|
NOTICE OF ACTION
ENFIELD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2005 – 7:30 P.M.
ENFIELD TOWN HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBERS
820 ENFIELD STREET – ENFIELD, CT
_______________________
AGENDA
THE MEETING WILL ADJOURN AT 11:00 P.M.
REGULAR MEETING 7:30 P.M.
1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance – Chairman Anthony DiPace called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
2. Roll Call – Present were Chairman Anthony DiPace and Commissioners Jeffrey Cooper, Charles Duren, Robert Egan, James Hickey, Jr., Karen Krebs, Karen Weseliza (arrived at 7:35 p.m.), Kathleen Sarno, Alternate, and Nicles Lefakis, Alternate (arrived at 7:45 p.m.)
3. Approval of Minutes – July 7 and July 21, 2005 – Commissioner Krebs made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Cooper, to approve the Minutes of July 7, 2005. The Minutes were approved by a unanimous vote.
Commissoner Krebs made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Cooper, to approve the Minutes of July 21, 2005. A correction was made to these Minutes noting that Vice Chairman James Hickey called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The Minutes, as amended, were approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote.
4. Staff Comments
a. Town Attorney (in writing)
b. Zoning Enforcement Officer (in writing)
c. Director of Planning – It was the consensus of the Commission to allow Jose Giner to handle the modification to the Enfield Community Federal Credit Union building materials administratively.
5. Public Participation – Reginald Leonard, 42 Fairfield Road, spoke regarding work done without the necessary permits on Grandview Drive. Chairman DiPace directed Mr. Giner to draft a letter to be sent to the Enfield Town Council regarding increasing the present fines for those that do not file the necessary permits.
6. Correspondence
7. Commissioners’ Correspondence
READING OF THE LEGAL NOTICE
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS - NEW
a. PH#2517 – Special Use Permit for construction of a 42-unit Senior Residential Development at the southeast corner of Brainard and George Washington Road, zoned R-44, Map #62 and #77, Lot 319, 67 and 68, Washington Associates of Enfield, LLC, Applicant/Owner. – This public hearing was continued to September 22, 2005.
9. OLD BUSINESS
a. PH#1414.02 – Special use Permit to locate, maintain, conduct and operate a crematory as an accessory use under Section 9-1.9 of the Enfield Zoning Regulations to Leete-Stevens Enfield Chapels, 61 South Road, (Map 73, Lot 88 and a 55’ x 442’ portion of Lot 89), R-33 zone; and location approval pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes Section 19a.0320, Leete-Stevens, Inc. applicant/owner. This application shall be considered under the zoning regulations at the original time of filing. This re-hearing is at the direction of, and on remand from, the Appellate Court of the State of Connecticut, Urbanowicz et al v. Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission et al, 87 Conn. App. 277, (2005) (Decision by 9/22)
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hickey, to approve PH# 1414.02 - Special Use Permit to locate, maintain, conduct and operate a crematory as an accessory use under Section 9-1.9 of the Enfield Zoning Regulations to Leete-Stevens Enfield Chapels, 61 South Road, (Map 73, Lot 88 and a 55' x 442' portion of Lot 89), R-33 zone; and location approval pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes Sec. 19a-320 , Leete-Stevens, Inc. applicant/owner. This application shall be considered under the zoning regulations in effect at the original time of filing. This re-hearing is at the direction of, and on remand from, the Appellate Court of the State of Connecticut, Urbanowicz et al v. Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission et al, 87 Conn. App. 277, (2005). This approval is in accordance with the following Facts and Findings and subject to conformance with the record plans and the stated conditions:
Facts and Findings:
1. The applicant Leete-Stevens, Inc., as applicant and owner, has filed an application for a special use permit to locate, maintain, conduct and operate a crematory as an accessory use under Section 9-1.9 of the Enfield Zoning Regulations to Leete Stevens Enfield Chapels, 61 South Road, Map 73 Lot 88 and a 55' x 442' portion of Lot 89 (the “Property”) and location approval pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes Section 19a-320 (the “Application”). The Property is located in an R-33 zone. The Enfield Zoning Regulations at the time of the original filing of this application (1998) are being used in consideration of this application.
2. This Application was remanded to the Enfield Planning & Zoning Commission (the “Commission”) by the Appellate Court of the State of Connecticut at 87 Conn. App. 277 (2005) to hold a new hearing after an adequately published notice.
3. The Enfield Planning & Zoning Commission has held two lengthy public hearings on June 23, 2005 and July 21, 2005 where testimony and evidence was received by the Commission from the public and the Applicant. Extensive testimony and evidence was submitted both in favor of the application and against the application. The Commission has received and considered a wetlands report as required by Conn. Gen. Stat. § 8-3c.
4. A Notice of Intervention was filed by Penny Urbanowicz dated April 4, 2005 and verified by Penny Urbanowicz on April 6, 2005.
