|
ENFIELD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 21, 2004
A Regular Meeting of the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission was held on Thursday, October 21, 2004 in the Council Chambers, Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut. Chairman Anthony DiPace called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Anthony DiPace, Chairman
Charles Duren
Robert Egan
James Hickey, Jr.
Karen Krebs
Samuel McGill, Alternate
Kathleen Sarno, Alternate
ALSO PRESENT: Jose Giner, Director of Planning
CORRESPONDENCE
Correspondence includes the following:
A letter from Dale A. Badura, Vice President, Enfield Motor Sports, requesting a median cut to Route 190. - Chairman DiPace stated this matter would have to go to the Town Council through the Traffic Safety Officer.
A Cease and Desist Order from Zoning Enforcement Officer Wayne Bickley to Kim M. Doughtie, 2 Chief Street, regarding a boat stored ahead of the front building line.
Letters from Zoning Enforcement Officer Wayne Bickley regarding motor vehicle parking to William Lia, Sr., at Lia Honda and Lia Nissan, 20 Palomba Drive and 10 Palomba Drive, to Robert Green and Kathleen Pilotte, 50 Palomba Drive, at Gale Toyota, and to John W. Medeiros, Trustee, 40 Palomba Drive, Lia Hyundai.
The publication "Building Livable Communities."
The Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency Notice of Action for October 5, 2004.
Mr. Giner reminded the Commission of the Wednesday, October 27, 2004 seminar to be held in West Hartford regarding the Aquifer Protection Act.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS - Continued from October 7, 2004 Meeting
a. PH#2467 - Special Use Permit for a church, school and parsonage within an existing structure at 177 Elm Street, zoned R-33, Assessor's Map 57, Lot 266, Steven E. MacCormack, Applicant; Lily Yeh Kalk and Renee Yeh, owners. (Must close by November 11)
Steven MacCormack appeared before the Commission regarding this application.
Mr.Giner stated he asked the Fire Marshal for a clarification regarding some statements made by Mr. MacCormack regarding occupancy limits. The Fire Marshal did submit a memo and stated he was not quite sure of the specific request at this time. The plans showed not only what the applicant wanted to do but also what he might do in the future. Mr. Giner stated there is a need to identify exactly what the applicant is requesting.
Mr. Giner suggested keeping this hearing open to November 4, 2004 to address the concerns from the Fire Marshal.
Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the public.
Salvatore Presto, 181 Elm Street, stated he is not opposed to a church, mosque or a temple being established in Enfield but he is opposed to a church at 177 Elm Street. He brought up funerals, weddings and other ceremonies being held on such a small parcel of property. He does not understand how an individual can come into a house and say that he is going to buy the house to the left and the house to the rear. Mr. Presto stated there are a lot of sites in Enfield that Mr. MacCormack could purchase. He also asked if this site would be non-taxable if the use becomes a church. He questioned why the town would want to deplete the grand list by two other homes if Mr. McCormack intends to buy them when he could purchase an alternate piece of property that does not have a building on it, build a new church and have a tax-free status.
Ed Walerzak, former owner with the life use of the property at 179 Elm Street, spoke against this application. In his opinion, a church and school do not belong on a highway that has five lanes with six proposed in the near future. Mr. Walerzak stated none of the codes are in compliance with Enfield's zoning codes where the applicant wants to locate a school and a church. Alarms are antiquated and schools and churches are required to have electric and battery powered fire alarms. There is no backup for electricity in the cellar. The windows are blocked. There is no access to handicapped and it would be almost impossible to put in a handicapped entrance because you are going into a cellar.
Mr. Walerzak stated there is a stairway going upstairs and there is an old furnace approximately fifty years old. If the furnace malfunctioned, there would be no access for anyone to leave. Regarding parking, Mr. Walerzak stated a previous doctor's office use ended up with patients parking on his lawn. He did not feel that parking on the street in this area was safe. Mr. Walerzak also discussed the previous uses and the problems with snow storage.
Mr. Walerzak stated this is a neighborhood with a lot of pedestrian activity. It is a quiet neighborhood and most of the children walk to school. If there are cars on the street, they would be a detriment to the people that walk.
Mr. Walerzak also questioned the tax status for this property. Chairman DiPace stated this Commission cannot consider the tax status of a property and their concerns relate to zoning requirements.
Mr. MacCormack pointed out that the only zone where a church is allowed is in a residential zone unless an applicant chooses a commercial zone and attempts a rezoning or a variance. Secondly, almost every single church and school in Enfield is located on a major road or highway. The fact that the speaker was against a church or school on a main road would have to negate the town's own decision to locate all their churches and schools on main roads.
