Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My Public Portal
About
03-10-2009
CITY OF MEDINA 2052 COUNTY ROAD 24 MEDINA, MN 55340 AGENDA MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, MARCH 10, 2009 7:00 P.M. MEDINA CITY HALL 1. Call to Order 2. Public Comments on items not on the agenda 3. Update from City Council proceedings 4. Planning Department Report 5. Approval of January 13, 2009 Planning Commission minutes 6. Open Discussion Item: Religious Institutions, Government Facilities, Schools, and Cemeteries 7. Adjourn Posted in City Hall March 6, 2009 Agenda Item: 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Crosby and City Council FROM: Dusty Finke, Associate Planner; through City Administrator Chad Adams DATE: February 26, 2009 RE: Planning Department Updates for March 3, 2009 City Council Meeting A) CUP Standards for Religious Institutions — staff intends to present the Planning Commission a summary of research at the March 10 meeting. Staff will seek buy -in on a framework to regulate religious institutions prior to preparing a draft ordinance for a Public Hearing in April. B) Commercial District Ordinances — the Council will review the ordinance at the March 3 Council meeting, potentially for adoption. C) Private Recreation Zoning District — the ordinance will be placed on a future agenda after the Council has acted on the Commercial zoning ordinances. D) General Business and Industrial Ordinances — the ordinance will be placed on a future agenda following Council action on the PREC ordinance. E) Michael Anderson (and Wallace Anderson) Final Plat — 985 and 995 Medina Road — The applicant has submitted a final plat for review. The applicant is completing addition work to meet the conditions of preliminary plat approval. Staff will place the item on the agenda when ready to proceed, possibly at the March 17 meeting. F) Woodridge Church — 1500 County Road 24 — the applicant has provided an extension that extends 60 days following the completion of the moratorium. They plan to be active in the discussion regarding the updated ordinance regulations. G) Wrangler's Restaurant — 32 Hamel Road — the application has been deemed incomplete. Staff awaits updated plans in order to complete a review. H) Holy Name Cemetery — the application has been deemed incomplete. The applicants intend to plot additional burial sites on property they own to the east of the existing cemetery, where an existing home is located. I) Comprehensive Plan Update — the Met Council has deemed the City's submittal incomplete for review. Staff had a meeting with Met Council on February 20, to discuss what is required. Staff will be working on the items requested after completion of the Commercial ordinance, and will seek City Council direction on changes made likely at the April 7 meeting. Planning Dept. Update Page 1 of 1 City Council March 3, 2009 Medina Planning Commission Draft January 13, 2009 Meeting Minutes CITY OF MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION Draft Meeting Minutes Tuesday, January 13, 2009 I. Call to Order: Commissioner Charles Nolan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Planning Commissioners, Charles Nolan, Robin Reid, Mary Verbick, Victoria Reid, Michele Litts, Beth Nielsen, and Jim Simons. Absent: None Also Present: Associate Planner Dusty Finke, and City Attorney Ron Batty of Kennedy & Graven. 2. Election for 2009 Planning Commission Chair: The Commission accepted nominations for the 2009 Planning Commission Chair. Commissioner Charles Nolan was nominated. Charles Nolan was unanimously elected to be Planning Commission Chair. 3. Election for 2009 Planning Commission Vice -Chair: The Commission accepted nominations for the 2009 Planning Commission Vice Chair. Commissioner Robin Reid was nominated. Robin Reid was unanimously elected to be Planning Commission Vice Chair. 4. Public Comments on Items not on the Agenda: No public comments. 5. Update from City Council Proceedings: Finke updated the Commission that the City Council: - approved a timeline for building a concession/field house at Hamel Legion Park, with construction to be completed by November 2009; - approved a ball field use policy, fee, and maintenance structure; - submitted Lake Sarah TMDL requirements, identifying strategies to reduce phosphorous loading in Lake Sarah. The strategies include a joint project with Loretto to re -meander a stream that had been ditched and to enlarge a wetland catch basin. - tabled the PREC ordinance once more, since two Council members were absent, and could not reach consensus on how to structure the ordinance; - directed staff to continue to refine a road improvement assessment policy; 1 Medina Planning Commission Draft January 13, 2009 Meeting Minutes took a preliminary look at the four-part commercial ordinance, agreeing with many of the PC's recommendations, but looking at reducing the minimum lot size to half an acre, increasing the square footage of a maximum size before requiring a CUP and directing staff to promote a coordinated design approach for development of commercial sites, with shared parking and storm retention; approved the final tax levy of $2,724,719 and budget of $3,982,429 for 2009; delayed the Pioneer Trail Phase II overlay in order to cover other road costs without bonding in 2009; - mentioned the City is likely to see income shortfalls in 2009, due to greatly reduced new development applications. welcomed new Council Member Mike Siitari. - heard a presentation on the Elm Creek Total Management of Daily Load of phosphorous, and approved a resolution allowing the Elm Creek Watershed to set up a watershed -wide, multi -city TMDL. agreed to more time flexibility in the Tri-city sanitary sewer agreement to allow Independence and Greenfield residents to hook up to an extension of the sewer that comes though Medina. - adjusted the Individual Sewage Treatment Standards Ordinance to give the City more authority to monitor septic systems. approved the lot line rearrangement at 985/995 Medina Road with all conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. - reviewed a comprehensive trail plan developed by the Park Commission. - reviewed a resident's request to not have the City's Nuisance and Outside Storage Ordinances apply in residential areas. No changes were made. 6. Planning Department Report: Finke updated the Commission that the David Willis application on Hamel Road for Preliminary Plat and Site Plan Review was postponed and would be brought to a future meeting once additional plans are submitted. A new public hearing notice would be mailed prior to the next scheduled date for the application. Finke updated the Commission that the Ordinance Amendment (Section 826) pertaining to churches and other places of worship under conditional use permits was postponed and would be brought to a future meeting once additional plans were submitted. A new public hearing notice would be mailed prior to the next scheduled date for this application. 7. Approval of December 9, 2008 Planning Commission Minutes: Motion by Verbick seconded by R. Reid to approve the December 9, 2008 minutes with no changes. Motion carried unanimously. 2 Medina Planning Commission Draft January 13, 2009 Meeting Minutes 8. David Willis — 32, 36, and 42 Hamel Road (PIDs 12-118-23-41-0012, 12-118-23-41-0013, & 12-118-23-41-0014) — Preliminary Plat and Site Plan Review to rearrange lot lines between existing lots and to construct a restaurant. Nolan announced that this item was postponed and that a public hearing would not be opened at the meeting. He stated that an updated notice would be published and mailed if and when the item is ready for a Public Hearing at a future meeting. 9. Ordinance Amendment — Section 826 of the City Code — Regulations and Conditional Use Permit Standards related to churches and other places of worship. Nolan announced that this item was postponed and that a public hearing would not be opened at the meeting. He stated that an updated notice would be published and mailed if and when the item is ready for a Public Hearing at a future meeting. 10. Planning Commission 2009 Orientation/Training: Ron Batty presented a training entitled Zoning and Planning 101 and the Basic Legal Principles. The discussion surrounded the roles and responsibilities of Commissioners and tips for reviewing applications and holding public hearings. Commissioners asked a variety of questions throughout the presentation. 11. Adiourn: Motion by Verbick, seconded by Simons to adjourn at 9:12 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. 3 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Dusty Finke, Associate Planner DATE: March 3, 2009 MEETING: March 10, 2009 Planning Commission SUBJ: Institutional Zoning Regulation Discussion Background The 2010-2030 Comp Plan update identifies a Public/Semi-Public (PS) land use which includes governmental, religious, educational, and cemetery uses. Cemeteries, schools, and religious institutions were not classified in this way within the 2000 Comp Plan, but were rather classified the same as the residential property that most often surrounded these uses. As a result of this shift in policy, the City had planned to prepare zoning regulations to implement this change after the 2010-2030 Plan has been approved, along with many other changes that will need to be made. The City originally prioritized the institutional uses later than many other changes. On February 3, 2009, the City Council enacted a moratorium on new or expanded religious institutions and facilities. The Council identified deficiencies in the existing regulations meant to mitigate potential impacts of these uses on surrounding properties. The Council directed staff to give the highest priority to research and present ordinance amendments necessary for expansions of existing religious institutions. The purpose of the discussion at this meeting is to provide feedback on the following subjects: 1) preferred location and/or zoning designation for new institutional uses in the future 2) a general strategy for organizing the regulations for different types of institutional uses 3) necessary changes to existing regulations for religious institutions Comprehensive Plan Information As with previous ordinances discussed by the Planning Commission, the City's Comprehensive Plan gives guidance in the creation of regulations for the various types of uses. The 2010-2030 Comp Plan update describes the Public Semi -Public land use within Chapter 5: "Public Semi -Public includes governmental, religious, educational, and cemetery uses." The map at the top of the next page identifies the location of the property designated as PS in the Comp Plan Update. The properties are almost all developed for one of the institutional uses. Almost all of the properties (with the exception of St. Anne's Church and the electric substation south of Highway 55 on Willow Drive) are predominantly surrounded by land that is identified as rural for at least the next 20 years. Institutional Uses Page 1 of 6 March 10, 2009 Planning Commission Discussion Planning Commission Meeting Lor,;,, _: `Treatment Pete and Pau' Ceme Legend Property Lines Institutional Parcels RR -Urban Reserve Rural Residential P-R - State or Regional Streets A Henne•in Coun PW German Liberal Cemetery WH Electric Substation City Hall Apostolic .;theran Church A e Cemetery v na , b,ame Church and School The Comp Plan identifies the following Objectives for the Public Semi -Public land use: 1. Achieve a balanced framework of public uses and private development. 2. Set aside land for parks and preservation of ecologically significant natural resources to meet a wide variety of recreational, educational and functional needs as defined and discussed in the Park, Trails, and Open Space chapter and the Open Space Report. 