incorporated herein as if set forth
in full when submitted.
26. In the ZONING SCHEDULE OF USE CONTROL, Sections 11-2-409
B. Commercial, Churches are not listed as a conditional use in the
R-4 District.
27. The R-4, Residential District is described in the Zoning
Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 3 as follows:
(R-4i Low Density Residential District: Only single-
family dwellings shall be permitted and no conditional
uses shall be permitted except for Planned Residential
Development and public schools . The .purpose of the ( R-4 )
District is to permit the establishment of low density
single-family dwellings, and to delineate those areas
where predominantly residential development has, or is
likely to occur in accord with the Comprehensive Plan of
the City, and to protect the integrity of residential
areas by prohibiting the intrusion of incompatible non-
residential uses. The (R-4) District allows for a
maximum of four (4) dwelling units per acre and requires
connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of
the City of Meridian.
28. Section 11-2-406 A of the City of Meridian Zoning and
Development Ordinance provides:
It is the intent of this Ordinance to permit conforming
uses. All applications for the enlargement, expansion,
extension of non-conforming uses or all applications for
the addition of other structures or uses prohibited
elsewhere in the same district shall be subject to the
Conditional Use procedures of Section 2-418 of this
Ordinance.
29. Conditional Use Permit is defined in the Zoning And
Development Ordinance, City of Meridian, Idaho as follows:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 17.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
• •
"Permits allowing an exception to the uses authorized by this
Ordinance in a zoning district."
30. A conditional use permit would be and is required for the
construction of a family life center building on the property.
31. There were no other comments by the public regarding this
application.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. All the procedural requirements of the Local Planning Act
and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met,
including the mailing of notice to owners of property within 300
feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's property.
2. The City of Meridian has authority to grant conditional
uses pursuant to Idaho Code Section 67-6512 and pursuant to 11-2-
418 of the Zoning And Development Ordinance of the City of
Meridian.
3. The City has the authority to take judicial notice of its
own ordinances, other governmental .statutes and ordinances, and of
actual conditions existing within the City and the State.
4. The City of Meridian has authority to place conditions on
a conditional use permit and the use of the property pursuant to
Idaho Code Section 67-6512 and pursuant to that section conditions
minimizing the adverse impact on other development, controlling the
duration of development, assuring the development is maintained
properly, and on-site or off-site facilities may be attached to the
permit; that 11-2-418 D authorizes the City to prescribe a set time
period for which a conditional use may be in existence.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 18.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
• •
5. Section 11-2-418 D. states as follows:
In approving any Conditional Use, the Commission and
Council may prescribe appropriate conditions, bonds, and
safeguards in conformity with this Ordinance. Violations
of such conditions, bonds or safeguards, when made a part
of the terms under which the Conditional Use is granted,
shall be deemed a violation of the Ordinance and grounds
to revoke the Conditional Use. The Commission and
Council may prescribe a set time- period for which a
Conditional Use may be in existence..
6. The City has judged this Application for a conditional
use upon the basis of guidelines contained in Section 11-2-418 of
the Zoning And Development Ordinance of the City of Meridian and
upon the basis of the Local Planning Act of 1975, Title 67 Chapter
65, Idaho Code, the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, and
the record submitted to it and the things of which it may take
judicial notice..
7. Section 11-2-418(C) of the Zoning And Development
Ordinance of the City of Meridian sets forth the .standards under
which the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council shall
review applications for Conditional Use Permits. Upon a review of
those requirements and a review of the facts presented and the
conditions of the area, assuming that the above conditions or
similar ones thereto would be attached to the conditional use, the
Planning and Zoning Commission concludes as follows:
a. The use, would in fact, constitute a conditional use
and a conditional use permit would be required by
ordinance;
b. The use would be harmonious with and in accordance
with the Comprehensive Plan but the Zoning Ordinance
requires a conditional use permit to allow the use;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 19.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
c . The use, if designed and constructed properly, would
be harmonious in appearance with the character of the
general vicinity; that if the conditions set forth herein
are complied with the use should be operated and
maintained to be harmonious with the intended character
of the general vicinity and should not change the
essential character of the area;
d. The use would not be hazardous. nor should it be
disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses if the
conditions are met; however, traffic may increase, but
the development will have vehicular approaches to the
property which shall be designed to decrease interference
with traffic on surrounding public streets;
e. The Applicant should be able to provide adequately
for the essential public facilities and services such as
streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures,
refuse disposal, water and sewer, but Applicant may have
to pay additional fees for the use;
f. The use would not create excessive additional
requirements at public cost for public facilities and
services and the use would not be detrimental to the
economic welfare of the community;
g. If the conditions are met, the use should not
involve a use, activity, process, material, equipment or
conditions of operation that would be .detrimental to
person, property or the general welfare by reason of
excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes,
glare or odors;
h. Sufficient parking for the proposed use will be
required to meet the requirements of the City ordinance;
and
i. The development and uses will not result in the
destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic
feature of major importance.
11. Because conditions may be placed upon the grant of a
conditional use permit to minimize adverse impact on other
development, it is recommended by the Planning and Zoning
Commission that the following conditions of the grant of the
conditional use be required, to wit:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 20.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
•
a. The conditional use, pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance,
shall not be transferable to another owner or lessor of
the subject property or to another property;
b. The conditional use shall not be restricted to a period
of authorization but may be reviewed annually, or more
often if conditions warrant, upon notice to the
Applicant, for violation of any conditions imposed herein
and other conditional use applications;
c. The Applicant shall meet the comments, recommendations
and requirements of the City Engineer's office and the
Planning and Zoning Administrator, which include, but are
not limited to the following:
(1) As residential properties surround this project
site and the commercial off-street parking area is
located in or adjacent to the residential district,
the parking area shall be effectively screened on
all sides which adjoin or face any property used
for residential uses by a wall, fence, or planting
screen which is not less. than four feet (4') in
height plus a planting strip of not less than four
.feet (4') in width. Appropriate landscaping and
ground cover, as determined by the City, shall be
provided and maintained on a continuous basis
within the planting strips;
(2) The Applicant-shall provide calculations of asphalt
areas and shall locate the appropriate number and
size trees in accordance with City Ordinance
Section 11-2-414 D. The Applicant shall provide to
the City a detailed landscape plan of the property,
including berming details, for approval prior to
obtaining building permits;
(3) As the site is adjacent to Nine Mile Creek, which
is identified in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan
for enhancement, the Applicant shall provide
additional trees and landscaping adjacent to the
easement of the Nine Mile Creek, as well as
adjacent to all residential areas;
(4) The Applicant shall provide fire access and hydrant
locations in accordance with the Uniform Fire Code
and Meridian Fire Department policies;
(5) The Applicant shall provide screening for existing
trash area(s) and any additional trash area(s).