Mr. MacCormack stated the proposed new start-up church now has only his wife, himself and his two children as members. It is a conservative Baptist church which is known to grow very slowly. They are similar to the First Baptist Church on the north side of town if not more conservative. It will be difficult to bring in a lot of members because they are not charismatic and they have very strict standards with dress codes. They are not proposing a large congregation during the first few years of beginning this church. Their main goal is to occupy the property, get the church started with five to fifteen members during the first three years, get some cash flow, purchase the property, and begin the school. At that time, they would have the Commission set limits as to how large they can grow. Once they get enough members and cash flow, their intent is to reapply to the Commission with a new site plan with appropriate parking and traffic circulation. If necessary to meet approvals, they will purchase abutting properties and make this a good use for the town. Chairman DiPace stated the Enfield Little League is still trying to obtain a permit for their concession stand. He asked that Mr. Giner look into this. Mr. Giner stated the Enfield Little League needs to talk to John Kazmarski, the Director of Public Works. He will call and find out the status of this application.
Mr. MacCormack stated regarding the worries about the furnace, the basement will not be used for any type of school functions. This building has had a chiropractor's office and if that basement was such a hazardous area, it is strange to him that the Commission, the Fire Marshal or the town code officials would allow a doctor's office. Mr. MacCormack stated there is an adequate access walk-out basement door which goes into the main lobby and reception area. If and when they purchase the building and want to use the basement for any of the uses, they plan to add an additional access way out of the basement and close the front driveway going on to Elm Street. They will do their best to limit any parking on the street. They will expand parking by buying additional properties and screen the area appropriately to satisfy the neighbors. He will do his best so that this church is a blessing to the community with programs to help young people and the needy.
Commissioner Egan asked if the proposed church is a 501C3 tax exempt organization in conformance to the Internal Revenue Service. Mr. MacCormack stated they are and they have a federal tax identification number and their application is in process. They will, within the next twelve months, receive the appropriate documentation from the federal government.
Commissioner Egan asked if the activities will be open to other than church members. Will the school be open to the public for fees?
Mr. MacCormack stated the school will begin with five year olds and will be open to other churches of like faith that do not have a Christian school and they will limit enrollment to a small group who agree with their strict standards. He does not see the church or the school growing to great numbers for a long period of time.
Commissioner Egan stated the information submitted shows occupancy numbers. He stated what Mr. MacCormack has submitted for the Commission's approval shows the potential occupancy of 92 people. Based upon that, Commissioner Egan stated that will require 23 to 26 parking spaces. He also noted the need for a site plan. Mr. MacCormack stated he will revise that or bring a letter to the Commission because he thought that was addressed in the ART meeting. The Building Inspector told him each classroom could contain only so many students per the square footage. Mr. MacCormack stated they will not exceed the maximum number. Also, the basement and the upper level will not be used simultaneously for the school.
Commissioner Egan suggested Mr. MacCormack revise his plans and provide the Commission with exactly what he is going to do so that the Commission knows what they are acting on. Commissioner Egan also requested a site plan.
Mr. MacCormack stated they are not proposing any modifications at this time to the site plan. If ten people in the church and three students are allowed, they will begin with that. At the ART, he was not told that he needed to submit a revised drawing with an explanation. He will do so now.
Commissioner Duren stated the Commission asked at the last meeting that Mr. MacCormack meet with Mr. Giner to go over this to provide the Commission with more accurate information. Commissioner Duren also cited the recent memo from the Fire Marshal. Water Pollution Control also has a problem with grease traps.
Mr. MacCormack requested that the application be approved with conditions and he will do his best to comply with any conditions to get the church started. He will meet with Mr. Giner and the Fire Marshal and revise the drawings. He will address the parsonage stove currently at this location which can be removed. He wrote a letter to WPC stating that they do not plan on cooking at this location. Students will bring their lunches and if there is a church function, it will consist of a pot luck dinner.
Mr. Giner set up a meeting with Mr. MacCormack for this Wednesday, October 27, at 10:00 a.m. pending the Fire Marshal's availability, to discuss this application.
Mr. Giner stated within Mr. MacCormack's current lease, he cannot make any modifications to the building or the site. This means he is limited as to the number of parking spaces he can provide. There is a need to determine the exact occupancy the Fire Marshal will allow for both uses being proposed.
Commissioner Duren read from the recent memo from the Fire Marshal stating that the current use of the building as an office space does not comply with the code.
Commissioner Hickey requested that the applicant pay particular attention to Article 9.2 of the zoning regulations because that is the basis on which the Commission will be ruling.
Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the public a second time.
Salvatore Presto stated Mr. MacCormack made comparisons to other churches and schools being on main roads which is true but they are not right on the road like this parcel of property. They are all set back and they have sidewalks on the front and side with driveways and roads that access the back of those properties for fire trucks in case of an emergency. This would not be feasible at this piece of property.