3. Provide a trail system connecting parks, open space and other public uses. 4. Provide space for some public and semi-public uses in urban areas. These could include: churches, recreation areas, and public service facilities such as post office, fire stations, libraries and utility structures. 5. Continue to pursue conservation and preservation of wetlands, woodlands, ecologically significant natural resources and other open space, as appropriate. 6. Protect wetlands, as they provide wildlife habitat, preserve open space, improve water quality and provide water storage areas for the City's storm drainage system. 7. Protect the shoreline of lakes, creeks and wetlands from development. 8. Utilize existing regulatory tools and supplement as necessary to allow these types of lands to be preserved or protected for public use. 9. Require public and semi-public zoning to complement the character of surrounding land uses. Institutional Uses Page 2 of 6 Planning Commission Discussion March 10, 2009 Planning Commission Meeting Preferred Location (or Zoning Districts) for Future Institutional Uses Staff recommends the Commission discuss where the City would prefer new schools, religious institutions, government buildings, cemeteries, to locate. This discussion will provide a context to create new regulations and development standards based on each of their surroundings. Comparing area communities, it is clear that there is not consensus on where cities allow institutional uses: City Districts Permitted Burnsville All Residential; Neighborhood Business (religious) Corcoran All except Business Park and Rural Transition Commercial Eagan Public Facilities; Limited Business; Business Park (schools); Park Eden Prairie Public Hanover Institutional Lake Elmo Public and Quasi -Public Maple Grove All Residential Minnetonka All Residential Minnetrista All districts except Commercial 2 and Industrial Plymouth All Residential; Public/Institutional; Commercial (religious, municipal) Rockford All Residential; Commercial -Service (religious) Wayzata Institutional Although the above information is useful as a reference, it is clear that communities need to regulate these types of uses based on the characteristics of the city. Rural, urban, and developing communities may establish very different regulations, all of which may make good land use and planning sense for their particular situations. Staff suggests that the Commission start the discussion in general terms such as: rural or urban; residential or non-residential; lower density residential or higher density residential; commercial or industrial; and so forth. This will provide a good framework for the discussion. The primary issues to consider when determining the preferred location of these uses are: 1) Character, scale and intensity of the use in comparison to surrounding uses 2) Proper access to and utilization of public facilities (transportation, infrastructure) based on the type of use proposed 3) Public welfare including: health, safety, protection of natural resources, convenient access to services, etc. It is important to consider these issues from the perspective of the City's future vision (as expressed in the Comprehensive Plan) as well as current conditions. Staff Analysis/Strategy Staff believes the preferable location for new institutional uses will be along the Highway 55 corridor, where the City has identified its future development. Most of the City's population will be in this area, so the uses will be more accessible. Additionally, there would be better access to Institutional Uses Page 3 of 6 March 10, 2009 Planning Commission Discussion Planning Commission Meeting the City's transportation system, and sewer would be available so that the uses would not need to rely on septic systems. Staff believes some institutional uses (especially schools) may best be located near residential development. This is more convenient and is consistent with creating a sustainable community center. The City can establish regulations to limit where a use could locate within the district (for example, must be located at the intersection of two streets classified as collectors), and would need to concentrate on regulations related to landscaping, screening, and lighting. In general terms, staff is suggesting the following framework for organizing the new regulations: 1) Directing new institutional uses towards the developing areas of the City. As suggested above, this could include both commercial and residential areas, depending on the use. 2) Utilizing the Public/Semi-Public land use designation to regulate institutional uses which are located in the rural area of the City. These existing uses offer important benefits for the City and serve City residents. The regulations would establish limitations on the size and intensity of uses, directing larger uses to the sewered area. 3) Perhaps allowing very limited institutional uses in the rural residential area of the City. Staff seeks discussion on this matter. Regulations for Religious Institutions As implied in the discussion above, the framework which staff has identified will require amendments to many separate ordinances. Some of the ordinances are yet to even be drafted (new residential districts, for example). The City Council has prioritized making changes regarding existing religious institutions as a result of the recently enacted moratorium. Because of these factors, staff recommends moving forward with a more directed set of ordinance amendments that address religious institutions within the rural area of the City. If the Commission supports the framework discussed above, this would be accomplished by rezoning these properties to a Public/Semi-Public designation and creating the regulations for religious institutions. A summary of the current conditions of religious institutions in the City is attached for reference. Staff believes this is important context for discussion on regulations. Current Medina Regulations Under the City's current zoning ordinances, "Churches and Other Places of Worship" are allowed Conditional Uses within the following zoning districts: Rural Residential, Suburban Residential, Urban Residential, and Multi -Family Residential. Religious Institutions are allowed as Conditional Uses in Uptown Hamel. Within the residential zoning districts, churches and other places of worship are required to abide by the following requirements in order to be granted a CUP (Section 826.98): (i) located with direct access to a collector or arterial roadway as identified in the comprehensive plan; (ii) buildings set back a minimum of 50 feet from all property lines; Institutional Uses Page 4 of 6 March 10, 2009 Planning Commission Discussion Planning Commission Meeting (iii) parking areas set back a minimum of 50 feet from all property lines; (iv) no more than 50 percent of the site to be covered with impervious surface and the remainder to be landscaped or left in a natural state; (v) exterior lighting must be designed and installed so that the globe is recessed and enclosed on all sides except the bottom and no direct light is cast on adjacent residential property or rights -of -way; (vi) roof top or outside mechanical equipment must be screened from view from adjacent properties and rights -of -way; (vii) any exterior storage must be screened from view with an opaque material architecturally compatible with the building; (viii) no exterior bells or loudspeakers; and (ix) the city council may require compliance with any other conditions, restrictions or limitations it deems to be reasonably necessary to protect the residential character of the neighborhood. Religious Institutions (Including an Existing Cemetery) within the Uptown Hamel and Uptown Hame1-2 districts have a shorter list of regulations as follows: (i) Shared parking options shall be considered when a proposed expansion requires more off-street parking. (ii) The site plan shall provide for adequate parking and traffic circulation including a plan for formation and movement of a funeral procession. Potential Changes to Regulations for Religious Institutions Staff seeks discussion on a number of topics specifically related to religious institution regulations. Regulations Related to Size/Intensity Current City regulations do not regulate the size of religious institutions except through hardcover. Large lots could, therefore, hold very large churches. Some local communities regulate the size of religious institutions through floor area ratio. This type of regulation is not ideal for the rural area of Medina, because of the large lot size. Communities in other areas of the U.S. have adopted regulation based on maximum occupancy of the sanctuary (see attached "Zoning Practice" document for a broad discussion about regulations for religious institutions). Staff believes this type of regulation would be useful because it limits the intensity of the largest events at a property. For the purposes of discussion, staff has identified the following potential thresholds: Maximum # of Seats Districts Permitted <200 persons Public/Semi-Public, Urban Service Area, Rural Areas 200-500 persons Public/Semi-Public, Urban Service Area > 500 persons Only in the Urban Service Area Institutional Uses Planning Commission Discussion Page 5 of 6 March 10, 2009 Planning Commission Meeting Another potential regulation could be based on the floor area of the building. The City uses this type of regulation for accessory buildings in the rural area, and building size in the commercial districts. Again for the purposes of discussion, staff identified possible thresholds. These numbers are consistent with regulations that the City Council has discussed in the Commercial districts. Floor Area Districts Permitted <20,000 square feet Public/Semi-Public, Urban Service Area, Rural Areas 20,000 — 50,000 square feet Public/Semi-Public, Urban Service Area > 50, 000 square feet Only in the Urban Service Area Lot and Development Standards Staff has identified a number of existing regulations for religious institutions which require amendments. The City originally established regulations which exceeded the requirements of the Rural Residential (RR) district to account for the fact that religious institutions are more intensive than a single family home. However, the RR standards have changed over time and the requirements for religious institutions have not. For example, religious institutions would be allowed a maximum of 50% hardcover. However, current Rural Residential (RR) district standards only allow 40% hardcover. Additionally, religious institutions are required to meet 50 foot minimum setbacks, which are no larger than those required for single family homes in the RR district. Staff recommends the following regulations for the Public/Semi-Public district: Regulation Recommended Standard Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage 40% (same as RR) Front and Rear Setback 75 feet (1.5x RR setback) Side Setback 100 feet (2x RR setback) Front Parking Setback 50 feet Side/Rear Parking Setback 100 feet Building Materials/Architectural Requirements Similar requirement as large accessory structures in RR (see attachment) Planning Commission Action Requested Staff seeks discussion on the items identified in this staff report. Commissioners are encouraged to provide additional feedback, especially regarding needed improvements in the regulations for religious institutions. Attachments 1) Summary of existing religious institutions in the City of Medina 2) "Zoning Practice" article entitled: "The Zoning of Religious Institutions in the Wake of RLUIPA — A Guide for Planners." 