The Applicant shall coordinate dumpster site
locations with the City's solid waste contractor,
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 21.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
• •
and locate dumpsters so as not to impede fire
access. The Applicant shall provide details and
the location(s) of the screened trash area(s) on a
revised site plan;
(6) As Cherry Lane is identified as an entrance
corridor in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, the
Applicant shall provide a thirty five feet (35')
landscape setback beyond the required right-of-way;
(7) Parking shall not be closer than four feet (4') to
any existing right-of-way;
(8) The Applicant shall provide curbing and underground
sprinkler system for all landscaped areas;
(9) The Applicant shall provide temporary fencing to
contain debris during construction;
(10) All driveway parking areas shall be paved, with all
driveway accesses approved by the Ada County
Highway District;
(11) Paving, striping and signage of the parking lot
shall be in accordance with Meridian City
ordinances and the Americans with Disabilities Act;
(12) Driveway widths and parking stall lengths shall
meet the requirements of City Ordinance Section 11-
2-414;
(13) Graveled driveways, parking, and access shall not
be permitted;
(14) The Applicant shall cause to be prepared a drainage
plan designed by a state of Idaho licensed
architect or engineer, and shall submit such plan
to the City Engineer with calculations for all off
street parking areas. All site drainage shall be
contained and disposed of on-site;
(15) The Applicant shall obtain a Certificate of
Occupancy prior to occupying the building;
(16) All signage shall be in accordance with the
standards set forth in Section 11-2-415 of the City
of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance, the
Uniform Sign Code, and shall receive design
approval of the Planning and Zoning Department. A-
frame and other temporary signs shall not be
permitted and will be removed upon three (3) days
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 22.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
•
•
notice to the Applicant. Sign permits shall be
required for all signage;
(17) All building construction shall be in compliance
with all required Uniform Codes and the Americans
with Disabilities Act;
(18) The Applicant shall provide the Public Works
Department with anticipated sewer and water usage
for analysis in determining whether additional
assessment fees should be charged. Assessment fees
will be determined during the plan review process.
The Applicant shall enter into a re-assessment
agreement prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy;
(19) The Applicant shall provide parking lot lighting
plans to the Meridian Public Works Department. All
lighting and illumination of the site shall be
designed and operated so as not to cause glare or
adversely impact neighboring residential
properties, as determined.by the City of Meridian;
(20) The location of sewer service lines to the project
shall be reviewed during the plan review process;
(21) As the treatment capacity of the Meridian
Wastewater Treatment Plant is currently being
evaluated, the grant of the Conditional Use Permit
pursuant to this application shall be contingent
upon the City's ability to accept the additional
sanitary sewage generated by this project;
(22) The location of water service lines to the project
shall be reviewed during the plan review process.
Water service to this project shall be contingent
upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis by
the City's computer model;
(23) As Nine Mile Creek is designated as a natural
drain, it may not be tiled. Any other irrigation/
drainage ditches which cross or lie adjacent to the
property shall be tiled. Plans will need to be
approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage
district, or lateral users association, with
written confirmation of the said approval submitted
to the Public Works Department;
(24) Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems
within this project shall be removed from domestic
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 23.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
•
service. Wells may be used for non-domestic
purposes such as landscape irrigation; and
(25) The Applicant shall provide a revised site plan
meeting all staff and agency requirements prior to
the application being scheduled for a public
hearing before the City Council.
d. The Applicant shall meet and comply with the comments,
recommendations and requirements of the Meridian Police
Department, the Meridian Fire Department, the Meridian
Sewer Department, the Central District Health Department,
the Ada County Highway District, the Nampa & Meridian
Irrigation District, and all other governmental agencies
submitting or hereafter submitting comments.
e. Proper and adequate access to the property is available
and shall be maintained, with appropriate buffering to
residential properties and traffic on Cherry Lane and
surrounding residential areas; and
f. All ordinances of the City of. Meridian shall be met,
including but not limited to, the Uniform Building Code,
Uniform Fire Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, the Fire and
Life Safety Codes, all parking and landscaping
requirements.
9. The above-conditions are concluded to be reasonable and
the Applicant shall meet these conditions.
10. It is recommended that if the Applicant meets the
conditions stated above, that the conditional use permit be granted
to the Applicant.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 24.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian
hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONER BORUP VOTED
COMMISSIONER SMITH VOTED
COMMISSIONER MACCOY VOTED
COMMISSIONER MANNING VOTED
CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) VOTED
DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION
7Iy
The Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the
City Council of the City of Meridian that it approve the
Conditional Use Permit requested by the Applicant for the property
described in the Application with the conditions set forth in the
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law or similar conditions as
found justified and appropriate by the City Council and that the
property be required to meet the water and sewer requirements, the
Fire and Life Safety Codes, Uniform Fire Code, parking, paving and
landscape requirements, and all ordinances of the City of Meridian.
The conditional use should be subject to review annually, or more
often if conditions warrant, upon notice to the Applicant by the
City.
MOTION : ~~ ~
~~~~ /
APPROVED DISAPPROVED:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 25.
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
OFFICIALS ~ HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY ~ COUNCIL MEMBERS
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk A Good Place to Live WALT W. MORROW, President
JANICE L. SMITH, City Treasurer RONALD R. TOLSMA
GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer CITY OF MERIDIAN ~ GLENN R. BENTLEREE
BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt.
JOHN T SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 P & Z COMMISSION
PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief Public WorksBuilding Department (208) 887-2211 MALCOLM MACCOY
W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443 KEITH BORUP
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney RON MANNING
ROBERT D. CORRIE BYRON SMITH
Mayor
TO: Planning & Zoning Commission, Mayor & Council
FROM: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to Ci En m
Shari Stiles, P&Z Administrator~~
DATE: June 13, 1997
SUBJECT: Request for Conditional Use Permit for Addition of Family Life Center at 2511
W. Cherry Lane by Cherry Lane Christian Church
We have reviewed the above-referenced submittal and request that the following conditions be
placed on the project in consideration of approval of the application. These conditions are to
be complied with in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by motion of the Meridian City
Council:
1. The project site is located in an L-O zone, which currently does not allow churches as a
permitted use. Expansion of this non-conforming use, plus the addition of a building
on the site, is only allowed under the conditional use process.
2. As Cherry Lane has been recently reconstructed and no change in access is proposed, it
is not anticipated ACHD will have any requirements of the project, with the exception
of payment of impact fees.
3. Residential properties surround this project site. City Ordinance Section 11-2-
414.D.2.c. states that whenever a commercial off-street parking area is located in or
adjacent to a Residential District, it shall be effectively screened on all sides which
adjoin or face any property used for residential uses by a wall, fence, or planting screen
that is not less than four feet (4') in height plus a planting strip of four feet (4')
minimum width or in an alternate arrangement as approved by the Commission. Due
to noise and other potential negative impacts of the project, additional landscape
setbacks may need to be imposed. Suitable landscaping and ground cover shall be
provided and maintained on a continuing basis within the planting strips.