Mr. Presto stated he heard tax free status mentioned. He asked how will this individual located on this piece of property support himself. He will run a business in addition to the church. Mr. Presto asked if this is still legal on a tax-free piece of property to conduct another business such as real estate or counseling. He doesn't see how an individual on this piece of property with 4 people could sustain his family. Mr. Presto stated Mr. MacCormack implies that his parishioners are different from other parishioners. He reminded Mr. MacCormack that every home in Enfield is a place of worship and people who worship in their homes do not need tax free status and they don't need any help from the town. People have the freedom to have as many people as they wish come into their home and pray. They don't have to come to the Town Hall and ask permission. Mr. Presto doesn't understand the motivation. If you are looking for parishioners, you can go out and preach and you have the right of free speech. You don't need to ask the town for assistance before you have a following.
Edwin Walerzak rebutted Mr. MacCormack regarding parking at schools. He drove a school bus for seven years and they insisted that there be no cars parked anywhere near a school for student safety. Mr. Walerzak identified various schools in Enfield which have no parking on either side of the driveways. Mr. Walerzak stated Mr. MacCormack has no parking at this building. The requirements are 9' for every car and 15' for a handicap space. He further discussed the property which has the original steps. He asked that the Commission check on some of these items prior to approving this application.
Chairman DiPace continued this public hearing to November 4, 2005.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - NEW
a. PH#2471 - Application for a special use permit approval of a fourth apartment as an efficiency apartment at 31 South Street, zoned R-33, Map 24, Lot 125, Gian and Lucy Improta, Applicants/Owners. (Must close by November 25)
Gian and Lucy Improta, 5 Sanford Avenue, appeared before the Commission regarding this application.
Lucy Improta stated this house at 31 South Street was purchased as a four-family home in 1999. It is listed as a four-family at the Town Hall and was always used as a four-family. They did not know until earlier this year that it was never approved as a four-family. The apartment has been vacant for a while and they went through and did everything the Fire Marshal requested to bring the apartment up to code.
Mr. Giner stated this came to the town's attention by Mr. Metcalf. There were some code violations noted and the question was raised if there were any records that the home had ever been a four-family. The records showed the home being a three-family and it appeared it had been converted to a four-family prior to purchase by the Improta's and without the proper permits. Mr. Giner stated the Fire Marshal submitted a letter stating he inspected the property in July and all code items had been addressed and brought up to code.
Mr. Giner stated there is no site plan for this property. There is a layout presented to the Commission from the aerial flyover which shows the buildings and the parking. Mr. Giner stated if the Commission feels this is a four-family, the request is for an approval so that there is a record of it.
Ms. Improta stated there is a four-car garage in the back of the property and the house itself is a four-family. There is one apartment off to the driveway side, two in the middle and one apartment up and down.
Commissioner Egan stated looking at the size of the lot, he notices there is an error on the deed on the east bound line. It states land now or formally of the Town of Enfield is 441.65' and the plan shows it at 141.65'. Ms. Improta stated there is a parking lot located next door that is owned by the Town. Commissioner Egan stated the deed should be corrected to show 141.65' rather than 441.65'.
Mr. Giner stated he looked up the Assessor's records and it is pretty much a multi-family neighborhood. While it is not technically in the Thompsonville Village area, it is on the fringes of it. Regarding the density of sixteen units per acre, 55 and 59 South Street both have two-family homes on smaller lots. Mr. Giner stated this apartment has existed without detection for four to five years, and possibly longer, and has not been causing any problems. The Fire Marshal is satisfied that it meets the code.
Chairman DiPace asked for input from the public. No one spoke in favor or against this public hearing.
Mr. Giner noted the need for two motions. One would be to waive the site plan submission requirements and the second would be to approve the fourth apartment.
Chairman DiPace closed this public hearing.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to waive the site plan submission requirements in Section 9.10.2 of the regulations for PH#2471. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote with Alternates Sarno and McGill voting.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve PH #2471 - Application for a Special Use Permit approval of a fourth apartment as an efficiency apartment at 31 South Street, zoned R-33, map 24, lot 125, Gian & Lucy Improta Applicants/Owners. This approval is subject to conformance with the submitted floor plan and the following conditions:
Conditions to be Met Prior to Signing of Plans and Certificate:
1. 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:
2. Two sets of paper plans, with any required revisions incorporated on the sheets, shall be submitted to the Planning and Department for signature of the Commission.
3. Final Fire Marshall approval shall be obtained.
4. This approval will become effective upon the filing of a Special Use Zoning 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 :
5. Street address shall be determined to the 911 coordinator's satisfaction prior to the issuance of the certificate of zoning compliance.
General Conditions:
6. This approval is for the specific use and structures identified in the application. Any change in the nature of the use or the structures will require new approvals from the Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission.