3) Standards for accessory structures over 5,000 S.F. in Rural Residential Institutional Uses Page 6 of 6 March 10, 2009 Planning Commission Discussion Planning Commission Meeting ATTACHMENT 1 Date: March 4, 2009 To: Dusty Finke, Associate Planner From: Debra Peterson -Dufresne, Planning Assistant RE: Research of Churches in the City of Medina HOLY NAME OF JESUS CATHOLIC CHURCH (155 County Road 24) Daycare (Before and After School) School from Kindergarten to 6th Grade EXISTING SETBACKS Front Yard (Old Church to Co. Rd 24): Front Yard (School to Co. Rd 24): Front Yard (Rectory to Co. Rd. 24): Side Yard (East — Brockton Ln. N.): Side Yard (west): Side Yard (Rectory — West): School to Single Family Home (west): CHURCH AND SCHOOL ACTIVITIES A monthly schedule is attached. 42 feet 86 feet 122 feet 553 feet 119 feet 68 feet 193 feet WOODRIDGE CHURCH (1500 County Road 24) Daycare is available per Resolution 99-66 which approved a Montessori School of Wayzata Bay to operate a preschool/kindergarten Program. EXISTING SETBACKS Front Yard: Side Yard - East: Side Yard - West: Rear Yard: CHURCH ACTIVITIES A monthly schedule is attached. 142 Feet 215 Feet 246 Feet 920 Feet CHURCH OF SAINT ANNE (200 Hamel Road) Daycare is not available. EXISTING SETBACKS Front Yard: Side Yard (east): Side Yard (west): Rear yard: 30 feet 100 feet 200 feet 150 feet CHURCH ACTIVITIES The list below summarizes ALL activities offered by the church: • Mass Services are Tuesday — Sunday starting at 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. • Fish fry during Lent • Several pancake breakfasts throughout the year • Annual Fall Festival in August (Street Dance on Saturday and Chicken Dinner on Sunday) • Weekly Religious Education Classes during the school year • Periodic Bible Studies throughout the year • Monthly Group meetings FIRST APOSTOLIC LUTHERN CHURCH (2300 Cox Trail) Daycare was not observed during the week day. Staff was unable to make contact with the church. EXISTING SETBACKS: Front Yard: Side Yard (west): Side Yard (east): Rear Yard (north): 280 feet 120 feet 431 feet 78 feet CHURCH ACTIVITIES No activity observed during the week. Staff was unable to make contact with the church. COMPARISON/SUMMARY Holy Name of Jesus Catholic Church & School Woodridge Church Church of Saint Anne First Apostolic Lutheran Church Zoning District Suburban Residential Rural Residential Uptown Hamel Rural Residential Total Site Area 19.45 Acres 19.748 Acres 3.15 Acres 10.3 Acres Church Square Footage 37,796 sf 28,069 sf 22,678 sf 20,892 sf School Square Footage 90,910 sf N/A N/A N/A Rectory Square Footage 2396 N/A N/A N/A Total Square Footage of Building (Approximate) 131,102 sf (approximate) 28,069 sf 22,678 sf (approximate) 20,892 sf Exterior Footprint of Building (Excluding Holy Name Rectory) 85,440 sf 17,671 sf 12,256 sf 20,892 sf Exterior Building Materials Brick Old church — Vinyl EIFS & rock face block accent Brick Vinyl siding & rock face block accent Sanctuary/Auditorium/Choir Seating 1,445 Seats 466 Seats 430 Seats 464 Seats Kitchen or Lunch Room On -Site Yes Yes Yes Yes Impervious Surface (approximate) 37% 19.2% 33% 26% On -Site Parking Spaces 585 Spaces 296 Spaces 59 Spaces 217 Spaces Proof of Parking Area Reserved N/A N/A 76 Spaces Accessory Uses/Activities (Calendar attached) (Calendar attached) (List attached) Unavailable to make contact Days open per week 7 days a week 7 days a week 6 days a week Unavailable School/Church Hours Open 6:00 a.m. — 9:30 P.m. 9:00 a.m. — 9:30 p.m. 6:00 a.m. — 9:30 p.m. Unavailable Religious. Services held per week 7 day per week 1 day per week 6 days per week (8am & 5pm) Unavailable Level of Activity High High Moderate Low Calendar Page 1 of 4 Holy Name of Jesus Catholic Church 155 County Road 24 Wayzata, MN 55391 763-473-7901 postmaster@hno).org Select a+ mOn day's Events Previous Month Sunday 1 CIS Lenten Group Sign Up After Weekend Liturgies One Table in Gathering Space after weekend liturgies for CANA Dinner Ticket Sales 6:30 AM - 2:30 PM Boy Scout Troop 537 PANCAKE BREAKFAST 8:00 AM -12:00 PM Sunday School Classes During 8:30 AM and 10:30 AM Liturgies 8:30 AM -11:30 AM Morning Liturgies at 8:30am & 10:30am 9:30 AM -10:30 AM St. Patrick's Planning Meeting 1:00 PM - 3:00 PM Luther College Octet 3:00 PM - 5:30 PM Lifeteen Rehearsal & Set Up 5:30 PM - 6:30 PM 5:30pm Sunday Evening Liturgy (Lifeteen) 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM Passion Play Rehearsal 8 CIS Lenten Group Sign Up After Weekend Liturgies One Table in Gathering Space after weekend liturgies for CANA Dinner Ticket Sales One Table in Gathering Space after weekend liturgies for Luke 18 Retreat. Second Collection at Weekend Liturgies: Peace Foundation his week's even Monday 2 HNSchool SAC Program in Lunchu«nn: 6:45 AM - 8:00 AM and 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM 6am Gather for Moming Prayer @ 6:15am 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM Morning Mass 8:00 AM -10:00 AM HNSchool Finance Committee 9:00 AM -10:30 AM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 10:15 AM -11:00 AM HNSchool Grade 5 Activity 12:30 PM -1:00 PM HNSchool Grade 1 Activity 1:00 PM -1:45 PM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 2:30 PM - 4:30 PM HNSchool Grade Four Girl Scout Troop #12633 3:00 PM .7:00 PM HNSchool After School Sports 3:00 PM -4:30 PM HNSchool Grade 3 Brownie Troop 3:30 PM - 5:15 PM HNSchool: Destination Imagination 4:45 PM - 6:30 PM T.O.P.S. 5:00 PM - 9:30 PM 7:00 p.m. Men's Community Bible Study 5:00 PM - 7:00 PM HNSchool: Grade 1 & 2 Soccer - TF 5:30 PM - 6:30 PM Outreach Meeting - MM 6:30 PM - 8:30 PM Cub Scout Den 5, Pack 537 7:00 PM - 8:00 PM Lector Rehearsal 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM Marriage Series 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM Troop 537 Meeting 9 HNSchool SAC Program in Lunchroom: 6:45 AM - 8:00 AM and 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM Sam Gather for Morning Prayer @ 6:15am 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM kThis month's even �'' .,.. : his month's tale FEBRUARY 2009 Tuesday 3 HNSchool SAC Program in Lunchroom: 6:45 AM - 8:00 AM and 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM 6am Gather for Moming Prayer @ 6:15am 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM Morning Prayer Service 9:00 AM -12:00 PM Communications/leadership Meeting 9:00 AM -10:30 AM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 10:15 AM - 11:00 AM HNSchool Grade 5 Activity 1:00 PM - 1:45 PM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 1:30 PM - 2:15 PM Faith Formation Meeting 2:15 PM - 3:00 PM HNSchool Gr 6 Bible Study ,-with Deacon Sam 3:00 PM - 4:00 PM HNSchool Study Hall (Basketball) 5:30 PM - 7:00 PM Basketball Practice - JP 7:00 PM - 8:00 PM 7:15pm - AA (Em 2) 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM CIS Evening Group 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM HNOJ Mans Basketball 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM Just Faith 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM Praise Choir Rehearsal 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM RCIA Meeting 10 HNSchool SAC Program in Lunchroom: 6:45 AM - 8:00 AM and 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM 6am Gather for Morning Prayer @ 6:15am 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM Morning Prayer Service 7:15 AM - 8:15 AM Cursiilo -EK Wednesday. 4 HNSchool SAC Program In Lunchroom: 6:45 AM - 8:00 AM and 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM 6am Gather for Morning Prayer @ 6:15am 6:45AM-7:15AM Morning Mass 9:00 AM -11:00 AM Cursiilo Group - JB 9:30 AM -11:00 AM MOMS 9:30 AM -11:00 AM Women Spirituality 10:15 AM -11:00 AM HNSchool Grade 5 Activity 11:00 AM - 3:00 PM HNOJ Card Club 12:00 PM - 1:30 PM HNSchool Liturgy Practice (Gr 1 @ Noon, Gr 2 @ 12:30, Gr3@ 1) 1:00 PM -1:30 PM HNSchool Gr 5 Bible Study with Deacon Sam 6:00 PM - 8:30 PM 6:15 PM - Parish FAMILY EVENT Faith Bawl Evening 7:00 PM - 9:30 PM Adult Choir Rehearsal 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM The P.A.D. 7:20 PM - 8:20 PM Violin Lessons 11 HNSchool SAC Program in Lunchroom: 6A5 AM - 8:00 AM and 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM 6am Gather for Morning Prayer @ 6:15am 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM da Include Past Events Thursday 5 HNSchool SAC Program In Lunchroom: 6:45 AM - 8:00 AM and 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM Senior Adult Outing: Feed My Starving Children 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM 6am Gather for Morning Prayer @ 6:15am 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM Morning Mass 7:30 AM • 9:00 AM Cursilio Groups 8:45 AM -12:00 PM 10:00 AM Cavins Bible Study 12:00 PM -1:30 PM Monthly All Staff Meeting & Pot Luck Luncheon 1:00 PM • 1:45 PM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 3:00 PM - 7:00 PM HNSchool After School Sports 3:00 PM - 5:00 PM HNSchool Destination Imagination. 3:15 PM - 4:00 PM Violin Lessons 5:00 PM - 7:30 PM Bell Choir Rehearsal: 5:15-6:00pm Alpha Ringers: 6:00- 7:30pm Holy Name Ringers 6:00 PM - 7:30 PM Violin Lesson 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM Cavin Bible Study - Video 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM Job Network 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM Social Justice Forum 7:30 PM - 9:30 PM Contemporary Choir Rehearsal 12 HNSchool SAC Program in Lunchroom: 6:45 AM -8:00 AM and 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM KC Auxiliary Off -Site Activity. Please contact Mary Guerrero, Auxiliary Co -Chair for details. I Dav, Friday View private events load Calendar DatalL: 6 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM Gam Gather for Morning Prayer @ 6:15am 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM Morning Mass 8:45 AM - 9:45 AM HNSchool: Liturgy 10:15 AM -11:00 AM HNSchool Grade 5 Activity 1:15 PM - 2:30 PM HNSchool Grade 3 Activity 3:00 PM - 7:00 PM HNSchool Athletics Hold 3:00 PM - 7:00 PM HNSchool: Dance Class 5:00 PM Church Held for Wedding Rehearsal 5-6:30p 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM Marian Prayer Group 13 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM Sam Gather for Morning Prayer @ 6:15am 6:45kM-7:15AM Morning Mass 7:15 AM - 9:00 AM Serra Club 8:00 AM • 3:00 PM HNSchool Activities Next Month Saturday 7 CIS Lenten Group Sign Up After Weekend Liturgies One Table in Gathering Space after weekend liturgies for CANA Dinner Ticket Sales One Table in Gathering Space after weekend liturgies for Luke 18 Retreat. Second Collection at Weekend Liturgies: Peace Foundation 8:00 AM - 3:00 PM HNSchool Sports 8:00 AM Morning Mass - Individual Reconciliation Available after Mass 9:00 AM -11:00 AM Violin Lessons 10:45 AM -12:00 PM AA 12:00 PM - 4:00 PM KC FREE THROW CONTEST 4:00 PM -10:30 PM 6:00 PM - Men Group Speaker: Rich Gannon "Going Deep,. 5:00 PM - 6:00 PM Liturgy 14 One Table in Gathering Space after weekend liturgies for Confirmation Prayer Partners One Table in Gathering Space for Peace Foundation after weekend http://www.mychurchevents.com/calendar/calendar.aspx?ci=Gl. L6I3K5I3L6G 1 G1 2/5/2009 Calendar Holy Name Church Page 2 of 4 8:00 AM -12:00 PM Sunday School Classes During 8:30 AM and 10:30 AM Liturgies 8:30 AM -11:30 AM Moming Liturgies at 8:30am & 10:30am 9:00 AM • 1:00 PM 9:30AM: Peace Foundation Speaker 1:00 PM - 5:15 PM 3:45 PM - Confirmation Class (Gr 10) 3:00 PM - 5:30 PM Liteteen Rehearsal & Set Up 5:30 PM - 6:30 PM 5:30pm Sunday Evening Liturgy (IJfeteen) 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM Passion Play Rehearsal Morning Mass 9:00 AM -10:30 AM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 10:15 AM -11:00 AM HNSchool Grade 5 Activity 1:00 PM - 1:45 PM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 3:00 PM - 7:00 PM HNSchool After School Sports 3:00 PM - 4:00 PM HNSchool Study Hall (Basketball) 3:30 PM - 5:15 PM HNSchool: Destination Imagination 4:45 PM - 6:30 PM T.O.P.S. 5:00 PM - 9:30 PM 7:00 p.m. Men's Community Bible Study 5:00 PM - 7:00 PM HNSchool: Grade 1 & 2 Soccer - TF 5:30 PM - 6:30 PM Outreach Meeting - MM 7:00 PM - 8:00 PM Lector Rehearsal 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM Marriage Series 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM Troop 537 Meeting 7:00 PM - 8:00 PM Troop 537: Cub Smut Parent Meeting 15 16 One Table in Gathering Space President's Day - after weekend liturgies for HNSchool Closed Confirmation Prayer Partners 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM One Table In Gathering Spam for 6am Gather for Peace Foundation after weekend Moming Prayer @ liturgies. 