4. The site currently contains a vast island of pavement that has never been adequately
landscaped. Although the proposed plan is an improvement, it falls far short of the
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & Council
June 13, 1997
Page 2 of 4
minimum of one (1) three-inch (3") caliper tree per 1,500 square feet of asphalt as
required per City Ordinance Section 11-2-414.D. Applicant is to provide calculations
of asphalt areas and locate appropriate trees on a revised site plan.
5. The site is adjacent to Nine Mile Creek, which is identified in the Meridian
Comprehensive Plan for enhancement. Additional trees and landscaping should be
provided adjacent to the easement of the creek, as well as adjacent to all residential
areas. Detailed landscape plans are needed.
6. Provide fire access and hydrant locations in accordance with the Uniform Fire Code
and Meridian Fire Department policies. The site plan erroneously shows a Fire
Department Access at the southwest comer of the site. This access lines up with an
existing City sewer easement and easement for the Rutledge Lateral. These easements
were not ever intended to be used as Fire Department access to the church site.
7. If the existing trash area is not currently screened, or additional trash area is
anticipated, provide enclosures per City Ordinance Section 11-2-414.A.3. Provide
details and location on revised site plan. Coordinate dumpster site locations with the
City's solid waste contractor, Sanitary Services, Inc. Locate dumpsters so as not to
impede fire access.
8. As Cherry Lane is identified as an entrance corridor in the Meridian Comprehensive
Plan, athirty-five-foot (35') landscape setback beyond required right-of-way is
encouraged. The fact that the area directly in front of the building is landscaped sixty
feet (60') back of the existing sidewalk should allow for the additional planting areas as
shown. Parking may not be closer than four feet (4') to an existing right-of--way.
Applicant is to provide detailed landscape plan, including berming details, for approval
prior to obtaining building permits.
9. Applicant to provide curbing and underground sprinkler system for all landscaped
areas.
10. Provide temporary fencing to contain debris during construction, particularly to protect
Nine Mile Creek.
11. All driveway and parking areas shall be paved, with all driveway accesses approved by
the Ada County Highway District. Paving, striping and signage of parking lot to be in
accordance with Meridian City Ordinance and the Americans with Disabilities Act.
~:~ .~.~
•
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & Council
June 13, 1997
Page 3 of 4
Driveway widths and parking stall lengths shall meet the requirements of City
Ordinance Section 11-2-414; i.e., 25-foot-wide driveway aisles with 9'x19' stalls (or as
otherwise dimensioned for angled parking). Graveled driveways, parking, and access
are not permitted. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or
engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer with calculations (Ord.
557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas. All site drainage shall be contained and
disposed of on-site.
12. Applicant is to obtain a certificate of occupancy prior to occupying building.
13 . All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-2-415 of
the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance, the Uniform Sign Code, and
shall receive design approval of the Planning &. Zoning Department. A-frame and
other temporary signs will not be permitted and will be removed upon 3 days notice to
the Applicant. Sign permits are needed for all signage.
14. All building construction shall be in compliance with all required Uniform Codes.
15. Applicant shall supply the Public Works Department with anticipated sewer and water
usage for analysis in determining whether additional assessment fees should be charged.
Assessment fees will be determined during the plan review process. A re-assessment
agreement will be entered into with the Applicant prior to issuance of a certificate of
occupancy.
16. Provide parking lot lighting plans to the Meridian Public Works Department.
Illumination of the site shall be designed to not cause glare or adversely impact
neighboring residential properties, as determined by the City of Meridian.
17. Sewer service to the project is proposed to a new service line to be installed south of
the new building. Service lines to the project will be reviewed during the plan review
process. The treatment capacity of the Meridian Wastewater Treatment Plant is
currently being evaluated. Approval of this application needs to be contingent upon
our ability to accept the additional sanitary sewage generated by this project.
18. Water service to the project will be via an extension of the existing service lines to the
church. Service lines to the site shall be reviewed during the plan review process.
Water service to this project is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic
analysis by our computer model.
~:~ ~.~.~
Planning &. Zoning Commission/Mayor & Council
June 13, 1997
Page 4 of 4
19. An existing irrigation ditch has been tiled on the westerly boundary of the property.
Nine Mile Creek is designated as a natural drain and may not be Bled. Any other
irrigation drainage ditches that may cross or lie adjacent to the property shall be tiled
per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate
irrigadon/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of
said .approval submitted to the Public Works Department.
20. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be
removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517. Wells may
be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation.
21. Applicant is to provide a revised site plan meeting all staff and agency requirements
prior to action by the P&Z Commission or, at minimum, prior to being scheduled for a
public hearing at City Council level, as determined by the P&Z Commission.
22. All uses/buildings shall be reviewed under the conditional use permit process. No
details have been submitted.
23. The conditional use, if approved, shall be subject to review upon notice to the
applicant.
C:UKy DavmmblchiytachrieGm.t~p.doc
i r
~ HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk
JANICE L. SMITH, Clty Treasurer
A Good Place to Live CO tNr^u ,tc-~aco
GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer
BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Su
t
CITY OF MERID WALT W. MORROW, President
RONALD R. TOLSMA
p
.
JOHN T SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt.
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks supt. IAN
33 EAST IDAHO CHARLES M. ROUNTREE
GLENN R. BENTLEY
SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator
PATTY A. WOLFKIEL
DMV S
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
,
upervisor
KENNETH W. t3pWERS, Fire Chief
W.L. "81LL" GORDON, Police Chief Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813
Public WorksBuilding De
artme
t
20 P & Z COMti_ "~GGICIN
JIM JOHNSON
Ch
i
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney p
n
(
8) 887-2211
Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443 ,
a
rman
GREG OSLUND
MALCOLM MACCOY
ROBERT D. CORRIE KEITH BORUP
RON MANNING
Mayor
TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian
Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to
Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: June 3 1997
TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5/21/97
HEARING DATE: 6/10/97
REQUEST: Conditional TTeo ne,..,.:~ r -_ _ ..... _
BY: Cherry i.ans. t^>ti..:~..;..~ ~•~__
LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: Section 11 T.3N. R.1 W Boise Meridian Ada
Count
JIM JOHNSON, P/Z
MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z
RON MANNING, P/Z
BYRON SMITH, P/Z
KEITH BORUP, P/Z
BOB CORRIE, MAYOR
RONALD TOLSMA, C/C
CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C
______WALT MORROW, C/C
GLENN BENTLEY, C/C
WATER DEPARTMENT
-~L_SEwER DEPARTMENT
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
FIRE DEPARTMENT
POLICE DEPARTMENT
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY ENGINEER
CITY PLANNER
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE (PRELIM. & FINAL PLAT)
-_____ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
--__ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT
__SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT
IDAHO POWER CO. (PRELIM. & FINAL PLAT)
___U.S. WEST (PRELIM. & FINAL PLAT)
---INTERMOUNTAIN GAS (PRELIM. & FINAL PLAT)
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION (PRELIM. & FINAL pLAT)
CITY FILES
--OTHER:
YOUR CONCISE REMARKS:
~11f~L1 1.1. 11 _... _-
lra.~
~ r ~~~~~~
.s ~ ~~~ 1 3 1997
~'~~ ~~ .~E~tlDfAt
'11a~r~ea. & ~~i~rtd.~a~ ~In~ctgatiaci ?>1,¢~uct
1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395
FAX # 208-888-6201
4 June 1997
ill Berg, City Clerk
Meridian City Hall
33 East Idaho
Meridian, ID 83642
RE: Conditional Use Permit for Addition of Family L~'e Center
Cherry Lane Christian Church
Dear Commissioners:
Phones: Area Code 208
OFFICE: Nampa 466-7861
Boise 343-1884
SHOP: Nampa 466-0663
Boise 345-2431
The Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District's Rutledge Lateral courses along the west boundary of the project. The
right-of--way of the Rutledge Lateral is 40 feet; 25 feet to the right and 1 S feet to the left facing downstream. The
Ninemile Drain is a contract drain and also courses through this project. The District's right-of--way of the Ninemile
Drain is 100 feet; SO feet from the center each way. For the Federal right-of--way, contact John Caywood at the
Bureau of Reclamation, 214 Broadway Avenue, Boise, Idaho. See Idaho Code 42-1208 RIGHTS-OF-WAY NOT
SUBJECT TO ADVERSE POSSESSION. The developer must contact John P. Anderson or Bill Henson at either
466-0663 or 345-2431 for approval before any encroachment or change of right-of--way occurs.
The Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District requires a Land Use Change/Site Development application be filed for
review prior to final platting. All laterals and waste ways must be protected. All municipal surface drainage must
be retained on site. If any surface drainage leaves the site, the Nampa 8t Meridian Irrigation District must review
drainage plans. Contact Donna Moore at 343-1884 or 466-7861 for further information.
The developer must comply with Idaho Code 31-3805. It is recommended that irrigation water be made available
to all developments within the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District.
Sincerely,
B~ nson`~Water Superintendent
NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGAT70N DISTRICT
BH.•dln
cc: Fik -Shop
Fik - O„Qice
Water Superintendent
APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES
RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000
BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS - 40,000
. ,
~a~r~Fia & ~~e~idut~ ~I~zcgauact Z~i~zict
1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395
FAX # 208-888-6201
Phones: Area Code 208
Cherry Lane Christian Church
2511 W. Cherry Lane
Meridian, ID 83642
OFFICE: Nampa 466-7861
Boise 343-1884
SHOP: Nampa 466-0663
Boise 345-2431
RE: Land Use Change Application for Addition-Family Life Center
Dear Cherry Lane Christian Church:
Enclosed please find a Land Use Change Application for your use to
file with the Irrigation District for its review on the above-
referenced development.
If you have any questions concerning this matter please feel free
to call on me at the District's office or John Anderson, the
District's Water Superintendent at the District's shop.
Sincerely,
Donna N. Moore,
Assistant Secretary/Treasurer
dnm
cc: File
Water Superintendent
City of Mew idian
enc.
APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES
RIVER FLOW RIGHTS • 23,000
BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS • 40,000
9 June 1997
~ •
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk
JANICE L. SMITH, City Treasurer
GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer
BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt.
JOHN T SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt.
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator
PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813
Public WorksBuilding Department (208) 887-2211
Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888=4443
ROBERT D. CORRIE
Mayor
COUN I tilt= ~nroe
WALT W. MORROW, President
RONALD R. TOLSMA
CHARLES M.ROUNTREE
GLENN R. BENTLEY
P & Z ('Ohm h~tggtOh
JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
GREG OSLUND
MALCOLM MACCOY
KEITH BORUP
RON MANNING
TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian
Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to
Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: June 3 1997
TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5/21/97
HEARING DATE: 6/10/97
REQUEST:- Conditional Tlcp po,..,,:* r ~ _ ~ .... _
BY: Cherry I.anp r'1...:~*;.... ~-•L-----•
LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: Section 11 T.3N. R.1 W Boise Meridian Ada
Coun
JIM JOHNSON, P/Z
MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z
RON MANNING, P/Z
B YRON SMITH, P/Z
KEITH BORUP, P/Z
BOB CORRIE, MAYOR
RONALD TOLSMA, C/C
CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C
WALT MORROW, C/C
GLENN BENTLEY, C/C
WATER DEPARTMENT
SEWER DEPARTMENT
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
FIRE DEPARTMENT
POLICE DEPARTMENT
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY ENGINEER
CITY PLANNER
---MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE (PRELIM & FINAL, PLAT)
.-__ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
--~A PLANNIlVG ASSOCIATION
--CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH
NAMI'A MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT
SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT
IDAHO POWER CO. (PRELIM. & FINAL PLAT)
___U.S. WEST (PRELIM. & FINAL PLAT)
---INTERMOUNTAIN GAS (FREE INAL PLAT)
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION . & FINAL:, PLAT)
CITY FILES
OTHER' ''~i
YOUR CONCISE REMARKS:
~~f
.Ih, 2 1 ~:°~7
C~~~ ~Y A~b~~F~
•
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk
JANICE L. SMITH, City Treasurer
GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer
BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt.
JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt.
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator
PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813
Public WorksBuilding Department (208) 887-2211
Motor Vehicle/Drivets License (208) 888-4443
ROBERT D. CORRIE
Mayor
C~ N .II II~C AC1cec
WALT W, MORROW, President
RONALD R. TOLSMA
CHARLES M. ROUNTREE
GLENN R. BENTLEY
P& O~~I 10~
JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
GREG OSLUND
MALCOLM MACCOY
KEITH BORUP
RON MANNING
TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
- WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian
Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to
Meridian City Mall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: ,Tune 3 1997
TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5/21/97
HEARING DATE: 6/10/97 -
REQUEST:_ Conditional Iicn np...,,;~ ~ ....JJ!a• .. _. __
BY: Cherry >I".~..o ~^~...:..x___ ~„ _
LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: Section 11 T.3N. R. l W Boise Meridian Ada
County
JIM JOHNSON, P/Z
MALCOLM MACCCrY, P/Z
RON MANNING, P/Z
BYRON SMITH, P/Z
KEITH BORUP, P/Z
BOB CORRIE, MAYOR
RONALD TOT_,SMA, C/C
CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C
WALT MORROW, C/C
GLENN BENTLEY, C/C
WATER DEPARTMENT
SEWER DEPARTMENT
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
FIRE DEPARTMENT
POLICE DEPARTMENT
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY ENGINEER
CITY PLANNER
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE (PRELIM. & FINAL PLA~~~~-;~'~~
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION ~; ~~' 2 ] ~q97
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT ~:ITY ~~ IHERIDIAN
SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT
IDAHO POWER CO. (PRELIM. & FINAL, PLAT)
U. S. WEST (PRELIM. & FINAL PLAT)
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS (PRELIM. & FINAL PLAT)
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION (PRELIM. 8c FINAL, PLAT)
CITY FILES
OTHER: ~ Z 2.~~
YOUR CONCISE REMARKS.
its ¢
ss.