7. 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.
8. Any necessary permits for the construction or operation of the use as approved must be obtained by October 21, 2005 or this approval shall be rendered null and void, unless an extension is granted by the Commission.
The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote with Alternates Sarno and McGill voting.
b. PH#2472 - Application for a special use permit to keep a commercial vehicle on property at 2 Cornfield Lane, zoned R-44, Map 86, Lot 301, Earl Reynolds, Applicant/Owner. (Must close by November 25)
Earl Reynolds appeared before the Commission regarding this application. Mr. Giner confirmed that the commercial vehicle meets the ordinance requirements. He presented some photographs of the vehicle to the Commission.
Mr. Reynolds stated as the photos will show, the vehicle does not obstruct anyone's vision. He also presented letters from his neighbors stating they are not opposed to this vehicle.
Commissioner Duren stated there appears to be another vehicle, a van, in the street. Mr. Reynolds stated that is a passenger vehicle and not a commercial one.
Chairman DiPace opened this hearing to the audience. No one spoke in favor or against this application. Chairman DiPace closed this public hearing.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hickey, to approve PH #2472 - Application for a special use permit to keep a commercial vehicle on property at 2 Cornfield Lane, Zoned R-44, Map 86, Lot 301, Earl Reynolds, Applicant/Owner. This approval is subject to conformance with the application record and the following conditions:
Conditions to be Met Prior to Signing of Certificate:
1. 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:
2. This approval will become effective upon the filing of a Special Use 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.
General Conditions:
3. This approval is for a 1997 GMC 6500 truck with a gross vehicle weight of 29,975, with a total length of 29 feet with a 20-foot box, a wheelbase of 230" and a height of 10 feet 10 inches. Any changes to the vehicle specifications as approved shall require a new approval by the Commission.
4. The vehicle shall be parked as indicated on the application record.
5. All landscaping and screening for the vehicle shall be maintained as indicated on the application record.
6. No hazardous materials or waste may be stored in the commercial vehicle.
7. No maintenance or repair of the commercial vehicle shall be allowed on the residential property.
8. There shall be no loading or unloading of commercial vehicles between the hours of 9 p.m. and 7 a.m.
9. The operation of this commercial vehicle shall comply with the Town's Noise Ordinance.
10. This permit is valid only as long as the commercial vehicle is owned or operated by the permanent resident of the property on which it is to be parked.
11. The use describe herein shall commence by October 21, 2005 or this approval shall be rendered null and void, unless an extension is granted by the Commission.
12. By acceptance of this permit and conditions, the applicant, land owners, and their successors and assigns 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.
The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote with Alternates Sarno and McGill voting.
c. PH#2473 - Application to petition for a zoning text change regarding the Business Professional Zoning District, Michael J. Trazinski, Pastor, Open Gate Ministries, Applicant. (Must close by November 25)
Gregory McCracken, an attorney from Robinson & Cole, 280 Trumbull Street, Hartford, appeared before the Commission regarding this application. He presented an affidavit confirming a sign was posted on Hazard Avenue regarding this hearing and the next hearing. Mr. Giner stated that would be applicable to the next hearing.
Attorney McCracken stated they are seeking a change to Table 5.20 to allow places of worship in the Business Professional District by special use. Currently, they are not permitted as of right or by special use. The current situation is that Business Professional is built out pretty well with a lot of professional space. Attorney McCracken understands that some of the Business Professional buildings in the office parks have vacant space. There is an opportunity to allow places of worship in that district where they are not currently allowed. Attorney McCracken stated places of worship can be a very good complementary use because of their traffic and hours of operation. Church activities are usually on Sunday morning or certain evenings and long after the business facilities close.
Attorney McCracken submitted an APA article that lists the whole idea of office buildings and churches sharing parking as making a lot of sense.
Attorney McCracken stated they are requesting the church use by special use permit so that any considerations regarding the affect on neighboring properties or the compatibility with the district could be addressed at the public hearing. He feels this makes a lot of sense for the Town and they are offering it as a zoning text amendment.
Attorney McCracken added Mr. Trazinski, the Pastor of Open Gate Ministries, is present along with Denis LeTourneau, the owner of the property.
In response to questions, Attorney McCracken stated the definition of a place of worship is the definition as it currently exists in the zoning regulations. Schools are allowed as an accessory use in the zoning regulations in a footnote below table 5.20. Mr. Giner read this section.
Chairman DiPace questioned how to revise the ordinance text to address the footnote. Attorney McCracken stated they could amend the footnote in conjunction with table 5.20 to say places of worship just means the place of worship itself and eliminate the residential uses or school uses.