6:15am 8:00 AM -12:00 PM Sunday 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM School Classes During 8:30 AM Morning Mass and 10:30 AM Liturgies 4:45 PM - 6:30 PM 8:30 AM -11:30 AM Morning T.O.P.S: Liturgies at 8:30am & 10:30am 5:00 PM - 9:30 PM 9:30 AM • 10:30 AM Special 7:00 p.m. Men's Needs Community Bibte 3:00 PM - 5:30 PM Ufeteen Study Rehearsal & Set Up 5:30 PM - 6:30 PM 5:30 PM - 6:30 PM 5:30pm Outreach Meeting - Sunday Evening Liturgy (Lifeteen) MIA 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM Passion Play 7:00 PM - 8:00 PM Rehearsal Lector Rehearsal 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM Troop 537 Meeting 9:00 AM -11:00 AM Communications Committee 9:00 AM -10:30 AM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 10:15AM-11:00Aft HNSchool Grade 5 ActiVity 9:00 PM - 3:00 PM Confirmation Activity 1:00 PM -1:45 PM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 2:15 PM - 3:00 PM HNSchool Gr 6 Bible Study with Deacon Sam 3:00 PM -4:00 PM HNSchool Study Hall (Basketball) 5:30 PM -7:00 PM Basketball Practice -JP 6:30 PM - 8:30 PM Boy Scout Pack 537 - Den 12 7:00 PM -8:00 PM 7:15pm - AA (Em 2) 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM HNOJ Mans Basketball 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM Just Faith 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM KC: Council Rosary 7:10 pm 7:00 PM -9:00 PM Pastoral Care Meeting 7:00 PM • 8:30 PM Praise Choir Rehearsal 7:00 PM -8:30 PM RCIA Meeting 17 HNSchool SAC Program in Lunchroom: 6:45 AM - 8:00 AM and 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM 6am Gather for Moming Prayer @ 6:15am 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM Morning Prayer Service 7:15 AM - 8:15 AM Cursillo -EK 9:00 AM - 10:30 AM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 10:15 AM - 11:00 AM HNSchool Grade 5 Activity 1:00 PM -1:45 PM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 2:15 PM - 3:00 PM HNSchool Gr 6 Bible Study with Deacon Sam 3:00 PM - 4:00 PM HNSchool Study Hail (Basketball) 5:30 PM -7:00 PM Basketball Practice -JP 6:45 PM - 8:00 PM First Communion Meeting 7:00 PM - 8:00 PM 7:15pm - AA (Em 2) 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM HNOJ Mens Basketball 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM Just Faith 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM Praise Choir Rehearsal 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM RCIA Meeting 9:00 PM -11:00 PM Planning Meeting - LDD Team Moming Mass 8:00 AM - 3:00 PM HNSchool: Library Activity 9:00 AM -11:00 AM Cursillo Group - JB 9:30 AM • 11:00 AM MOMS 10:15 AM -11:00 AM HNSchool Grade 5 Activity 11:30 AM • 12:00 PM HNSchool Gr 4 Liturgy Practice 12:00 PM -1:30 PM HNSchool Liturgy Practice (Gr 1 @ Noon, Or 2 @ 12:30, Gr3@1) 1:00 PM -1:30 PM HNSchool Gr 5 Bible Study with Deacon Sam 2:30 PM - 3:00 PM HNSchool Grade 58.6 Liturgy Practice 4:30 PM - 9:00 PM Faith Formation Evening: 4:45-5:45 pm, 6:00-7:00pm, 7:15-8:15pm, Fine Dining 5:15 - 7:00pm: Children Choir 5:45- 6:30pm in Music Rm: Youth Choir 6:00- 7:00pm In Bell Room. 4:30 PM - 5:46 PM ZION 7:00 PM - 9:30 PM Adult Choir Rehearsal 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM The P.A.D. 7:20 PM • 8:20 PM Violin Lessons 18 HNSchool SAC Program in Lunchroom: 6:45 AM - 8:00 AM and 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM 6am Gather for Morning Prayer Co 6:15am 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM Moming Mass 7:15 AM - 9:00 AM - Chitdrens Faith Formation Committee 9:00 AM -11:00 AM Cursillo Group - JB 10:15 AM -11:00 AM HNSchool Grade 5 Activity 11:00 AM - 3:00 PM HNOJ Card Club 12:00 PM -1:30 PM HNSchool Liturgy Practice (Gr 1 @ Noon, Gr 2 @ 12:30, Gr3@1) 1:00 PM -1:30 PM HNSchool Gr 5 Bible Study with Deacon Sam 1:00 PM - 3:00 PM HNSchool Grade 3 Presidential Wax Museum 4:30 PM - 9:00 PM Faith Formation Evening: 4:45-5:45 pm, 6:00-7:00pm, 7:15-8:15pm, Fine Dining 5:15 - 7:00pm Children Choir 5:45- 6:30pm in Music Rm Youth Choir 6:00- 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM 6am Gather for Morning Prayer oQ 6:15am 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM Moming Mass 7:30 AM - 9:00 AM Cursillo Groups 8:45 AM -12:00 PM 10:00 AM Cavins Bible Study 9:30 AM -11:00 AM Book Discussion Group: Parenting Kids with Love & Logic 1:00 PM -1:45 PM HNSchooi: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 2:00 PM - 5:00 PM HNSchool Grade Two Brownie Troop 3:00 PM - 7:09 PM HNSchool After School Spats 3:00 PM - 5:00 PM HNSchool: Destination Imagination 3:15 PM - 4:00 PM Violin Lessons 5:00 PM - 7:30 PM Bell Choir Rehearsal: 5:15-6:00pm Alpha Ringers; 6:00- 7.30pm Holy Name Ringers 6:00 PM - 7:30 PM Violin Lessons 6:30 PM -10:00 PM Scout CPR Training 7:00 PM - 9:09 PM Baptism Class 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM Cavins Bible Study - Video 7:30 PM - 9:30 PM Contemporary Choir Rehearsal 19 HNSchool SAC Program in Lunchroom: 6:45 AM - 8:00 AM and 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM 6am Gather for Moming Prayer Q 6:15am 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM Moming Mass 7:30 AM - 9:00 AM Cursillo Groups 8:45 AM -12:00 PM 10:00 AM Cavins Bible Study 1:00 PM - 1:45 PM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 1:30 PM - 3:00 PM Ministry Staff Meeting 3:00 PM - 7:00 PM HNSchool After School Sports 3:00 PM - 5:00 PM HNSchool: Destination Imagination 3:15 PM - 4:00 PM Violin Lessons 5:00 PM - 7:30 PM Bell Choir Rehearsal. 5:15-6:00pm Alpha Ringers; 6:00- 7:30pm Holy Name Ringers 6:00 PM -10:00 PM Leadership Assembly 6:00PM-7:30PM ; Violin Lessons 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM 8:45 AM - 9:45 AM HNSchool: liturgy 10:15 AM -11:00 AM HNSchool Grade 5 Activity 11:00 AM - 1:00 PM HNSchool Grade 3 Brownie Troop 1:15 PM - 2:30 PM HNSchool Grade 3 Activity 3:00 PM - 7:00 PM HNSchool Athletics Hold 3:00 PM - 4:30 PM HNSchool Grade Four Girl Scout Troop 412633 3:00 PM • 7:00 PM HNSchool: Dance Gass 3:00 PM -11:00 PM Set Up For CANA Dinner 5:00 PM Church Held for Wedding Rehearsal 5-6:30p 20 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM 6am Gather for Moming Prayer @ 6:15am 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM Morning Mass 8:45 AM - 9:45 AM HNSchool: Liturgy 10:15 AM -11:00 AM HNSchool Grade 5 Activity 1:15 PM - 2:30 PM HNSchool Grade 3 Activity 3:00 PM - 7:00 PM HNSchool Athletics Hold 3:00 PM - 7:00 PM HNSchool: Dance Class 5:00 PM Church Held for Wedding Rehearsal 5-6:30p 5:30 PM • 9:30 PM 6:30 PM: All in God's Plan: Girls Grade 4-7 and Mothers liturgies. 8:00 AM 6:30 PM - CANA DINNER 8:00 AM - 3:00 PM HNSchoot Sports 8:00 AM Moming Mass - Individual Reconciliation Available after Mass 9:00 AM -11:00 AM Violin Lessons 10:46 AM -12:00 PM AA 5:00 PM - 6:00 PM Uturgy 21 One Table in Gathering Space after weekend liturgies for Confirmation Prayer Partners One table in Gathering Space for Crew 88/Troop 537 Coffee Sales after Saturday 5pm and Sunday moming liturgies. 8:00 AM - 3:00 PM HNSchool Sports 8:00 AM Morning Mass - Individual Reconciliation Available after Mass 8:30 AM -1:30 PM RCIA Lenten Retreat 9:00 AM -11:00 AM Violin Lessons 10:45 AM -12:00 PM AA 12:00 PM • 4:00 PM KC FREE THROW CONTEST 3:00 PM Lenz/Ferry Wedding 5:00 PM - 6:DO PM Liturgy 7:00 PM -10:00 PM Ultreya http://www.mychurchevents.com/calendar/calendar.aspx?ci=G1 L6I3K5I3L6G1 GI 2/5/2009 Calendar Holy Name Church Page 3 of 4 22 One Table in Gathering Space after weekend liturgies for Confirmation Prayer Partners One table in Gathering Space for Crew 88frroop 537 Coffee Sales after Saturday 5pm and Sunday morning liturgies. 8:00 AM - 12:00 PM Sunday School Classes During 8:30 AM and 10:30 AM Liturgies 8:30 AM -11:30 AM Moming Liturgies at 8:30am & 10:30am 11:30 AM -1:30 PM Lenten Group Brunch 12:30 PM - 4:45 PM 3:00 PM: INTERFAITH CHOIRFEST 1:00 PM - 5:15 PM 3:45PM- Confirmation Class (Gr 10) 4:45 PM - 5:30 PM Lifeteen Rehearsal & Set Up 5:30 PM • 6:30 PM 5:30pm Sunday Evening Liturgy (Lifeteen) 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM CIS Group: Coleman 7:00 PM • 8:30 PM Passion Play Rehearsal 1 One Table in Gathering Space after weekend liturgies for Girl Scout Cookie Sale 8:30 AM -11:30 AM Morning Liturgies at 8:30am & 10:30am 11:30 AM • 11:30 PM LUKE 18 RETREAT SET UP(3pm Friday - Lifeteen Mass on Sunday) 3:00 PM • 5:30 PM Lifeteen Rehearsal & Set Up 5:30 PM - 6:30 PM 5:30pm Sunday Evening Liturgy (Lifeteen) 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM CIS Group: Coleman 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM Passion Play Rehearsal 23 HNSchool SAC Program in Lunchroom: 6:45 AM - 8:00 AM and 3:00 PM-6:00PM 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM 6am Gather for Morning Prayer @ 6:15am 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM Morning Mass 9:00 AM - 10:30 AM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 10:15 AM -11:00 AM HNSchool Grade 5 Activity 1:00 PM -1:45 PM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 3:00 PM - 7:00 PM HNSchool After School Sports 3:00 PM - 4:00 PM HNSchool Study Hail (Basketball) 3:30 PM - 5:15 PM HNSchool: Destination Imagination 4:46 PM - 6:30 PM T.O.P.S. 6:00 PM - 9:30 PM 7:00 p.m. Men's Community Bible Study 5:00 PM - 7:00 PM HNSchool: Grade 1 & 2 Soccer - TF 5:30 PM - 6:30 PM Outreach Meeting - MM 7:00 PM • 8:00 PM Lector Rehearsal 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM Special Needs Parent Networking: HOPE 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM Troop 537 Meeting 2 HNSchool SAC Program in Lunchroom: 6:45 AM - 8:00 AM and 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM 6am Gather for Morning Prayer @ 6:15am 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM Morning Mass 9:00 AM -10:30 AM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 10:15 AM -11:00 AM HNSchool Grade 5 Activity 1:00 PM - 1:45 PM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 3:00 PM - 7:00 PM HNSchool After School Sports 3:00 PM - 4:00 PM HNSchool Study Hail (Basketball) 4:45 PM -6:30 PM T.O.P.S. 5:00 PM - 9:30 PM 24 HNSchool SAC Program in Lunchroom: 6:45 AM - 8:00 AM and 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM KC: Social time at Panera - 7:45 PM 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM Sam Gather for Morning Prayer @ 6:15am 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM Morning Prayer Service 7:15 AM - 8:15 AM Cursillo -EK 9:00 AM -10:30 AM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 10:15 AM - 11:00 AM HNSchool Grade 5 Activity 12:00 PM - 3:00 PM Liturgical Environment Lent 1:00 PM - 1:45 PM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 2:15 PM - 3:00 PM HNSchool Gr 6 Bible Study with Deacon Sam 3:00 PM - 4:00 PM HNSchool Study Hall (Basketball) 5:30 PM - 7:00 PM Basketball Practice - JP 6:30 PM - 8:30 PM Boy Scout Pack 537 - Den 12 7:00 PM - 8:00 PM 7:15pm - AA (Em 2) 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM CIS Evening Group 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM HNOJ Mens Basketball 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM HNSchool & Parish Speaker: Barbara Carlson 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM Praise Choir Rehearsal 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM RCIA Meeting 3 HNSchool SAC Program in Lunchroom: 6:45 AM - 8:00 AM and 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM 6am Gather for Morning Prayer @ 6:15am 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM Morning Prayer Service 9:00 AM -10:30 AM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 10:15 AM - 11:00 AM HNSchool Grade 5 Activity 1:00 PM - 1:45 PM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 2:15 PM - 3:00 PM HNSchool Gr 6 Bible Study with Deacon Sam 3:00 PM - 4:00 PM HNSchool Study Hall (Basketball) 5:30 PM - 7:00 PM Basketball Practice - JP 7:00 PM - 8:00 PM 7:15pm - AA (Em 2) 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM CIS Evening Group 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM HNOJ Mens Basketball 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM Just 7:00pm in Bell Room. 4:30 PM - 5:45 PM ZION 7:00 PM - 9:30 PM Adult Choir Rehearsal 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM The P.A.D. 7:20 PM - 8:20 PM Violin Lessons 25 Ash Wednesday Liturgy at 6:45 am. Ash Services at 8:45 am, 5:30 pm, and 7:00 pm. HNSchool SAC Program in Lunchroom: 6:45 AM - 8:00 AM and 3:00 Ptvt - 6:00 PM 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM 6am Gather for Morning Prayer @ 6:15am 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM Morning Mass 8:45 AM - 9:45 AM HNSchool: Ash Service 9:00 AM -11:00 AM Cursillo Group - JB 9:30 AM -11:00 AM CIS Group 9:30 AM -11:00 AM MOMS 10:15 AM -11:00 AM HNSchool Grade 5 Activity 12:00 PM - 2:00 PM HNSchool: Library Activity 5:30 PM • 8:00 PM 5:30 PM & 7:00 PM: Ash Wednesday Service 7:00 PM - 9:30 PM Adult Choir Rehearsal 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM The P.A.D. 7:20 PM -8:20 PM Violin Lessons 4 HNSchool SAC Program in Lunchroom: 6:45 AM - 8:00 AM and 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM 6am Gather for Morning Prayer @ 6:15am 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM Morning Mass 8:45 AM - 9:30 AM HNSchool Lenten Prayer Service 9:00 AM -11:00 AM Cursillo Group - JB 9:30 AM 11:00 AM CIS Group 9:30 AM • 11:00 AM CIS Lenten Group 9:30 AM -11:30 AM HNSchool Gr2 Science Museum 9:30 AM -11:00 AM MOMS 10:15 AM -11:00 AM HNSchool Grade 5 Activity 11:00 AM - 3:00 PM HNOJ Card Club 11:30 AM - 1:00 PM Cavins Bible Study - Video 7:30 PM - 9:30 PM Contemporary Choir Rehearsal 26 27 HNSchool SAC 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM Program in 6am Gather for Lunchroom: 6.45 AM Morning Prayer @ - 8:00 AM and 3:00 6:15am PM - 6:00 PM 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM Morning Mass 6am Gather for 7:15 AM - 9:00 AM Morning Prayer @ Serra Club 6:15am 10:15 AM -11:00 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM Morning Mass 7:30 AM - 9:00 AM Cursillo Groups 8:45 AM -12:00 PM 10:00 AM Cavins Bible Study 9:30 AM -11:00 AM Senior Adults Faith Quest 1:00 PM - 1:45 PM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 3:00 PM - 7:00 PM HNSchool After School Sports 3:00 PM - 5:00 PM HNSchool: Destination Imagination 6:00 PM - 7:30 PM Violin Lessons 7:00 PM • 9:00 PM Cavins Bible Study - Video 7:30 PM - 9:30 PM Contemporary Choir Rehearsal 5 HNSchool SAC Program in Lunchroom: 6:45 AM - 8:00 AM and 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM 6am Gather for Morning Prayer @ 6:15am 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM Morning Mass 7:30 AM - 9:00 AM Cursillo Groups 9:30 AM -11:00 AM Senior Adults Faith Quest 12:00 PM -1:30 PM Monthly All Staff Meeting & Pot Luck Luncheon 1:00PM-1:45PM HNSchool: Special Grade 3 Activity (Joan Singewald) 3:00 PM - 7:00 PM HNSchool After School Sports 3:15 PM - 4:00 PM Violin Lessons 5:00 PM - 7:30 PM Bell Choir Rehearsal: AM HNSchool Grade 5 Activity 11:30 AM -11:30 PM LUKE 18 RETREAT SET UP (3pm Friday - Lifeteen Mass on Sunday) 1:15 PM - 2:30 PM HNSchool Grade 3 Activity 3:00 PM - 7:00 PM HNSchool Athletics Hold 5:00 PM Church Held for Wedding Rehearsal 5-6:30p 6 6:00 AM - 6:30 AM 6am Gather for Morning Prayer @ 6:15am 6:45 AM - 7:15 AM Morning Mass 8:45 AM - 9:45 AM HNSchool: Liturgy 10:15 AM -11:00 AM HNSchool Grade 5 Activity 1:15 PM - 2:30 PM HNSchool Grade 3 Activity 3:00 PM - 7:00 PM HNSchool Athletics Hold 3:00 PM - 7:00 PM HNSchool: Dance Class 6:00 PM - 8:00 PM HNSchool Conferences 6:30 PM -8:30 PM Gathering After Stations (Special Needs) 6:30 PM - 7:30 PM Special Needs Stations of the Cross 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM 28 One Table in Gathering Space after weekend liturgies for Girl Scout Cookie Sale 8:00 AM - 3:00 PM HNSchool Sports 8:00 AM Morning Mass - Individual Reconciliation Available after Mass 9:00 AM - 11:00 AM Violin Lessons 10:45 AM -12:00 PM AA 11:30 AM -11:30 PM LUKE 18 RETREAT SET UP (3pm Friday- Lifeteen Mass on Sunday) 5:00 PM - 6:00 PM Liturgy 7 One table in Gathering Space for Ascension School after all weekend liturgies. Second Collection at Weekend Liturgies: St. Patrick's Fund Raiser 8:00 AM - 3:00 PM HNSchool Sports 8:00 AM Morning Mass - Individual Reconciliation Available after Mass 8:30 AM -10:00 AM CIS Lenten Group 9:00 AM - 11:00 AM Violin Lessons 10:45 AM -12:00 PM AA 5:00 PM - 6:00 PM Liturgy 7:00 PM - 10:00 PM KC Card Party http://www.mychurchevents.com/calendar/calendar.aspx?ci=G 1 L6I3K5I3L6G 1 G1 2/5/2009 Calendar Holy Name Church Page 4 of 4 7:00 p.m. Men's Community Bible Study 5:30 PM • 6:30 PM Outreach Meeting - MM 6:30 PM - 8:30 PM Cub Scout Den 5, Pack 537 7:00 PM • 9:00 PM CIS Lenten Group 7:00 PM • 8:00 PM Lector Rehearsal 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM Troop 537 Meeting Faith 7:00 PM .8:30 PM Praise Choir Rehearsal 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM RCIA Meeting Choirfest Evaluation Meeting 11:30 AM -12:00 PM HNSchool Gr 4 Liturgy Practice 12:00 PM • 1:30 PM HNSchool Liturgy Practice (Gr 1 @ Noon, Gr 2 @ 12:30, Gr3@1) 1:00 PM - 1:30 PM HNSchool Gr 5 Bible Study with Deacon Sam 2:30 PM • 3:00 PM HNSchool Grade 5&6 Liturgy Practice 4:30 PM - 9:00 PM Faith Formation= . Evening: 4:45-5:45 pm, 6:00-7:00pm, 7:15-6:15pm, Fine Dining 5:15 - 7:00pm; Children Choir 5:45- 6:30pm in Music Rm; Youth Choir 6:00- 7:00pm in Bell Room. 4:30 PM - 5:45 PM ZION 6;00 PM • 7:15 PM 6:15 pm: FAMILY FAITH FORMATION 7:00 PM - 9:30 PM Adult Choir Rehearsal 7:00 PM • 9:00 PM The P.A.D. 7:20 PM • 8:20 PM Violin Lessons 5:15-6:00pm Alpha Ringers; 6:00- 7:30pm Holy Name Ringers 6:00 PM - 7:30 PM Violin Lessons 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM Job Network 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM Social Justice Forum 7:30 PM - 9:30 PM Contemporary Choir Rehearsal CIS Lenten Group 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM Marian Prayer Group http://wwvw.mychurchevents.com/calendar/calendar.aspx?ci=G 1 L6I3K5I3L6G 1 G 1 2/5/2009 Monthly Calendar Woodridge Church Page 1 of 3 Sun h j 8 9:00 AM Sunday 9 7:30 PM Faith Q� 0 9:15 AM Women's Bible 11 6:30•PM junior High RUSH 12 9; 0t0 AM moms in Step 13 9:00 AM Biggest Loser - {g 14 j i e i 3 & Fitness Celebration LIFEgroup - Study (AM) 7:00 PM Single Holiday 10:30 AM Sunday Chuck Plante ' C 12:00 PM Connection Challenge Moms LIFEgroup LIFEgroup 7:00 PM Fireproof MOVIE Celebration Lunch - 7:00 PM Treasure Club 11:45 AM Special Church Northeast Minneapolis - Viewi g Cancelled 7:00 PM Senior 7:00 PM Fireproof Your Business 6:00 PM Alpha Meeting - High Cancelled - Winter Course LIFEgro ps Marri-ge - 12:00 PM LAUNCH LIFEgroup w/ Brent & Kristen Nolby_ 4:00 PM South Gate 5:30 PM Heinsch Life Group 6:00 PM The Exchange Prayer Gathering 6:30 PM The Exchange Worship Gathering 15 9:00 AM Sunday 16 7:30 PM Faith 17 9:15 AM Women's Bible 18 6:30 PM Junior 19 9:00 AM Moms 20 9:00 AM Biggest Loser - 21 12:00 AM Senior High and & Fitness High RUSH In Step Celebration 10:30 AM Sunday LIFEgroup - Study (AM) 7:00 PM Single Moms Holiday Junior_itgb Kalahari Retreat Chuck Plante 6:00 PM Alpha Challenge LIFEgroup i - Winter Course LIFEgroup 7:00 PM Treasure Club 9:00 AM Imprints- Celebration i 11:35 AM Early Spring 1 Childhood 7:00 PM Senior Session Vision Meeting 11:45 AM 4th Grade Girls Pizza and Paint 4:30 PM Senior High LIFEgroups High and Junior High Kalahari Retreat 1:00 PM SrHi 6:00 PM 'Respite Care for Worship Team Practice Parents of 4:00 PM South Gate Children with Disabilities 6:00 PM The Exchange Prayer Gathering 6:30 PM The Exchange http://my.serviceu.cam/publie/MonthlyCalendar.asp?GF=&QrgID=1679&strColumnsTaS... 2/12/2009 Monthly Calendar Woodridge Church Page 2 of 3 Worship Gathering 22 12:00 AM Senior High and 23 7:30 PM Faith 24 9:15 AM Women's Bible. 25 7:00 PM Junior 26 8:30 AM Generous 27 9:00 AM Biggest Loser - 28 F I & Fitness High Serving - Junior High LIFEgroup - Study (AM) Variety Show Church Regional Holiday Challenge Kalahari Retreat Chuck Plante 6:00 PM Alpha Summit 9:00 AM Sunday 7:00 PM Single LIFEgroup - Winter Course Moms LIFEgroup 9:00 AM ImgAnts- Celebration 7:00 PM Treasure Club 10:30 AM Sunday spring 1 Session 7:00 PM Senior 7:00 PM Fireproof Your Celebration 6:00 PM The High Serving Event v Marriage - Exchange LIFEgroup w/ Prayer Brent & Kristen Gathering Rally 6:30 PM The Exchange Worship Gathering Mar 1 9:00 AM Sunday Mar 2 7:30 PM Faith & Fitness Mar 3 9:15 AM Women's Bible Mar 4 6:30 PM Junior Mar 5 9:00 AM Moms In Step Mar 6 9:00 AM Biggest Loser - Mar 7 High RUSH Celebration LIFEgroup - Study (AM) 7:00 PM Single Holiday 10:30 AM Sunday Chuck Plante 6A0 PM Aloha Challenge Moms LIFEgroup - Winter Course LIFEgroup 7:00 PM Treasure Club 9:00 AM Imprints- Celebration 1:00 PM SrHi Spring 1 Worship Team 7:00 PM Senior Session Practice i i f 4:00 PM South High LIFEgroups Gate 6:00 PM The )exchange Prayer Gathering 6:30 PM The Exchange Worship Gathering Mar 8 9:00 AM Sunday CeletKation 10:30 AM Sunday Mar 9 7:00 PM Shack Mar 10 9:15 AM Women's Bible Mar 11 5:00 PM Warroad Mar 12 12:00 AM Warroad Mar 13 12:00 AM Warroad Mar 14 12:00 AM Warmed Mission / March Chat 7:30 PM WI Study (AM) Mission / March Mission / March Mission / March 6:00 PM Alpha 11-15 11-15 11-15 11-15 & Fitness 6:30 PM Junior 9:00 AM Moms 9:00 AM Biggest Loser - i LIFEgroup - - Winter Course Celebration Chuck Plante High RUSH In. Step 1:00 PM SrHi 7:00 PM Single Holiday Challenge Worship Team Moms LIFEgroup Practice LIFEgroup http://my.serviceu.com/public/MonthlyCalendar,asp?GF=&OrgID-1679&strColumnsToS ... 2/ 12/2009 Monthly Calendar Woodridge Church Page 3 of 3 4:00 PM South 7:00 PM Cate Treasure Club 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Senior Student High' Ministries LIFEgrouos Senior High and Junior High Life Group Leaders Dinner 6:00 PM The Exchange Prayer Gathering 6:30 PM The Exchange Worship Gatherina 9:00 AM Imprints - Spring 1 Session 6:00 PM Respite Care for ; Parents of Children with Disabilities 7:00 PM Fireproof Your Marriage - LIFEgroup wt Brent & Kristen Nolby LiCalendar and Registration services provided by ServiceU Corporation. © Copyright ServiceU Corporation 2009 ServiceU Terms of Use and Privacy Policy http://my. servi ceu.com/public/Month lyCalendar. asp?GF=&OrgID=1679&strColumnsToS... 