5. The Commission finds that the applicant has established that the proposed use, a crematorium, meets the requirements of being an accessory use to the funeral home on the Property under 9-1.9 of the Regulations. An accessory use must be both customary and incidental to the main use on the Property. The Commission finds that the main use on the Property is a funeral home. As described by the Applicant’s witnesses and members of the public, the public looks to local funeral homes to provide all the services necessary for the care taking of those loved ones that have died. Included with those services are cremation services. Typically, it is funeral homes which make the arrangements to have a body cremated. The Commission finds that a crematory is incidental and subordinate to a funeral home and should be located within the confines of the Property. As the demand for cremations has increased, the Commission finds that funeral homes customarily have crematoriums because of the nature of the business of funeral homes.
6. The Commission finds that it is appropriate to locate a crematory in this location under Conn. Gen. Stat. Section 19a-320. The Commission finds that the most logical place for a crematorium is in the vicinity of a funeral home because funeral homes often require a crematorium for its business. As more people request cremation services, more funeral homes have sought to add crematories to their funeral homes. A crematory is a logical extension of the funeral home business. The Commission finds that the Applicant has provided sufficient expert evidence indicating that the air emissions from the crematorium are compatible with the neighborhood and meet Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection guidelines. The Intervener’s expert was not convincing due to the inexact nature of the testimony and the failure to do site specific testing of the soil in the neighborhood of the crematorium. Also, the Applicant has provided qualified expert testimony from an appraiser indicating that the fair market value of properties in the immediate vicinity of the crematory location will not be negatively affected.
7. The Commission finds that the Property with this crematorium application does not have an industrial and/or commercial use which has as its primary activity the handling, use, treatment, processing, storage, incineration and disposal of hazardous materials under Regulation 16-2.9.
The cremation of the human corpse in the operation of a crematory does not constitute the operation of a solid waste or hazardous waste facility under Federal EPA, Connecticut DEP or the Enfield Zoning Regulations, as human corpses are not solid or hazardous wastes. Section 16-2.9 along with the requirements of Section 16-4.1.14, and Section 12-13.1.9, were adopted in order to regulate uses like a hazardous waste dump or other similar use. The Commission has no knowledge of ever utilizing these regulations. The primary activity on the Property remains the funeral home and the provisions of 16-4.1.14 do not apply to this Application.
8. Due to Ms. Penny Urbanowicz filing an intervention under 22a-19, the Commission finds that based upon the evidence presented that the proposed conduct does not meet the requirements of the first prong of CGS Section 22a-19 and that is whether it “ is reasonably likely to cause the pollution, impairment or destruction of the public trust in the air, water or other natural resources of the state...”. In particular, the Commission finds that the evidence presented by the Applicant means that due to satisfactory DEP testing no reasonable pollution will be created by the Application. Even if one determined that there was unreasonable pollution, the Applicant has met its burden regarding feasible and prudent alternative by moving the crematory to the far end of the buildable area of the site and even incorporating land from another lot adjacent to the lot containing the funeral home. In addition, the Commission finds that this Application does not create any unreasonable impairment in relation to the southerly slope containing the condition originally created in 1976. The remaining items set forth in the Intervention are not within the Commission’s jurisdiction or have been discussed in paragraph 7.
9. The Commission finds that the slope condition of the 1976 permit is not violated by this Application. No disturbance to the slope is set forth in the plans. Section 9-2 of the Regulations states that only “one house” is permitted for each lot and the Commission finds that this term does not include accessory buildings other than a house.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. Only 1 crematory may be constructed on the Property
2. Operation Hours for the crematory are from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and not on Sundays.
Conditions to be Met Prior to Signing of Plans:
3. All plans submitted for signature shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for the preparation of the plans.
4. The conditions of this approval shall be binding on the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns.
Conditions to be met prior to the issuance of permits:
5. One set of mylars and two sets of paper plans, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets, shall be submitted to the Planning Department for signature of the Commission.
6. This approval will become effective upon the filing of a Special Permit Certificate signed by the Commission Secretary on the Land Records by the owner of the property. Proof of such filing shall be in the file prior to the issuance of any permits
Conditions which must be met prior to the Issuance of a Certificate of Compliance :
7. Complete as-built plans certified to Class A-2 accuracy shall be submitted prior to the issuance of any certificates of zoning compliance.
8. The applicant shall also submit final plans in a digital format prescribed by the Director.
General Conditions:
9. This approval is for the specific use and structure identified in the application. Any change in the nature of the use or the structure will require new approvals from the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission.
10. This project shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the referenced plans. Minor modifications to the approved plans may be allowed in accordance with the regulations, subject to staff review and approval.
11. By acceptance of this permit and conditions, the applicant and owner acknowledge the right of Town staff to periodically enter upon the subject property for the purpose of determining compliance with the terms of this approval
Accordingly, based upon the reasons as set forth above and the evidence provided to the Commission, the Application is approved.
The motion was approved by a 5 – 2 – 0 vote. Chairman DiPace and Commissioners Duren, Hickey, Krebs and Weseliza voted in favor; Commissioners Cooper and Egan voted nay.
Attorney Matthew Willis left the meeting at 9:45 p.m.