Mr. Giner questioned if there is a need to do so because having this use by special use permit allows the Commission to address specific concerns about accessory uses normally allowed. This could be addressed during the public hearing and if a residential use is deemed not appropriate, that could be a limitation on the special use permit.
Attorney McCracken stated in offering the amendment, they would have no objection to limiting the accessory uses or amending them out. They would have to slightly modify the zoning text to truncate the definition of place of worship just for this BP District. Mr. Giner suggested an exception listed at the end would be the best way to resolve this.
Commissioner Egan questioned if this would create a problem for the Commission in the future with the Religious Land Use and Institutional Persons Act. There are a lot of open areas and gray areas that have not yet reached the Supreme Court. There are a lot of interpretations and if it is stated as a place of worship within the regulations and the Commission denies a religious school, this could trigger some question of that Act and put the Commission in a legal situation. Commissioner Egan stated under the special permit provisions, the Commission can control the school situation. If there are certain overriding circumstances that could be challenged, the whole Act could be challenged.
Attorney McCracken stated that Act really applies to situations where you treat a religious use less favorably than other similar uses. An example is if you had a district that allowed private clubs and you said no churches. That type of disparate treatment of a religious use could become a concern under the Act cited by Commissioner Egan. Attorney McCracken stated removing the school use or the residential part of this use in a BP District he does not see as implicating that.
Attorney McCracken stated they have no objection to limiting the definition. As it stands, he felt it would benefit the BP District. If the Commission is concerned about the external components of something more than a place of worship like a rectory or a school, he felt the Commission would not create a problem under the religious act by allowing places of worship without a school or residence as an accessory use.
Mr. Giner questioned how the Commission would like to address this.
Chairman DiPace suggested the amendment stand as it is and concerns be addressed during the special use permit process. If there are problems in the future, the Commission can always make an additional change to the text.
Chairman DiPace asked for input from the public. No one spoke in favor or against this application. Chairman DiPace closed this public hearing.
Mr. Giner explained when the Commission approves a text change, it has to have an effective date. It has to be filed with the Town Clerk and be published in the newspaper. He recommended an effective date of at least October 29, 2004. Chairman DiPace asked that the effective date be November 1, 2004.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve the application for a zone text change regarding the BP zoning district as heard in Public Hearing #2473 with an effective date of Monday, November 1, 2004.
The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote with Alternates Sarno and McGill voting.
d. PH#2474 - Application for a special use permit for operation of a place of worship in an existing building in the Business Professional (BP) District. It is a change of use of existing floor space at 139 Hazard Avenue, Building 4, zoned BP, Map 65, Lot 76, Michael J. Trazinski, Pastor, Open Gate Ministries, Applicant/Denis LeTourneau, Owner. (Must close by November 25)
Attorney Greg McCracken, Robinson & Cole, 280 Trumbull Street, Hartford appeared before the Commission along with Michael Trazinski, Pastor, Open Gate Ministries. The owner, Denis LeTourneau was also present.
Attorney McCracken submitted with the application a letter from Mr. LeTourneau consenting to this application. He also submitted an affidavit to Mr. Giner stating that the necessary sign had been posted.
Attorney McCracken reviewed the requirements for the special use permit for this application. He added they did submit the best plans available of the grounds around Building #4, which is where this use will be, as well as the interior of the building. This will be a modification of use but not a modification of the site or any of the exterior of the building. The only contemplated modification at this time will be the removal of an interior wall to make one room out of two that will be used for the sanctuary within this existing building. From the exterior, you will not notice a difference. There will not be any grading, site work or exterior construction.
Attorney McCracken believes the drawings submitted fairly portray the site and the conditions around the building and what is planned for the interior. He requested a waiver of any of the non-compliance site plan requirements.
Attorney McCracken stated regarding the site access requirements in Section 5.5.1 of the zoning regulations, these were satisfied when the complex was built. Section 5.50.2 addresses accessory parking in adjacent zones. They do not plan to do that and that section would not be applicable. 5.50.3 - buffer yard and setback requirements - is also not implicated because these would have been met when the complex was built originally and they are not looking to change anything.
Attorney McCracken stated under Section 9.10.1c., they are going to seek a waiver of that requirement to the extent that the plans they submitted don't meet every one of the requirements.
Section 9.20.1.b is a requirement for a public hearing and Attorney McCracken noted the hearing is now being held.
Attorney McCracken stated the applications for the special permit have been satisfied. Mr. Trazinski signed the application. Mr. LeTourneau submitted a letter saying he consented to this application being made as the owner of this building. They paid the prescribed fee when they submitted the application on September 14, 1004. They sought a waiver of the site plan application requirements because this is a church of modest means. Attorney McCracken summarized they meet all the application requirements. Beyond that, the Commission has not imposed any additional costs in terms of hiring professionals.