2/12/2009 St. Anne's Church — List of Events • Weekly religious education classes during school year • Breakfasts • Fish fries during Lent • Periodic Bible studies • Monthly group meetings ATTACHMENT 2 ZONING AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION CI ISSUE NUMBER NINE PRACTICE RELIGIO S INSTITUTIONS September 2oo8 The Zoning of R Wake of RLUIPA— By Adam Kingsley and Thomas Smith us In itutions in the i ners Since it was signed into law in 2000, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) has forced municipalities to rethink the way they plan for and zone religious institutions, as well as the manner in which they review discretionary applications regarding the siting or expansion of religious facilities. Court decisions have provided some guidance as to what is and what is not acceptable under the law, but these cases are often fact -specific and leave many questions unanswered. One theme that does emerge from these decisions is the importance of sound planning. Courts recognize that even with RLUIPA in place religious institutions are not entitled to locate wherever they want or build whatever they want, and an outcome where a religious institu- tion is denied its preferred location or site plan may be perfectly legal. However, when a munic- ipality denies the requested zoning relief, that decision is subject to serious scrutiny and must be justified by a well -supported planning rationale. This article explains why sound plan- ning has become the best defense to a RLUIPA challenge and discusses what constitutes sound planning in the context of RLUIPA. THE ORIGINS OF RLUIPA In i998, a select group of clergymen and attorneys for various religious institutions were invited to Washington, D.C., to testify before Congress regarding their experiences in obtaining land -use approval from cities and towns for new or expanded religious institu- tions. They told tales of rampant "hostility" to religious institutions, "discrimination" against religious institutions, and "arbitrary" deci- sions in the application of local zoning regula- tions. Each and every denial of a zoning charge, variation, or special use permit was presented as additional conclusive proof of a nationwide roadblock to the exercise of reli- gious freedom. Members of Congress were led to believe that religious institutions were facing near -insurmountable obstacles in their Q This church in Hinsdale, Illinois, occupies a prominent corner location in accordance with Clarence Perry's ideas about the neighborhood unit. attempts to find appropriate sites and fulfill their religious missions. The testimony at these hearings was largely one-sided, with municipal advocacy groups such as the National League of Cities barely rec- ognized. If given the opportunity, municipal offi- cials would have likely told a very different story —that religious users and institutions were welcome in their cities and towns but should be expected to navigate the same zoning and plan- ning concems and constraints as secular users. For example, the officials would probably have mentioned long -recognized planning concems such as conflict among uses, the desire for eco- nomic development, issues associated with traffic and parking, and aesthetic preferences. They might have continued by listing regulatory constraints including a limited number of potential locations, intensive special use (or conditional use) review and processing, input from elected officials, and community curiosity. In other words, the fact that religious institu- tions are required to go through the same zon- ing process as other uses and, like other uses, are sometimes disappointed or frustrated by that process is not evidence of "hostility" or "discrimination." Instead, it is part and parcel of the community development and zoning approval process. For better or worse, Congress largely accepted the version of events offered by reli- gious institutions. This congressional "fact- finding" became the evidentiary basis for RLUIPA. The empirical debate over the preva- lence of religious discrimination in municipal zoning decisions (both then and now) was not truly resolved before the passage of RLUIPA. In fact, it continues to this day. To illustrate, attorney Daniel Dalton writes in the April 2oo7 issue of Planning & Environmental Law about his frustrating experience representing a church seeking to relocate to a vacant office building in Southfield, Michigan, while attor- ney Dwight Merriam, FAICP, and planner Graham Billingsley, AICP, discuss the planning basis for Boulder County's decisions regarding the proposed development of a large religious complex in a rural setting. ZONING PRACTICE 9.08 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION 1 page 2 ASK THE AUTHOR JOIN US ONLINE' Go online from October zo to 31 to participate in our Ask the Author" forum, an interactive feature of Zoning Practice. Adam Kingsley and Thomas Smith will be available to answer questions about this article. Go to the APA website at www.planning.org and follow the links to the Ask the Author section. From there, just submit your questions about the article using the e-mail link. The author will reply, and Zoning Practice will post the answers cumulatively on the website for the benefit of all subscribers. This feature will be available for selected issues of Zoning Practice at announced times. After each online discussion is closed, the answers will be saved in an online archive available through the APA Zoning Practice webpages. About the Authors Adam Kingsley is a senior counsel at Holland & Knight LLP in Chicago. He advises municipalities on RLUIPA issues and has liti- gated several important RLUIPA cases on their behalf, including CLUB v. City of Chicago and the Long Grove and Northbrook law- suits. Thomas P. Smith is a senior associate at Duncan Associates, an urban planning firm with offices in Austin, Texas, and Chicago. He holds a master's in city planning and has more than 25 years of experience in the field. For more than 75 years, Smith worked on zoning cases for the City of Chicago. He has taught land -use planning and zoning at the University of Illinois at Chicago for more than seven years. THE LASTING IMPACT OF RLUIPA ON THE PLANNING COMMUNITY Eight years after it was enacted into law, ques- tions regarding whether RLUIPA was truly neces- sary and should have been passed in the first place are interesting, but beside the point. The fact is RLUIPA has forced municipalities to change the way they evaluate and respond to proposed religious uses. With an aggressive set of attomeys (including the United States Department of Justice) ready to support religious institutions, the threat of a lawsuit hangs over almost every zoning and planning decision that relates to the location, size, or operation of a reli- gious institution (including accessory uses). While RLUIPA is by no means the first intrusion of federal law into the local zoning process (e.g., cell tower regulation, adult uses, the Fair Hous- ing Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act, to name a few), the sheer number of zoning applications involving religious institutions arguably makes RLUIPA the most ubiquitous fed- eral law impacting local govemment today. Because of the implicit (and often explicit) threat of litigation that attaches to a religious -use zoning applications, and because the exact con- tours of RLUIPA are still being debated by attor- neys and judges, many municipalities seek the input of their attomey at an early stage of the zon- ing process. Legal consultation and advice is cer- tainly justified. However, what may be overlooked by lawyers and planners is the important role that sound planning plays in defending against a RLUIPA lawsuit. More and more courts are coming to the conclusion that zoning codes or decisions that deny religious institutions their preferred location or site plan do not violate RLUIPA if those individual decisions, as well as the municipality's overall plan for religious institutions, are sup- ported by legitimate planning principles. Many legal commentators suggest that sound planning is a defense to zoning and land - use litigation, but courts generally afford cities and towns great deference in their zoning deci- sions. Moreover, depending on the state, the legal standard for what constitutes sound plan- ning is sometimes akin to "any rational justifica- tion," a standard very generous to municipali- ties. This is especially true in the typical federal case involving zoning decisions where the legal standard is usually "rational basis." However, RLUIPA has upped the ante. as a distinct and unique use. Thanks in large part to Clarence Perry's monograph on the neigh- borhood unit in the 1929 Regional Plan of New York, planners often considered religious institu- tions to be a crucial component of a complete neighborhood. Writing for the Journal of the American Institute of Planners in 1954, William Clair said that churches, like city or town halls, should be given prominent locations "near the center of the community or neighborhood activ- ity" and "on the natural travel pattern of the community." Planners considered religious insti- The sheer number of zoning applications involving religious institutions arguably makes RLUIPA the most ubiquitous federal law impacting local government today. The law has instructed courts to assume that unsupported planning decisions are the product of anti -religious bias. This hard -look approach has forced municipalities to defend their land - use decisions with real facts rather than assump- tions, speculation, or blind deference to commu- nity concerns. The good news is that those communities that have marshaled the facts and done the hard planning have, more often than not, prevailed in RLUIPA litigation. The remainder of this article explains the constraints and limita- tions that RLUIPA has imposed on planners, and gives suggestions as to what "sound planning" means in the context of RLUIPA. THE ZONING OF RELIGIOUS USES — A BRIEF HISTORY Historically, many zoning codes categorized reli- gious institutions —often identified as churches— tutions to be appropriate for large, preferably cor- ner, lots either within a residential district or serving as a buffer between residential and busi- ness districts. The prototypical example of the place (both physical and spiritual) that churches played in the community might be the City of Chicago, where people of a certain age often identify themselves not by geographic neighbor- hood, but by the name of their Catholic parish, which served as a proxy. The traditional way of thinking about the proper location of religious institutions has been buffeted by a series of changes over the last half -century including: • increased religious diversity in formerly homogenous communities ® the divergent size of congregations (from the home -based or "storefront" church to the megachurch) ZONING PRACTICE 9.08 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION I page Many communities now consider scale and impacts when classifying religious institutions. These distinctions are most significant in commu- nities in which a megachurch has located or for institutions that attract congregants from several communities. For example, last April in North Carolina, Charlotte's city council adopted a zoning text amendment that contains the fallowing classifications: ♦ small religious institutions --includes institutions with up to 400 seats in the largest assembly space ♦ medium religious institutions —includes institutions with 4oi to 75o seats ♦ large religious institutions —includes institutions with 751 to 1,2oo seats In Charlotte, small and medium religious institutions can locate on smaller collector streets (versus minor or major thoroughfares) provided such religious institutions do not exceed a floor area ratio (FAR) of o.25. Small and medium religious institutions with an FAR in excess of o.25 but not exceeding o.5 must be located on a minor or major thoroughfare. Large religious institutions may have FARs in excess of o.5 but all such institutions must be located on major thoroughfares and are limited to higher density residential districts and mixed use zoning classifications. Additionally, all religious institutions must meet the following standards: ♦ They must provide at least 25 percent on -site open space. ♦ They must provide landscape screening especially from adjoining residential properties. ♦ Offices within these institutions must be limited to 25 percent or less of the total floor area of buildings on the lot. ♦ The site plan must show that accessory structures and buildings are contiguous to the principle structures. In Texas, Et Paso's Development Services Department has prepared a draft ordinance that uses a similar classification system for assembly uses: ♦ neighborhood facilities —public assembly uses (including religious institutions) designed for and serving the residents