Nrz~~
w ~ p Wills
CENTRAL CE
•• DISTRICT
pRHEALTH
DEPARTMENT
Rezone #
DISTRICT HEALTH DE
Environmental Health Division
~IENT
I:'2~c'EI~' "~~
eturn to:
U f~ Q 4 1~Q7 ^ Boise
^ Eagle
~I'1'Y tl~ +~ERIDIAI~ ^ Garden city
Conditional Use # _ /~i~i°!/Ly 1~~~~,/i~--;e ~-Meridian
^ Kuna
Preliminary /Final /Short Plat
s
c
^ Acz
L,~t-~/~
^ I. We have No Objections to this Proposal.
^ 2. We recommend Denial of this Proposal.
^ 3. Specit'ic knowledge as to the exact type of use must be provided before we can comment on this Proposal.
^ 4. We will require more data concerning soil conditions on this Proposal before we can comment.
^ 5. Before we can comment concerning individual sewage disposal, we will require more data concerning the depth of:
^ high seasonal ground water
^ solid lava from original grade
^ 6. We can Approve this Proposal for individual sewage disposal to be located above solid lava layers:
^ 2 feet
^ 4 feet
^ 7. This project shall be reviewed by the Idaho Department of Water Resources concerning well construction and
water availability.
-~ 8. After written approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for:
~ central sewage ^ community sewage system ^ community water well
^ interim sewage .'central water
^ individual sewage ^ individual water
^ 9. The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare,
Division of Environmental Quality:
^ central sewage ^ community sewage system ^ community water
^ sewage dry lines ^ central water
10. Street Runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem.
^ I I. Stormwater disposal systems shall be reviewed by relative to: ^ Waste Disposal ^ Injection Well rules.
^ Groundwater Protection
^ 12. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other
considerations indicate approval.
^ 13. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage
Regulations.
^ 14. We will require plans be submitted for a plan review for any:
^ food establishment ^ swimming pools or spas ^ child care center
^ beverage establishment ^ grocery store
,~- 15. S'~ 2M Wi?Tr-r~ f~uiJ --o ~ S/~o ~ l ~ ~~ r,~ /N~ A- Date: ~ / 3 ~ / ~ 7
_9N/ksS y ~s'c.~.~t2F ,(j~~ ~!S ~ i ~9 7~ Reviewed By:
~ J'C'~~/~rrE 73 EA5' . -~
CDHD 10/91 rcb, nv. I/9S
Review Sheet
~ ~
..
:~.~
_•
' ~i.. ..;1tt.
~~ =' _"~
~ ~ t''=
~ 43S T/NA MAR/E A VENUE
~ ~z c~
~~~~~
JUN 1 ~ 1~,'9?
CITY OFtd£Rl~d1AAl
`~
14~~
Unobstructed 'ew of mountains
1675 Squa o be built -verified from plansl
Large Open Gourmet Kitchen with oak cabinets, cast iron
sink, pan try, microwave over range, center island & sk yligh t
3 Large Bedrooms (or deny -- 2 Baths
Plant Shelves -- Rounded Corners
Gas Fireplace, Furnace & Water Heater
Central Air Conditioning .
Roughed in Plumbing for Water Softener
lnsula ted Triple Car. Garage with Opener
+ 12 x 14 Shop Area
FOR FURTHER /NFORMA T/ON PLEASE CALL:
WAVNE OR MARV W/LL/AMSON
PARK PO/NTE REALTY
939-09 ~9 // 323-Od62
Park Pointe
REALTY, Inc.
(? (`. 12~,.; fj(1t`~ s R015F%, ~f~3~ln s~ •'+r,7 • (1~)c~) ~i~ ~ nQf~
_ -'r~' ~
r
Meridian Planning and Zoning,
~ ~2 ~--
JUN 1 8 iS97
CITY 0 M 'RIDIAN
We ask that you do not allow the construction proposed by the Cherry Lane
Christian Church. We are opposed to building a s< pure :-:usa~ ~~~
close to homes in our neighborhood. Such a structure should be constructed
on land where it would not interfere with already developed neighborhoods.
A project such as this is designed for activities attracting large groups of
people. This facility will disrupt the quiet neighborhood atmosphere that we
now enjoy.
Back yard noise from air conditioning is a concern as is additional lighting at
night. Currently there is an ongoing issue with existing lighting and homes.
As proposed, the structure would totally cut off the mountain view to some
home owners, morning shading of the sun is a major issue of concern, some
homes will be totally overshadowed by this structure thus interfering with
basic enjoyment of property.
We also feel that this structure would lessen the current property value and
would severely limit opportunities to sell the homes directly involved.
Below are signatures of concerned neighbors who ask that you not allow this
structure to be constructed in our neighborhood.
Address
J . M1
l
~ $' 3,- ~J X11 fir- ~ / ~ r-
~ ~S ~ c~
2G7v ~,
,~
- ~ z~
Meridian Planning and Zoning,
~~~~~ ~~
J U ~~ 1 ~ ~~"~7
We ask that you do not allow the construction proposed by the Cherry Lane
Christian Church. We are opposed to building a structure rising 30 Ft so
close to homes in our neighborhood. Such a structure should be constructed
on land where it would not interfere with already developed neighborhoods.
A project such as this is designed for activities attracting large groups of
people. This facility will disrupt the quiet neighborhood atmosphere that we
now enjoy.
Back yard noise from air conditioning is a concern as is additional lighting at
night. Currently there is an ongoing issue with existing lighting and homes.
As proposed, the structure would totally cut off the mountain view to some
home owners, morning shading of the sun is a major issue of concern, some
homes will be totally overshadowed by this structure thus interfering with
basic enjoyment of property.
We also feel that this structure would lessen the current property value and
would severely limit opportunities to sell the homes directly involved.
Below are signatures of concerned neighbors who ask that you not allow this
structure to be constructed in our neighborhood.
,.T.,,...,o
Address
~ ~ a ~ v
c,~{I-e
~, ~
" ~ ,
~ ~
Q2~ ~ 3 ~ SGtery~ s'r
Z ~ LCi ~ 1
s
J,
I.t
1,~~ c~5"Y
~
~,,
/
~~~~ NNW ,
~-.
y~ ~'-~ ~_
sl
~T
/ g _
~~
~
13 3- N ._ ~ .
e .
a Q
~~. ~
~s} ~°~ j
F,7 ,k ~q Y~b3~.`.,a~Y~4+g~
.-'
2l0~9 (,/j. 5/
a ` ~~
//~~ VI/l_O.nn
~ S`f ~ L~1- St~-ti1~1 ~JTs~t-,mil ~~
7~ ~ 2u ~rr.~ ~
f'~
1
a ~'v
~iG u~.