10. NEW BUSINESS
a. SPR#1334 – Application to remove damaged fence and pad used to hold dumpsters size 18’ x 10’ – pour new pad 26’ x 12’ and fence in to hold three dumpsters at 65 Hazard Avenue, zoned BL, Map 56, Lot 27, Daniel M. Kossick, Applicant/Owner. – No action.
b. SPR#1335 – Application to modify the current grading of the easterly portion of the property, connect a septic line to the sanitary sewer system, modify the tree line and berm on the northerly side of the property and to add parking spaces in the gravel at 1675 King Street, zoned I-1, Map 13, Lot 26, Tri-State Rentals LLC, Applicant/Owner. – No action.
c. SPR#1336 – Application for a clothing box for clothes and shoes at 138 Weymouth Road, zoned BL, Map 52, Lot 51, Bipin Patel, Applicant/Owner. – Commissioner Krebs made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Duren, to approve SPR#1336 – Application for a clothing box for clothes and shoes at 138 Weymouth Road. The motion was denied by a 0 – 6 – 1 vote. Commissioner Cooper abstained.
11. BOND RELEASES
a. PH#2151 – Request for release of $45,095 maintenance bond and $6,900 landscape bond for Riverview Estates – 16 lot open space subdivision (Grandview Drive off of Old King Street). – No action. This bond release was tabled to a later meeting pending receipt of information regarding the cutting of the road.
b. PH#2198, 2199 and 2200 – Request for release of bonds by Somerset Development for Birch Hill Farm subdivision – Erosion and Sediment for $42,750 and $176,500 for Phase One Engineering. – No action. This bond release was tabled to a later meeting.
12. OTHER BUSINESS
a. Request for a ninety (90) day extension to file the mylars for PH#2510 – Resubdivision of a remainder parcel into 5 lots including 3 new building lots and one remainder parcel at 221 Shaker Road and 38 Bacon Road, zoned R-44 and I-1, Map 94, Lot 4, Estate of Joseph Polek, Applicant/Owner. Approved on July 7, 2005. – Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve a ninety (90) day extension to file the mylars for PH#2510. The motion was approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote.
b. Section 8-24 Referral – For acceptance of sidewalk easement on 88 Middle Road – Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to recommend acceptance to the Town Council of the sidewalk easement at 88 Middle Road. The motion was approved by a 7 – 0 – 0 vote.
c. Applications to be Accepted
The following applications were accepted by the Commission:
PH#2521/#SAN 1239 – Application for sign permit (Type C) within BR district, demolition of an existing Chi Chi’s restaurant and construction of an Outback Steakhouse, proposed 3 attached signs and one freestanding sign at 90 Elm Street, zoned BR, Map 43, Lot 17, Linda French, Applicant/Westfield Shoppingtown, Owner.
A public hearing will be scheduled for September 22, 2005.
PH#2522 – Application for a subdivision development of 2 single family homes; extension of Yale Court and related site work, zoned R-33, Map 18, Lot 281, Ridgewood Homes, applicant/owner.
A public hearing will be scheduled for October 6, 2005.
PH#2523 – Petition for zone change at 87 Simon Road from R-88 to R-44, Map 69, Lot 266, Francis Legienza, Applicant/Owner.
A public hearing will be scheduled in October following the application being sent to CRCOG.
PH#2524 – Application for subdivision of parcel at 247 Brainard Road to create a building lot, zoned R-33, Map 62, Lot 107, Douglas Hazall, Applicant/Owner.
A public hearing will be scheduled in October.
SPR#1338 – Application to convert an office place to a convenience store and deli at 397 Enfield Street, zoned BL, Map 33, Lot 234, Mohammed Siddiqui, Applicant/Abe Yacteen, Owner.
SPR#1339 – Application to install new 45” x 312” awning with “Grilled Sandwiches” copy (6” x 156”) at 12 Hazard Avenue – D’Angelo’s (Part of 10 Hazard Avenue), zoned BR, Map 56, Lot 22, Darcie Roy, Applicant/Gateway CT Properties, Owner.
SPR#1340 – Application for handicap ramp at 29 Oliver Road, zoned I-1, Map 47, Lot 5, Brendan Begley, Applicant/Oliver Road Associates, LLC, Owner.
SPR#1341 – Application for construction of two industrial buildings (19,620 square feet and 22,896 square feet) paved parking and loading areas at 3 Peerless Way, zoned I-1, Map 94, Lot 67, New Palazzesi Construction Realty, Co., Applicant/C.J.K. Realty, LLC, Owner.
SPR#1342 – Application to replace front awning with wooden structure façade at 229 Post Office Road, zoned BL, Map 68, Lot 151, Michael T. Panella/Still Corked LLC, Applicant/Still Corked LLC, Owner.
SPR#1343 – Application for a coin laundry/dry cleaning establishment at 95 High Street, zoned TV, Map 25, Lot 6, Mihyang Tenzer, Applicant/ S&T Associates, Owner.
13. Adjournment – Commissioner Krebs made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Weseliza, to adjourn. Following a unanimous vote, the Commission adjourned at 10:05 p.m.
|