of a neighbor- hood, which is defined as an area of one square mile ♦ community facilities —public assembly uses designed for and which serve the residents of several neighborhood areas, where such neighborhoods are in the same approximate geographic area (defined as an area of four square miles) ♦ regional facilities —public assembly uses designed for and serving the residents of the entire city, nearby communities, and unincorpo- rated areas For all three facility types the maximum square footage of any build- ing is limited to one -fifth of the total land area of the lot. Neighborhood facilities can locate on any public street. However, they must have lot areas between one and five acres. In contrast, community facilities must locate on arterial streets. In addition, they must have lot sizes between five and 15 acres. Following this pattem, regional facilities must have a minimum lot size of 15 acres. . the growth of accessory or auxiliary functions within reli- gious institutions (e.g., school, day care, adult education, and homeless services) • the willingness of religious institutions to locate in nontradi- tional and converted buildings • suburbanization, "greenfield" churches, and the concept of a religious institution as a destination site e the intensive use of religious facilities on more than just one day a week Even without RLUIPA, all of these changes were forcing planners to reconsider the appropriate manner in which to reg- ulate religious land uses. For example, in 1988, suburban Northbrook, Illinois, changed its zoning code to allow religious institutions only in the IB (Institutional Building) zoning district. This change required religious institutions to obtain a rezoning to the IB district and approval as a special use (both legislative acts) wherever they wished to locate. Because each potential religious institution presented its own set of issues, the village thought it best to review every application on a case -by -case basis. This classification scheme was later challenged as violat- ing RLUIPA and, as discussed below, was subsequently amended in 2oo3. Planners should note, however, that despite the fact that religious institutions could not locate as of right in any particular district, every religious institution that applied for a rezoning and special use approval in the 1988 to 2oo3 time period obtained approval through a process of negotia- tion and compromise. Other communities responded to these changes in a similar manner by, for example, opening their business and commer- cial districts to religious institutions, sometimes treating them as special or conditional uses and subjecting them to the same type of detailed site plan and traffic analysis more typically associated with commercial development. SOUND PLANNING AND RLUIPA RLUIPA has two main provisions, each of which imposes new constraints on planners. The Equal Terms provision provides that a municipality may not treat "a religious assembly or insti- tution on less than equal terms with a nonreligious assembly or institution" (42 U.S.C. §2000cc(b)(1)). This provision is based upon the idea that gatherings 0.e., assembly) for reli- gious worship should, for zoning purposes, be treated no dif- ferently than gatherings for the purpose of discussing or cele- brating secular issues. The assembly uses most obviously comparable to religious institutions are private clubs and lodges, country clubs, union halls, and private assembly halls. Planners might better describe these as privately owned buildings where members regularly meet, socialize, or discuss civic issues. For example, one court said that if a city's zoning code allows a Cub Scout troop to hold a weekly meeting in someone's house, the neigh- bor next door should be allowed to host similarly sized meet- ings for the purpose of religious worship or Bible study (Konikovv. Orange County, Florida, 4io F.3d 1317 (nth Cir. 2°05)). Likewise, if a nonreligious assembly use, such as an Elks Lodge, is allowed to locate in a particular zoning district ZONING PRACTICE 9.08 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION 1 page 4 without the need for a variance or special use approval, so too should a religious institution (Digrugilliers v. Consolidated City of Indianapolis, 5o6 F.3d 612 (7th Cir. 2oo7)). There is no question that RLUIPA commands that religious institutions be given, at a mini- mum, whatever zoning rights govern the location of these secular assembly uses and that it essentially compels planners to review existing zoning codes and compare the treatment of reli- gious institutions with comparable secular assembly uses. Using the Northbrook example, the village's 1988 zoning code allowed "mem- bership organizations" to locate in its industrial district by right, but required religious institu- tions to obtain a rezoning and special use approval. After the passage of RLUIPA, the village recognized that it needed to modify its code to equalize treatment —even though most religious institutions had been successful in obtaining the necessary legislative approvals. After much con- sideration, Northbrook determined that neither religious nor secular assembly uses should be allowed in industrial districts and it amended its code accordingly. At the same time, it modified its code to allow religious uses to operate in cer- tain residential districts as of right, and in certain business and commercial districts as a special use. The Seventh Circuit court of appeals found that these changes put all assembly uses on the same footing and brought the code into compli- ance with RLUIPA's Equal Terms provision (Petra Presbyterian Church v. Village of Northbrook, 489 F.3d 846 (7th Cir. 2oo7)). To ensure that there is no distinction in the treatment of religious and secular assembly uses, some municipalities have done away with "church" or "religious institution" as a separate category of use. For example, the Village of Long Grove, Illinois, enacted a public assembly ordi- nance that places the same maximum square footage restriction on all assembly uses, and links the maximum square footage to the size of the property and type of roadway to which the property has access. Again, this type of equal treatment was upheld by the courts (Vision Church, United Methodist v. Village of Long Grove, 468 F.3d 975 (7th Cir. 2oo6)). Some courts have suggested that the defini- tion of "nonreligious assembly or institution" is broader and includes theaters, restaurants, and bars where people assemble for commercial or entertainment purposes. We do not believe that RLUIPA was intended to give religious institutions the same zoning rights as restaurants and other retail uses. In zoning terms these uses have never been thought of or categorized as assembly uses. This is one area where planners can play an important role in educating the courts as to the distinctions between true assembly uses (char- acterized by exclusivity and noncommercial operation) and retail and commercial uses where people happen to gather in groups. The good news is that the courts that have charac- terized restaurants and other retail uses as assembly uses have also concluded that the exclusion of religious institutions from purely commercial districts is not a violation of RLUIPA, because there is no unequal treatment when taking into consideration the purpose of the dis- tinction —such as the creation of a district devoted solely to economic development 2. Larger institutions may be required to provide open space or landscaping, especially if located in or near residential areas. Larger institutions should be also expected to provide adequate parking and have access to appropriate second- ary or collector roads. 3. Because of land -use conflicts, assembly uses may be inappropriate for, and wholly excluded from, certain areas of the municipal- ity, including manufacturing districts, enter- tainment districts, and business development districts. 4. Although no land must be made available as of right, planning staff should be prepared to affirmatively identify sites that are appropriate 0 The building and parking footprint of this megachurch in Eden Prairie, Minnesota, shows how new large-scale religious institutions can contribute to urban sprawl (Lighthouse Institute for Evangelism, Inc. v. City of Long Branch, 5io F.3d 253 (3rd Cir. 2oo7)). Of course, even if the decision is made to treat all assembly uses in the same manner, the question becomes, where should they go? There is no one right answer to this question as it de- pends on jurisdiction -specific facts such as size of the community, development trends, the loca- tion of existing assembly uses, and the commu- nity's land -use and economic development goals. We offer the following planning principles to provide guidance: 1. Different areas of the municipality may be appropriate for differently sized assembly uses (as measured by square footage, Floor -area - ratio, number of seats, or parking), with smaller institutions acceptable in traditional neighbor- hood locations and larger uses more appropri- ate for nonresidential locations. for the institution in question, especially if the institution's preferred site is considered unavailable or inappropriate. While compliance with RLUIPA's Equal Terms provision is somewhat mechanical and can be achieved by a review of, and edits to, zoning codes, compliance with RLUIPA's sec- ond provision is a bit more complicated be- cause it is triggered by individualized review of zoning applications. RLUIPA's Substantial Burden provision (42 U.S.C. §2000cc(a)) prohibits a municipal- ity from imposing or implementing a "land - use regulation" (further defined as "a zoning or landmark law or the application of such law") in a manner that imposes a "substantial burden" on "religious exercise." The phrase substantial burden is not defined, but reli- gious exercise is defined to include "the use, 0 pasn :pamasai s148u py eaosauum to qis� ZONINGPRACTICE 9.os AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION 1 page5 ISSUES RELATED TO MEGA AND STOREFRONT CHURCHES A megachurch is a very large church, generally defined as having 2,000 or more wor- shippers for a typical weekly service. According to the Hartford Institute (a religious research institute), there are more than 1,3oo such Protestant churches in the United States. According to the Institute, about 5o churches have congregations ranging in size from io,000 to 47,000. Such megachurches have significant traffic impacts and some contribute to prob- lems of associated with suburban sprawl. Many locate on the urban fringe where there is ample land. In some cases, this means converting productive farmland to the religious assembly use. Due to their locations, few megachurches have access to transit. Consequently, these uses require large fields of parking, which can have sig- nificant environmental impacts in terms of stormwater runoff and seasonal flooding. Currently in Montgomery County, Maryland, Bethel World Outreach Ministries, a z;000-member Baptist church, is challenging county zoning regulations and the rejec- tion of its water and sewer permit applications. Lawyers for the county contend that the zoning ordinance is based on the county's land -use plan and that the proposed loca- tion for the n9-acre megachurch is within an area designated as an "agricultural reserve," which prevents the construction of a wide variety of private institutions and assembly uses. In 2oo6, the church filed a lawsuit in state court but that suit was unsuccessful. The new lawsuit moves the case to the federal courts where the church is making RLIUPA claim. At the other end of the spectrum are small storefront churches. The term store- front church is used to describe places of religious assembly that occupy buildings designed for retail or office uses along a commercial corridor. Many of these institu- tions have small congregations