Meriden planner memo on mosque

MEMORANDUM

DATE: February 7, 2019 TO:

Planning Commission

FROM: Renata Bertotti, Director of Planning, Development and Enforcement RE:

999 Research Parkway, M-4 Zone Special Permit Application of Omar Islamic Center, Inc. for a Change of Use From Office (Vacant) to Place of Worship

STAFF REPORT:

Last Updated February 5, 2019

APPLICATION NO:

TPL 19-06

APPLICANT:

Omar Islamic Center, Inc.

PROPERY OWNER:

Research Parkway Associates, LLC

PROPERTY ADDRESS:

999 Research Parkway

HEARING DATE:

February 13, 2019

SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant, Omar Islamic Center, Inc. (the “Applicant”) is proposing to occupy the existing 31,000+/- sq. ft. industrial office building which has been vacant for a significant period at 999 Research Parwkay. The Applicant’s intended use of the Property is to establish a house of worship on the first floor of the building and, in the future, utilize the second floor for office rental to professional services and organizations.

The 3.56-acre site is located on the west side of Research Parkway in an M-4 zone. The existing twostory building was constructed in 1991 and has been unoccupied for last ten+ years according to the Applicant. There is an existing 110-space parking lot currently in good condition.

As noted, the Applicant would like to establish a place of worship which would include regular midday prayer services, Saturday community dinners on a monthly or weekly basis, Friday afternoon prayer services, and Sunday school at the subject site. The Applicant states that its current congregation consists of 25 to 30 families and could potentially increase to an anticipated maximum of 60 families.

Aside from restriping the parking lot to include more handicap accessible spaces, no changes are proposed to the site or building’s elevation.

Planning Commission Page 2 February 7, 2019

Planning Commission Page 3 February 7, 2019 REVIEW CRITERIA In reviewing this application, the Planning Commission must consider the following criteria: 1. Places of worship, schools, playgrounds, and public buildings are a special exception use allowed in the C-1 zone. The Planning Commission is required to review the proposed change of use under the language of Section 213-32B(2)(a) of the City of Meriden’s Zoning Regulations: Uses permitted [in an M-4 zone] subject to issuance of a special permit by the Planning Commission. (a)

Any use permitted in the Central Commercial C-1 District, not mentioned in § 213-32B(1) above, provided that the City Council also approves and that the Planning Commission shall find other uses will not tend to depreciate the value of the property in the neighborhood or be otherwise detrimental or aggravating to the neighborhood or its residents or alter the neighborhood's essential characteristics.

Zoning Regs., p. 213:69 2. The Planning Commission must further consider the general criteria listed under Section 213-73B of the City of Meriden’s Zoning Regulations. That section provides: Special exception objectives. In evaluating a special exception application, the Zoning Board of Appeals [in this instance the Planning Commission as prescribed under the Section 213-32B(2)(a)] shall take into consideration the health, safety and welfare of the public, in general, and the immediate neighborhood, in particular, and may prescribe reasonable conditions and safeguards to ensure the accomplishment of the following objectives:

(1)

Harmony with development. That the proposed use is of such location, size and character that, in general, it will be in harmony with the appropriate and orderly development of the district in which it is proposed to be situated, will not tend to depreciate the value of property in the neighborhood, and will not be detrimental to the orderly development of adjacent properties in accordance with the zoning classification of such properties.

Planning Commission Page 4 February 7, 2019

(2)

Site plan objectives. That the site plan submitted as part of the special exception application will accomplish the site plan objectives described in § 213-72, particularly in that it will not create traffic or fire hazards and will not block or hamper the City circulation pattern.

(3)

Conformance to requirements. Unless otherwise specified, a special exception use shall conform to all requirements of the district in which it is located. Where two or more special exception uses apply to the same premises, the minimum requirements shall be the minimum requirements for each use as specified in this chapter or, in cases of two or more special exception uses in the same building, whichever requirements are more restrictive.

Zoning Regs., p. 213:175-6 3. Lastly, the Planning Commission must consider the “equal terms” provision of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), 42 U.S.C. §2000cc, et seq.. RLUIPA is a federal law that protects religious institutions from unduly burdensome or discriminatory land use regulations; its “equal terms” provision states that religious institutions must be treated as well as comparable secular institutions. The U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division issued A Guide to Federal Religious Land Use Protections which cites a case in which a mosque leased space in a storefront, but zoning officials denied an occupancy permit since houses of worship are forbidden in that zone. However, fraternal organizations, meeting halls, and places of assembly were all permitted as of right in the same zone. The Guide states, in part: “Because the statute on its face favors nonreligious places of assembly over religious assemblies, this example would be a violation of” the equal terms provision of RLUIPA. Institutional use and public buildings are permitted uses by right in an M-4 zone; places of worship, schools, and playgrounds are allowed under the special permit in a C-1 zone, and, by extension, offered under § 213-32 B(2)(a) in an M-4 zone. Furthermore, as denoted in Section 213-32 of the City of Meriden’s Zoning Regulations, the purpose of an M-4 district is: to allow for the creation of an integrated industrial development in which buildings, structures and facilities may be constructed and used for different and mixed uses, to include use for industrial, institutional, public, municipal, office and commercial.” Zoning Regs., p. 213:68.

Planning Commission Page 5 February 7, 2019

DISCUSSION Based on the description of the proposal provided by the Applicant and the relevant application review criteria, the staff is of the opinion that the proposed use will not negatively impact the area streets, intersections, or neighborhoods. The site is designed for relatively similar, if not higher intensity of use, and can support parking generated by the proposed place of worship. The peak hours of operation are not likely to match the peak hours of the industrial and office uses in the vicinity. The Applicant has provided documentation which will be presented to the Planning Commission during the February 13, 2019 meeting suggesting that real estate values hold steady and increase when places of worship, such as the one that is proposed here, are located nearby. Lastly, the staff believes that since there are secular uses allowed as of right in this zoning district, approving this application would be consistent with the “equal terms” provision of RLUIPA. RECOMMENDATIONS The Planning Commission should not act on this application until the approval is obtained by the City Council. Therefore, it is recommended that Application No. TPL 19-06 be tabled until the Planning Commission’s next meeting date.