Attorney McCracken stated most of the action on this application is in Section 9.20.2 in which the Commission looks to certain requirements that this use should meet in this business park to comply with the zoning requirements. One of them is taking into consideration public health, safety and general welfare and the comforts and convenience of the public in general and the residents of the neighborhood.
Attorney McCracken presented pictures showing the site and buildings. This is a business professional park that was built approximately 1990. It is on a large lot that has access to Hazard Avenue, a fairly lengthy driveway and about four buildings clustered around a green with parking around them. Around the parking, there is a pretty substantial moat area that acts as a buffer and behind that is a heavily wooded area. There really are no neighboring uses close to Building #4 or the complex in general. Previously on this site, a day care center operated which, unlike the church, would coincide with peak traffic demands and would be in use during regular business hours. It probably had more of an effect on the neighborhood and other uses in the complex than a church would.
Attorney McCracken stated they have signalized access to Hazard Avenue, a significant amount of parking, wide buffers around this and most of the time that the church would be having activities, there won't be much else going on. Attorney McCracken does not anticipate a lot of impacts on either the town in general or this neighborhood in particular from the activities that are contemplated. The church proposes to meet on Sunday mornings and possibly Wednesday and Friday nights. The congregation would not arrive and leave all at once but people would trickle in and out and traffic will be more dispersed. The membership is approximately 75 people. The lease is short-term, three years, in the hope that this church will outgrow its space and end up having to find a new location. During the time the church is located in this park, it won't heavily modify the business park and will be an unobtrusive neighbor. They feel this use is a good fit and it does make sense. In terms of public health, safety and general welfare as well as convenience and comfort, Attorney McCracken stated there really aren't any issues of concern.
Attorney McCracken stated another criteria was the extent to which the proposed use complies with specific criteria and standards assigned to a special use permit as stated in Article 5. Attorney McCracken stated he reviewed those earlier in Section 5.50 and there really aren't any that specifically deal with a place of worship in this district. Another requirement was that all proposed structures, equipment and materials should be readily accessible for fire and police. Attorney McCracken did not feel there are any issues in this building. It was previously approved for a public use that involved children and the fire access, handicap access and other emergency accesses are all in place and nothing will change. Attorney McCracken stated if the Commission has any concerns, Mr. LeTourneau can address them.
Attorney McCracken stated the most significant factor is that the proposed use be of such location, size and character that it is in harmony with the district and not detrimental to its neighbors. Attorney McCracken stated for the reasons previously stated, he believes that is the case. This should be a pretty complementary use to the office uses and won't be obtrusive or create parking or traffic problems. Due to the constraints of the size of the leased space, it is unlikely to be a very long-term use. The church hopes to grow and eventually outgrow this space and move to another location.
Attorney McCracken stated there is a requirement in Section IV that if it is adjacent to a residential district, it has to meet certain requirements. It is not adjacent to a residential district so there are no issues there. The nearest uses are quite some distance from this park.
Attorney McCracken confirmed they posted the sign as required for this public hearing. All the other requirements have been met. The biggest concern in everyone's mind is probably off-street parking and loading. Attorney McCracken stated the regulations require one parking space for every four seats for a place of worship. At this point, the church contemplates eighty seats. There are forty parking spaces available with this space and, by lease arrangement, another thirty spaces can be made available. This would be a total of 70 that they could use which would be sufficient parking for 280 seats. They are only contemplating eighty seats and would have more than enough parking. The parking is all off street, accessible at a light and all set back a pretty good distance from Hazard Avenue. Loading space is readily accessible near the front door either at existing places or at curbs. Most of the loading will occur when the church is not in operation so Attorney McCracken does not see any conflict between loading and parking issues and traffic concerns. The loading area is well removed from Hazard Avenue. Attorney McCracken summarized that they have complied with Section 10.10 of the ordinance.
Attorney McCracken distributed copies of a compliance statement which outlines the requirements of the ordinance and how they believe they meet them.
Commissioner Duren noted the memo from John Cabbibo which mentions a 1,000 square foot addition on the plans. Otherwise, Mr. Cabbibo had no engineering concerns. Attorney McCracken stated there are no intentions of expanding. Mr. LeTourneau confirmed there was a 1,000 square foot addition approved for Building #6 but it was never built.
Mr. Trazinski stated he was before the Commission in April looking at another piece of property for the church. One of their intentions is to go after kids on drugs or alcohol and give them an alternative lifestyle. One of their ministries is to see young people come into a place of productivity and wholeness. Mr. Trazinski stated he feels they are meant to be in Enfield and he would like to be given an opportunity for this church. He previously had young people appear before the Commission and if they were able to come tonight, they would have given testimony of how they have been helped.