of 3o to 5o persons. Storefront churches in urban areas often operate without permits or zoning certi- fications. in many cases, this happens because the storefront church operator is not aware of permit requirements and because such institutions are not subject to the typical license requirements that apply to small businesses. A common concern of local chambers of commerce is that the storefront churches unfairly compete for retail locations. Since such churches are typically exempt from property taxes and certain licensing requirements, they may find it eas- ier to establish themselves in these neighborhood business districts. More importantly, local business owners often complain that storefront churches do not generate retail traffic. Because these institutions are usually closed during normal business hours, local retailers may complain that a storefront church creates a dead space in the retail corridor. Similarly, they may object when a church boards up existing storefront windows in an effort to create a quiet, private space for reli- gious services. Last year, the planning department in Long Beach, California, recommended pro- hibiting storefront churches in the city's Commercial -Neighborhood Pedestrian (CPN) districts due to concerns that storefront churches do not add significant pedestrian traffic during peak shopping hours. At the same time, the planning department rec- ommended deregulating many storefront churches in other commercial districts by eliminating the time-consuming and costly conditional use approval process and replacing it with an administrative review handled by the zoning administrator. Elsewhere in California, Oakland has modified its "small project design criteria" to clar- ify that they apply to a variety of "civic uses," including storefront churches. The city applies its standards through an administrative review process, and its criteria require that store- front churches and other institutional and civic uses retain display windows when reusing an existing retail space. The design standards also require that storefront churches use sig- nage and bulletin boards compatible with the signage of nearby businesses. building, or conversion of real property for the pur- pose of religious exercise" (42 U.S.C. §z000cc5(7)(B)). The question of substantial burden often comes up in the context of individual review of special use, conditional use, or planned unit development appli- cations. If an application is denied (or approved with major modifications), the religious institution may assert that denial of its preferred site consti- tutes a substantial burden and a violation of RLUIPA. Many religious institutions have asserted that virtu- ally any denial of zoning approval is a substantial burden on their religious exercise. Courts generally reject this argument and hold that a religious institution's inability to locate, expand, or develop accessory facilities at a particular location is not, in and of itself, a substantial burden on its exercise of religion. This consensus begins with the idea that RLUIPA is not a free pass that allows religious institutions to escape the difficulties that many landowners face in finding suitable (or afford- able) land and in obtaining zoning approval. Nor is RLUIPA a guarantee that a religious institution will be able to locate or expand at its favored site, even when denial of that site will cause inconvenience, disappointment, or a loss of congregants. Rather, courts have been focusing on objective questions such as the amount of land in the city or town poten- tially available for religious use, the ability of the reli- gious institution to find other suitable locations, and the size of the facility that the municipality is willing to allow as compared to what is reasonably neces- sary for the institution's purposes. Here is where sound planning comes into play. Courts are mostly likely to find a substantial burden when denial of zoning relief is accompanied by a set of facts that demonstrates bad faith or hostility on the part of the municipality 0.e., because the municipal- ity's reasons for denial appear disingenuous, illogical, or unsupported by planning principles). In one California case, for example, a county overrode the recommendation of its own planning division and denied a conditional use permit for a Sikh temple. The temple then identified another location that did not raise the same concerns regarding potential conflicts with residential uses. Again, planning staff issued a favorable report. Neighbors, however, complained about "traffic and property values" and the board of supervisors rejected the second site as well. Although each denial might be independently justifiable and not necessarily the product of discrimination, the courts found that, as an overall course of conduct, the county placed a substantial burden on the religious organization and appeared to give it "the runaround" (Guru Nanak Sikh Society of Yuba Cityv. County ofSutter, 456 F.3d 978 (9th Cir. 2oo6)). ZONINGPRACTICE 8.08 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION I page 6 Other cases are marked by municipal deci- sion making that can best be characterized as confused and contradictory, which, in turn, raises an inference of discriminatory intent (e.g., Sts. Constantine and Helen Greek Orthodox Church v. City of New Berlin, 396 Fad 895 (7th Cir. 2oo5)). Alternately, some cases include a record that is long on complaints and accusa- tions by neighbors or members of the zoning board but short on actual facts. In one New York case, the court found that the zoning board's fac- tual conclusions regarding the evidence pre- sented with respect to a proposed expansion of religious day school were "characterized not sim- ply by the occasional errors that can attend the task of government but by an arbitrary blindness to the facts" (Westchester Day School v. Village of Mamaroneck, 504 F.3d 338 (2nd Cir. 2oo7)). When the municipality has discretion in re- viewing a zoning application, it's important for it to adhere to best practices. Indeed, when a mu- nicipality denies the zoning application of a reli- gious institution, that denial is subject to a greater degree of court scrutiny as compared to the denial of an application for commercial development. These best practices include: 1. Sensitivity on the part of zoning staff so as to avoid any comments that might be perceived as hostility or bias toward a particular religion or religious use in general 2. Decision making on the basis of sophisti- cated, professional analyses of traffic, parking, property value, or other impacts, rather than on the basis of assumptions, unfounded fears, or questionable data many storefront churches board r'z up display win Bows to limit street noise and to give the inte- rior space the look and feel of a sanctuary. 3. Consistency in staff review and the applica- tion of various standards, so that the institution cannot point to a similar use that received pref- erential treatment 4. A process that is not only fair on paper, but fair, open, and not predetermined 5. Flexibility on the part of planning staff, evi- denced by a willingness to compromise and solve problems rather than a tendency to rely on bureaucratic responses Perhaps most important, if the municipality is likely to deny the application it should be pre- pared to offer meaningful suggestions and alter- natives to the applicant (e.g., ways for the appli- cation to improve its site plan to satisfy planning concems or, if the site is simply not acceptable, the identification of other feasible locations). If the religious institution is intent on litigating over the site or plan in questions, it is important that the municipality give solid justifi- cations for its decision and be proactive in offer- ing reasonable altematives to the institution. At the end of the day, the entire course of interaction should lead a neutral observer to conclude that the municipality was willing to be reasonable and accommodating and that the lack of approval was due to the religious institu- tion being unreasonable or obstinate. In the Long Grove case, for example, the vil- lage's code allowed for a 55,000-square-foot facility (the same that any other assembly use would be entitled to at that location). The church's own architectural expert testified that this was more than enough space for a congre- gation of approximately 200. The church, how- ever, demanded approval of a ioo,000-square- foot complex to accommodate "future growth." The village denied this request. The court of appeals found no RLIUPA violation and observed that the village's planning decisions were well thought out, while the church was overstretching. Planners cannot, of course, bind corporate authorities. Indeed, some of the adverse court decisions involve a positive recommen- dation by planners but an override at the political level. Nevertheless, planners should offer their expertise with respect to the loca- tions that are most appropriate and compati- ble with municipal planning goals, the condi- tions for approval that are most important and justifiable, and the evidence that does (or does not) support denial or modification of an application. In RLUIPA lawsuits, courts have been skeptical of rote or unfounded objections to religious institutions, but have shown a willingness to uphold the discre- tional denials when they are justified by rec- ognized planning principles. Cover photo: "The High and Lofty" by Herman Krieger, from the series Churches Ad Hoc: A Divine Comedy atwww.efn.org/ —hKrieger; design concept by Lisa Barton. Vol. 25, No. y Zoning Practice is a monthly puirlicattorx of iL$ce American Planning Association. Subscriptions are., available for $• 5, (U.S.') and Slop (foreign). W. Paul Farmer, Executive Director; William R. Klein, lace, Director of Research. Zoning Practice (ISSN 1548--0135) is produced at APA. Jim Schwab, AICP, and David Morley, Editors; Julie Von Bergen. Assistant Erlike; Lisa Barton, Design and Production. Copyright (z)2oo8 by American Planning Association, 12z S. Michigan Ave., Suite if,00. Chicago, IL 6o6o3. The American Nanning Association also has offices at 1776 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 2o036; www.planning.org. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, with- out permission in writing from the American Planning Associatiem Printed on recycled paper, including 50 70 1, recycled fiber and to`l postconsumer waste. ZONING PRACTICE 9.08 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION 1 page7 ZONING Ao# AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION 122 S. Michigan Ave. Suite i600 Chicago, Il6o6o3 1776 Massachusetts Ave., N.W. Washington D.C. zoo36 ATTACHMENT 3 Requirements for Accessory Structures Larger than 5000 square feet [City Code Section 826.98 Subd. 2(m)] (i) The accessory building's design shall include architectural interest through the appropriate use of the following elements: cupolas, dormers, windows, porches, overhangs, varied building foundation, or other design treatments which the city council determines create a quality architectural design that enhances the appearance of the accessory building and complements the principal dwelling and the rural residential character or residential neighborhood in which the building is to be constructed; (ii) At least two colors or textures shall be used in the accessory building's exterior design, including contrasting trim or fascia; (iii) Any metal exterior materials on the accessory building shall be warranted to resist fading for a period of at least 15 years; and (iv) The accessory building shall have an infiltration basin, rain garden, rain barrel or other similar best management practice used to capture storm water runoff from the building and to improve water quality. Said best management practice must be reviewed and approved by the city council.