Sl ~~3~ w~ ~,~o~ G~ .
2 Gf
~Q D ,lr hi ~
~~ o c
~ w
`oZ D l Lv - 2Bvt. ¢--
• • '~
P ~Z~
JUN 1 ~ ~,'~~~
~. :~..
~~`17.~~~rs~ ~~~
~ ~~ ~- ,~
z s
la~~ ~v- ~PcrrLEAS~
2,573 W - ~~~. ~~`a- ~:
Meridian Planning and Zoning,
~ ~ ~~2~.
:~~t ~;~
8}~~, Juta i ~ ~~i
Vi1l i i"~u r~~~..:~4r(~~.:k~~1~~.
~~~
We ask that you do not allow the construction proposed by the Cherry Lane
Christian Church. We are opposed to building a structure rising 30 Ft so
close to homes in our neighborhood. Such a structure should be constructed
on land where it would not interfere with already developed neighborhoods.
A project such as this is designed for activities attracting large groups of
people. This facility will disrupt the quiet neighborhood atmosphere that we
now enjoy.
Back yard noise from air conditioning is a concern as is additional lighting at
night. Currently there is an ongoing issue with existing lighting and homes.
As proposed, the structure would totally cut off the mountain view to some
home owners, morning shading of the sun is a major issue of concern, some
homes will be totally overshadowed by this structure thus interfering with
basic enjoyment of property.
We also feel that this structure would lessen the current property value and
would severely limit opportunities to sell the homes directly involved.
Below are signatures of concerned neighbors who ask that you not allow this
structure to be constructed in our neighborhood.
Name
Address
ZZ ~--
•
•
REMARKS BEFORE
THE
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
August 5, 1997
Good evening.
~~
My name is Larry Woodard, I am an elder at the Cherry Lane
Christian Church.
I would like to make some brief remarks to acquaint you with our
congregation and our plans to complete the final phase of our campus
development.
In 1980 we purchased the subject 4+ acres after we had been advised by
the then City Council that the property we had earlier acquired at the
NE corner of Locust Grove and Pine was in fact in an industrial park
area and that we should locate on Cherry Lane since all indications were
that the residential growth of the city would be in that direction. We
followed that advice and thus acquired the acreage we now own at 2511
W. Cherry Lane. In 1983 we constructed our sanctuary and a small
educational wing. Just as the council predicted, within 5 years
subdivisions began to fill in around our church. As a result, the
congregation has grown substantially and we have added to the original
facility until we now have 22,000 sq. ft. of educational and worship
space. From our initial meetings with the council all parties were aware
that we would ezpand as our congregation grew. We have followed that
initial plan with a series of incremental building programs. Our request
before you tonight happens to be our final building on our campus.
Because of growing evidence that the family structure in America and
yes, even in our own Meridian, is under attack, we have opted to make
the last phase of our campus a family life center where we can better
address the needs of the families in this community. It will contain a
gym for youth, classrooms for instruction to our many young married
couples, classrooms for religious instruction and places where those
having addiction problems can meet.
-S~"~ 7
•
We fully expect our facility will be used by various community groups
from time to time, like AA, the election board, and others, but it would
be safe to say that the youth of our church and community will be the
primary focus of the new facility.
Because any major modifictions to our facility requires Planning and
Zoning approval, we submitted our request for a conditional use permit
in June, anticipating construction this fall. Considering the time still
required to get a building permit and the approaching winter,we are now
looking at starting construction next March.
At the P & Z hearing, several neighbors expressed opposition to the new
facility and one neighbor had taken it upon herself to secure a petition of
reportedly 100 homes in the neighborhood opposed to our plans.
Concerns ranged from the size the building, proximity to neighbors,
security lighting, lack of landscaping, general upkeep of the property,
and the loss of view by neighbors to the west. Since then, we have met
with many of the neighbors who directly abut our property and found
that most have no objections to the proposal. One man in fact indicated
his son is anxious to join our youth program when the facility is finished.
We have heard their concerns and have agreed to revise our outdoor
lighting scheme, agreed to place two gates to keep people from parking
behind the building except when capacity crowds are expected, lowered
the height of the facility to minimize the impact on view, agreed to obtain
a better idea of the effect of the building on the sunlight in the yards of
two neighbors, and reduced our parking to the barest minimum possible
to accomodate more landscaping. In fact, the landscaping requirements
represent one of the more difficult aspects of meeting city requirements,
but we are committed to providing extensive plantings, although the 3"
tree size is of particular concern. We have expanded a tree area on the
southeast corner of our property at the request of neighbors and will
make this into a prayer garden.
In addition to our personal visits, we notified the 100 families who had
signed the petition about our plans and held an open-house on July 28
during which three couples whose homes abut us on the south and west
attended. It is safe to say we were unable to accomodate all their
concerns, particularly the suggestion by one neighbor that we move
somewhere else.
Because our congregation has doubled in 10 years to its present
membership of 500, we are encouraged by what the future holds for
Meridian as a city and specifically our congregation as a church to
minister to the spiritual and social needs of those of our community who
will benefit from this new building.
I want to now turn the podium over to one of our architects to give you a
few specifics about the final plans for the building and its attendant
facilities such as lighting, building height, parking, gating, access, and
landscaping.
Thank you for your consideration of our needs.
t
~~ ) L~
~/C ~~~,
Dear Mayor, City Council Members and representatives of the Cherry Lane
Christian Church,
Unfortunately my wife and I are unable to attend the hearing tonight. We
however want to be heard and have this notarized letter on record. We
oppose the construction of the family life center. As residents of Meridian
we are aware of the vast growth. We recognize the impact of the growth on
the churches and the community. We are sensitive to the desire of the Cherry
Lane Christian Church to have a recreation center but feel that the particular
p1an_ as yronosed is unacceptable for an established neighborhood.
We have worked hard to make our home and backyard a pleasant place for
our family and guests. At present when we walk into our back yard we have
a panoramic view of the mountains. This adds charm and desirability to our
home. If a home were to go up on the proposed sight, we would be sad to
loose our view but we could accept this. If this building is built our mountain
view will be replaced not simply by another home, but by a gymnasium with
a large plain stucco wall and aluminum roofing . The architects have
presented a very nicely drawn and colored plan of the proposed front of this
building. Unfortunately we live behind the proposed structure and the back
side is a very large unappealing warehouse type building. To make matters
worse we are informed that there will be no landscaping between our
property and the proposed structure to help camouflage the warehouse image
of this building because of an existing easement which the church is building
right up to. When we have tried to expressed our concern about this to the
church we were informed that "Change is hard." They are totally insensitive
to the impact they will have on us. We feel that this building will interfere
with our basic enjoyment of property, lessen our current property value and
severely limit future opportunity to sell our property.
Before the Planning and Zoning meeting we collected signatures
representing 100 households in the affected subdivision. These people feel
that the proposed structure is NOT appropriate as submitted for an already
established neighborhood.