Mr. Trazinski stated Sunday morning will be their peak time from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon. On Wednesday or Friday night, they will also be meeting with teaching time and programs. They do not foresee problems with other neighbors. Traffic is not a problem. They are looking to do the Lord's work here in Enfield. They have been established in Granby for six years and they are a 501C3 as well.
Mr. Giner stated this application is being handled differently to accommodate the church's attorney. The Commission did approve the text change and it is technically not effective yet. The Commission needs to make a decision at the next meeting when the actual regulations for this use are in effect.
Chairman DiPace asked for public input. No one spoke in favor or against this application. Chairman DiPace closed this public hearing.
Chairman DiPace tabled action on this application until the November 4, 2004 meeting. In the interim, Mr. Giner will draft possible conditions of approval for the Commission's consideration.
OLD BUSINESS
a. PH#2404/SPR#1240 - Request by American Inn for a one-year extension of Special Use Permit (approved December 18, 2003) to allow a Residential retirement community with assisted living facilities and congregate care living on property located easterly of North Maple Street just south on the Connecticut/Massachusetts border and along a private street known as Mayfield Drive, zoned R-44, Map 78, Lot 30, and Assessor's Map 79, Lot 95, The American Inn, Owner/Applicant.
Commissioner Duren stated this application was approved some time ago. He questioned if there are any construction concerns or any changes that should be updated. Mr. Giner stated there is an issue with the State of Connecticut regarding the pine barren moth and they are still in discussions with the State.
Mr. Galanek appeared before the Commission requesting a one-year extension of this application by American Inn. Mr. Giner stated there was a public hearing with a reapplication of this application last December.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to extend approval of PH#2404/SPR#1240 for one year. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote with Alternates Sarno and McGill voting.
NEW BUSINESS
a. SPR#1290 - Application to open a real estate office at 287 Hazard Avenue, zoned HVBL, Map 83, Lot 60, Duncan Campbell, Applicant/American Wholesale Inc., Owner.
The Commission requested that Mr. Giner handle this application administratively and that the applicant follow the guidelines regarding the sign. Some discussion followed on how businesses are allowed to open prior to filing an application. Mr. Giner stated the applicant may have thought the receipt of application by the Commission constituted an approval. He will verify this.
b. SPR#1291 - Application to construct a 2,100 square foot building addition at 6 Niblick Road, zoned IP, Map 55, Lot 89, AOA Pro Applicant/Owner.
Dante Boffi of Danta Boffi Architecture LLC, 20 West Main Street, Avon, appeared before the Commission regarding this application. He is representing Allessee Orthodontic, a Wisconsin based company. This is currently an industrial/office building on Niblick Road. The building is currently 4,500 square feet and they plan to add a 2,100 square foot addition. Most of the addition is dedicated to additional closed door offices. There's also a small extension of the production space and men's and ladies' restrooms.
Mr. Boffi addressed the exterior of the building. Presently there is an exterior insulation known as a drive-it band in the front of the building. That will be removed and the new steel framed structure will have a new drive-it system over it with more curb appeal than the old one. It is a metal stud building with a flat roof to match the existing. There will be no change of use. There was site work done last year in preparation to accommodate the addition. Additional parking was added and they have received a letter from Engineering stating there are no outstanding issues with this property.
Mr. Boffi stated the color of the addition is a taupe base (a grayish tan) with a clay trim (grayish tan but a little more on the gray side). The store front systems will be anodized aluminum (silver) and there's a small glass block insert on one of the exterior offices. The existing block will be painted to match this addition.
Mr. Giner confirmed this application does not require Wetlands approval. There is a letter from Neil Angus regarding this.
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve the expansion of 6 Niblick Road as heard in SPR#1291 - application to construct a 2,100 sq. ft. building addition at 6 Niblick Road, Zoned IP, Map 55, Lot 89, AOA Pro Applicant/Owner. This approval is subject to conformance with the referenced plans, as may be required to be modified by this motion, and the following conditions:
Referenced Plans:
"Site Plan Prepared for Allesee Orthodontic Appliances, Enfield, Connecticut" Sheet 1 of 1, Scale: 1" = 20', by William R. Palmberg & Son LLC, dated 09-20-04.
"AOA/PRO Office Expansion, 6 NIBLICK Road-- Enfield, CT" Sheets A-1 and A-3 showing elevations and floor plan, by Dante J. Boffi Architecture, LLC, Stamped "Received" by the Planning Department on September 24, 2004.
Conditions to be Met Prior to Signing of Plans:
1. All plans submitted for signature shall require the seal and live signature of the appropriate professional(s) responsible for the preparation of the plans.
2. The SPR file number "SPR 1291" shall be displayed prominently on the final plan sheets either in the title block or in the area around it.
3. 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 Zoning Permit:
4. 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.
5. A pre-construction meeting between the applicant, site contractors, project engineer and Town Staff shall be held unless waived by the Director of Planning..
6. If necessary, an Erosion and Sediment Control Bond shall be submitted in the form of a passbook, pledged to the Town, in an amount to be determined by the Town Engineer.
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 submit to the Planning Director final as-built 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. The construction of facilities as approved must be commenced by October 21, 2005 or this approval shall be rendered null and void, unless an extension is granted by the Commission.
12. 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.
The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote with Alternates Sarno and McGill voting.
BOND RELEASES
a. SPR#1203 - Request for release of landscape bond in the amount of $1,470 for 89 High Street (Diana's Bakery loading facility).
Commissioner Duren made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to approve the release of the landscape bond in the amount of $1,470 for SPR#1203, 89 High Street (Diana's Bakery - loading facility). Reference is made to a memo from Neil Angus dated October 6, 2004. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote with Alternates Sarno and McGill voting.
b. PH#2151/2158 - Request for release of landscape bond in the amount of $6,900.
Commissioner Duren stated thirty-two street trees were planted with this application and the Commission required more than that. Mr. Giner stated it was his understanding that this applicant plans to resubmit another application. He stated the intent is to have the developer replace the bond and come back next year for release of this bond when the requirements have been met.
The Commission tabled action on this bond release.
OTHER BUSINESS
Chairman DiPace stated the Enfield Little League is still trying to obtain a permit for their concession stand. He asked that Mr. Giner look into this. Mr. Giner stated the Enfield Little League representatives need to talk to John Kazmarski, the Director of Public Works. He will call and find out the status of this application.
a. Section 8-24 Referral - For amendment to lease of Town of Enfield and Tanguay Magill Post 80 American Legion, Inc., Parcel A and Parcel lB, "The Dingle" to change the term of the lease from five years to ten years.
Commissioner Hickey made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Krebs, to recommend approval to the Town Council of the Section 8-24 Referral for amendment to the lease of the Town of Enfield and the Tanguay Magill Post 80 American Legion, Inc., Parcel A and Parcel 1B, "The Dingle," to change the term of the lease from five years to ten years. The motion was approved by a 7 - 0 - 0 vote.
b. Applications to be received
The following applications were received by the Commission:
PH#2478 - Application for a resubdivision of parcel to provide separate lot for Red Robin Restaurant at 25 Hazard Avenue, zoned BR, Map 45, Lot 8, SEA Enfield Commons LLC, applicant/owner.
A public hearing will be scheduled for November 4, 2004.
PH#2479 - Application for a resubdivision for proposed three-lot residential subdivision. Conditional approval requested for bonding purposes on west side of Riverview Street, 1,000 +/- north of intersection of Bridge Lane, zoned R-33, Map 19, Lot 10, Margaret R. Pappas, Applicant/Owner.
A public hearing will be scheduled for November 18, 2004.
PH#2480 - Application for a Special Use Permit to expand a nonconforming use (dining room addition), zoned BL, Map 64, Lot 64, Richard Ouellette, Applicant/Owner.
It was the consensus of the Commission to allow Mr. Giner to handle this application administratively.
PH#2481 - Application for zone change - R-44 to R-88 - properties in Laughlin Road area (see map), Town of Enfield, Applicant.
A public hearing will be scheduled for December 2, 2004.
PH#2482 - Application for a Zone change - I-1 to R-33 at 59 and 69 West Street, Town of Enfield, Applicant.
A public hearing will be scheduled for December 2, 2004.
PH#2483 - Application for a Special Use Permit for a martial arts school at 935 Enfield Street, zoned R-33, Map 26, Lot 79, David Ciemniewski, Applicant/Plus Life, Inc.
A public hearing will be scheduled for the second meeting in November or the first meeting in December.
SPR#1292 - Application for replacement of shrubs and plants at 33 Palomba Drive, zoned BR, Map 57, Lot 343, Manchem, LLC, Applicant/Owner.
SPR#1293 - Converting screened porch to exterior room at Parkway Pavilion, zoned HR-33, Map 20, Lot 129, Parkway Pavilion, Applicant/Ventas Healthcare Properties, Owner.
Mr. Giner informed the Commission of items he has recently approved administratively. Bernie's is not doing any change to their site work but plan to park their trucks in an alternate location. Mr. Giner stated this is an improvement to the traffic flow.
Mr. Giner brought up an emergency access or partially paved strip behind Mark Twain that people use for parking. The request is to bump out the area a little and repave it so that people can back out. It was the consensus of the Commission to allow Mr. Giner to approve administratively the request of Mark Twain to do repaving to their emergency access area.
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Krebs made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hickey, to adjourn. Following a unanimous vote, the Commission adjourned at 9:27 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
______________________
Charles Duren, Secretary
jmr Enfield Planning and Zoning Commission
|
|