We have made suggestions to the church about alternatives:
1. We have suggested that they remodel the original building and place the
gymnasium where the foyer is currently located. This would place the
y ~y
structure mare central to the lot, create more parking, and insulate the
neighborhood from noise and lighting . This idea has been rejected because
according to the church it would be inconvenient.
2. We have suggested that they redesign the Family life center to be more
aesthetically pleasing. Using the same brick as in the original structure and
perhaps adding some windows in the rear to break up the monotony of the
building. This has been rejected because they say the cost is too prohibitive.
3. We have suggested that they build it on a different location on the lot.
They have rejected this stating that it would be inconvenient because of
drainage and the work that would have to be done to make it adhere to
regulations.
4. We have suggested that they search for a new piece of land that would
meet the needs of their expanding congregation and alI of their foreseeable
future needs without disrupting an already existing neighborhood. This was
outright dismissed even though the Pastor admits that although the proposed
changes will meet all of their needs now, member growth is so large that
beyond a few years they may have to look for additional land anyway.
We have been informed by the church that given the location of our lot in
respect to the proposed building we quote "will not really be affected". If
one were to only look at the plat that would be an easy assumption to make.
A piece of paper cannot fully convey the reality of the impact this building
will have on our home, .Because of the angle of
our property, positioning of our home, size of the building and lack of
landscaping it will literally be like Living behind a warehouse in a
commercial area instead of the wonderful neighborhood atmosphere that we
now enjoy. We are not opposed to progress and change. But owning and
maintaining a home is the American dream and maintaining the standards to
afford us to enjoy our homes is one of the reason there are zoning laws.
We are asking the City council to postpone this project until mediation can
occur to lessen the impact on, and devaluation of the homes involved.
~~~~
~~5
~/~/~~
gl~~~~~
~~~, ~~
~~~ ~~~
.~ ~ . i
015on & ~55ocia~5 ~~ihl VG~S~ I .~.~
Stan Olson, AIA • Russ Phillips, AIA • Dana Kauffman, AIA • Doug Houston, AIA
NAMPA: 14 f2d- Avenue SouCi ~ Su1Ga 2i0 o Nampa, 1D 83651 ~ 208-466-2212 0 (FA)G 208-466.676
BOISE: 1789 Broadway Avenue o Boise, fD 83706 ~ 208~.?8-9080 0 (FAX 20838-9067) TRANSMITTAL
LETTER
Attention: ~ S Project Number: 3 Date:
Company: , Proje Name: ~~
~~~ A /
From: Nampa Office
Phone: Fax: /
Wt 0 Boise Office
Enclosures:
^ Correspondence ^ Submittals ^ Other
^ Plans D Shop Drawings
D Specifications ^ Change Order
D Prints ^ Samples Via:
^ Regular Mail ^ Fax
^ UPS ^ Courier
^ Fed-X ^ Picked Up
^ DHL D
Copies Date or No. Description
RE~E"'EO
acs
~ k~u
Transmitted:
^ For Acceptance D For Review & Comment D For Your Record
^ As Requested ^ For Your Use ^ For Your Information
^
Remarks:
-- t ~ (~lvt- ~ Q8~
G.Gt-S
~` ~ tea. 2/ Gt~i _
5 - ~ S~~ ~ -
- Cu~c ~`
~f ~ a ~
~s •'
Signature:
lTopies Ta: Fle ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
Solar Path and Solar Angle
TH DIAGRAMS (CONTINUED)
is is inclined 23°27' to its orbit around the sun and rotates 15° hourly.
points on the earth, the sun appears to move across the sky vault on various
r paths with maximum declinations of ±23°27'. The declination of the sun's
in a cycle between the extremes of the summer solstice and winter solstice.
follows the same path on two corresponding dates each year. Due to irregu-
n the calendar year and the astronomical data, here a unified calibration is
differences, as they do not exceed 41', are negligible for architectural
Ti~w~ r~r TuC ~I IN
LINATION CORRESP. DATE DECLINATION UNIFIED CALIBR.
+23°27' +23°27'
+20°O9' July 21 +20°31' +20°20'
+11'48' Aug. 21 +12°12' +12°00'
+0'10' Sep. 21 +0°4T +0°28'
-10'37' Oct. 21 -10°38' -10'38'
-1g°57' Nov. 21 -19°53' -19°55'
- 23°27' - 23°27'
r.
y0°
X60•
I
~
~ SO°
6
~
\ i
4
I
0 0•
`p
\
\ I 3
0•
/
V I O°
~~
~ N
~ l ~ r v u -
0°
(
'~ ~ vm
0
l 1 ~ .,
s
~I I ~ a .X E
.3 9
2 I, 8 0° II ~O °O
x ~
~ 70• ~
\
~ i~ I60°' ~
\ O
~
XI
5O° t
I Xu O°
i O
~ ~ <o
° o
h
3 0
°
40• I 20°
~ i a0
30
i0• 30
°
ao,
O°
a
lo• s o°
LATITUDE
X70° N 170.
160° ,s0°
i
p SO.
~y
`a~ 40•
30.
I vl a
v u ~.
0
vw
S ~ 0
0
S' ^
I IX E
A) it ~
3 BO° 9
2 IO 0
~~ I / 7 II m
60' 0
i 50° XI ~
4O• XII ~
Xh
0, ~ ~ 30• h0
4~• 1 20• a°
30• j 10• 30
?O• I 20.
10• g 10°
TITUDE
AIA: Princeton University; Princeton, New Jersey
The elliptical curves in the diagrams represent the horizontal projections of the wn's path.
They are given on the 21st day of each month. Roman numerals designate the months, ~`''~
A cross grid of curves raduate the hours indicated in arabic numerals. Eight solar path ".-~r
diagrams are shown at 4~ intervals from 24°N to 52°N latitude.
~tif.
EXAMPLE
Find the sun's position in Columbus, Ohio, on February 21, 2 P.M.:
STEP 1. Locate Columbus on the map. The latitude is 40°N.
STEP 2. In the 40° sun path diagram select the February path (marked with II), and
locate the 2 hr line. Where the two lines cross is the position of the sun.
STEP 3. Read the altitude on the concentric circles (32°1 and the azimuth along the outer
circle (35°30'W). ~~^E1Vr ~A'
V C O '.:::
JUt i ~ ~~
CITY 0~ Ir1EftlDl
• 170° N 170. c_
0
0
W
m
0
52' N LATITUDE
0
0
E
0
0
I
-- 10• B 10. - ~'~
,,_
r '~ ~ 1
• ~`
s r. ~ x ,~~i ''~--~ -L
z-5 S ~ ,., - COI-'O - Q ~L
~'as y~~r7'O ' Ir H __ I ~~ ~~
.yj~ Ifl ,...w+
~~ ~ ti j.Kk ~ "l.J
h 1 '~
V
1 ~ ~ \ \~ ~ IOC ' IID~~ ,
} ~" I L , ~ ~
a~ ~-~.
.~~ ~ ~ ~ = -
~~
~~x ~~ y
' -~~'_
~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ N ~
{ ~~ ~
I
~- --- ----- - f'~ . ~ -
c _
N ~~~ I I ~~ ~? f I.
fE;' /
~ . ~ ~ ~ - - g
C11
~~,/~/~
. ~Y~ ~
I / _ ~~
--~ -~ !~ 1 ~'// // X -1-
~~ ~ is ~ r/ ~ ~ _ ~`_ ~ ~ ~~~
_ -... •L ~i ~ ~U~~ ~- ~i
_~ ~ k ~ ~
~ / \I\~ ' I , ~ ~ ,
' ~ ~~! ~ a
~ ~ ~~t
~ i
~ a ~ Z~
c o
`~ o ~
.~ G
~ i °-, o ~ ~
r~ c ~
g s
~--~ ~ ~
~ ~
~_ ~ 8
i~l~ Z
~ ~
~~ .
~ ~"~"~~ Y. ~ ~i ~ I , ~ ~ L
~` ~k~ t ~ f i ~ 1
y~ i , V i _ ,~~-p ~I,D II ~p~-O ± ~-Q Y
~rse ~,,~ w.. ` 1-
~r~ ~~,
r
''~ yu.;Clq a~, '~ x
j~ ~ ~~- ~ ~~ O'
~l~ ~ ,
~~ ~ ~ I, .n
'~{[~
~~~ :~ ~E ~ i . ~
i a
ftif~Sxt') ~ i '~~~ I S r. ~p~
'~~ ~ _
III ~` ~_ ~.® .t s.., .>, ~~
_~
j 6- ~~ '~~~i,-
~'
i -, ~: ~ ; S
a ' ; I~' F~~f ' i r
w-. II ~~ /
~/
r-~ ' ~ ~ 7a ~ -j- ~Q
i ,.
_n~. ,.-,. i ~~ I~ -~ ~ t-gyp- -~ ;o,uti~ ~
„' ~~ ; ~
a
~~ ~'' ~ ~
4 ` !~ ~ Q
'~~~ ~ ~
_ ~ ~~ G
L ~
~_ ~ Q
t ~ ~
~_ ~ ~ ~ ~
Q ~
~ ~
u~
5 L~. ~ t 1_. ~ C
I ~ 1~ I II 1 u + ~~
y ~^ ~ ~ZO Q b LO'O ~-0YL
't ~ i ;~ ~,
~ ~ ..: ~ ,, o--~4
~~~I~t \ ~ ~J~L o
T- : ``_ O~ ~ ~_ ~-
3 1-i~
~_ ~~ ~, - -
a~ +
~1~~ ,. I
'~~~ ~;' ;i . ~ ;±~~ r III ~~Z
r.:~ ~ t
-~y,~ I ,~~ j 1 V a ~I ~ N
~~~ ~I~IQ"z ," I ~ - I N
~~~~~ f 0
- -~ ~ ~.. .
F ,
6-
~'. ~
.,, ~ ~ Ins ~ 's,r - - g
~ ~ ~ ,-
> I i~~ ~ ,# ~ ~ o
~ ~ i~
~~ ~ ~~
/ ~~
--+ ~~ ~°~ - ~II
~i ~ ' ~ `per ~ ~-~ ~ uti~
~~ ~ ~ ~
~~ , -
• _ -` ~ G
i ~ r o ,~ ~
v
~ ~ ~
~ ~
~~~
v ,~ a
Meridian Planning & Zonin~ommission
July 8, 1997
Page 13
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #6: TABLED JUNE 10, 1997: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
SHERBROOKE HOLLOW SUBDIVISION BY WESTPARK CO. - E. OF LOCUST
GROVE ROAD, N. OF VICTORY ROAD:
Johnson: This is the preliminary plat. Now that we have acted on the annexation then
we move to the preliminary plat. This just takes a motion for approval if that is what you
want to do.
Borup: Mr. Chairman, I would move that we instruct Counsel to prepare findings of fact.
Johnson: No, there are not findings of fact on preliminary plats.
Borup: Did we have any other hanging questions?
Johnson: Let's ask staff that question. I think it is page 50 of your minutes, last meeting.
Ms. Stiles?
Stiles: Chairman Johnson, Commissioners I believe it was tabled due to the fact that
there were no findings on the annexation and you couldn't act on the plat without that
being done.
Johnson: That is my understanding. But we can now.
MacCoy: Mr. Chairman I move we move the preliminary plat forward for approval.
Borup: Second
Johnson: A motion and a second to move the preliminary plat approval onto the City
Council, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #7: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT FOR A FAMILY LIFE CENTER BY CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN
CHURCH:
Johnson: Any discussion regarding these findings of fact and conclusions of law as
prepared by our City Attorney? Do we have a motion for approval then?
Borup: Mr. Chairman, I move the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of
Meridian hereby adopts and approves these findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Meridian Planning & Zonir~ommission
July 8, 1997
Page 14
MacCoy: Second
Johnson: Moved and seconded, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Borup -Yea, Smith -Yea, MacCoy -Yea, Manning -Absent
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Johnson: Recommendation to the City please.
Borup: Mr. Chairman I recommend the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby
recommends the City Council of the City of Meridian that it approve the conditional use
permit requested by the applicant for the property described in the application with the
conditions set forth in the findings of fact and conclusions of law or similar conditions as
found justified and appropriate by the City Council and that the property be required to
meet the water and sewer requirements, the fire and life safety codes, uniform fire code,
parking, paving and landscape requirements and atl ordinances of the City of Meridian.
The conditional use should be subject to review annually or more often is conditions
warrant upon notice to the applicant by the City.
Smith: Second
Johnson: Moved and seconded we pass that recommendation onto.the City Council as
stated by Commissioner Borup, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: 2 Yea, 1 Nay
ITEM #8: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT FOR EXPANSION OF FACILITIES BY CLASSIC KITCHEN INC. - BRET
JONES:
Johnson: Any items for discussion on these findings of fact as prepared by our City
Attorney? A motion please?
Smith: Mr. Chairman, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian
hereby adopts and approves these findings of fact and conclusions of law.
MacCoy: Second
Johnson: Motion and a second to approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law as
prepared., roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Smith -Yea, Borup -Yea, MacCoy -Yea, Manning -Absent
~ •
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: Jul 8 1997
APPLICANT: CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:
REQUEST: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ~~i'"'
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: ~y
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: (~'
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
~~~`'
-~~~ ` ~''
r~cEG~~i
OTHER:
All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
• •
MERIDIAN PLANNING 8 ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: June 18.1897
APPLICANT: CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 3
REQUEST: CONQITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A FAMILY UFE CENTER
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
COMMENTS
SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS
SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT: "REVIEWED"
CITY FIRE DEPT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
~~~^,~ ~~
~~a~Gk C
SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS
SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS
OTHER:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.