Enders Island Zoning Compliance Report 1.11.2018 CONTENTS    1.  FINDING / 1  2.  BACKGROUND / 3  3.  FULL PROPERTY ASSESSMENT / 12  4.  ADDITIONAL CONTEXT / 23  APPENDIX / 25        About the Department of Planning  The Stonington Department of Planning is a Town Charter‐established agency that works under the direction of the  First  Selectman  of  the  Town  of  Stonington.  The  team  is  comprised  of  land  use  and  community  development  professionals,  that  work  to  implement  recommendations  in  the  Town’s  Plan  of  Conservation  and  Development,  review land use applications, and enforce land use regulations.   When  enforcing  zoning  regulations,  the  Department  of  Planning  works  as  an  agent  of  the  Town  of  Stonington  Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission is an independent town agency comprised of volunteers that are  electors of the community.   Jason Vincent, AICP – Director of Planning  Keith Brynes, AICP, CZET – Town Planner  Candace Palmer, CZEO – Zoning & Wetland Official  Gayle Phoenix, CZET – Land Use Application Facilitator   Cheryl Sadowski – Land Use Application Facilitator      CONTENTS  1. FINDINGS  NO ZONING ENFORCEMENT ACTION REQUIRED.   A. B. C. D. The property is in compliance with the Town of Stonington Zoning Regulations as a preexisting,  legal nonconforming use: “place of worship (assembly) / retreat facility with off‐street parking.”   The property is in compliance with the Town of Stonington Zoning Regulations as a preexisting,  legal  nonconforming  bulk,  for  the  following  elements:  RC‐120  Non‐infringement  Area;  RC‐120  Gross Floor Area; RC‐120 Required Yards, for existing structures.   Use of the property could be changed via a special use permit process ‐ Zoning Regulation Section  3.1.3.7 Non‐profit associations… on a minimum of five (5) acres  The Federal Religious and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) limits local government’s ability  to determine what is a religious practice.   RC‐120 DISTRICT USES  The use of the property is a preexisting, legal nonconforming use: “place of worship (assembly) / retreat  facility”. Any activities that relate to this core use are accessory to the core use. The retreat facility has  lodging,  dining,  events,  meetings,  offices,  private  spaces,  off‐street  parking,  assembly  spaces,  conferences,  passive  recreation,  gift  shop,  public  access,  and  active  recreation,  all  of  which  are  in  compliance with the history of the use of Enders Island, as documented through many sources. Because  the use of the property pre‐dated the application of the RC‐120 Zoning District, Zoning Regulation Section  3.1 does not apply to the current use. However, if Section 3.1 were to be applied, all of the above‐listed  activities could seek approval via a Special Use Permit (ZR 3.1.3.7).  RC‐120 DISTRICT BULK REQUIREMENTS  YARDS   The most recent structure, the Chapel, was constructed 100’ from the property line at the time it  was approved. The property line was Mean High Water (elevation 1.7’) at that time. The new  standard is the Coastal Jurisdiction Line (CJL; elevation 2’), which took effect on October 1, 2012.  This change may have created a preexisting, legal nonconformity, but that can only be ascertained  with an as‐built survey. Such a determination is not necessary nor warranted at this time.   All structures are either legally nonconforming or conforming. This nuance has not been addressed  as there is no proposal to change these structures, nor is there a violation of the regulations.  GROSS FLOOR AREA   The property is allowed a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.083 per a Variance issued May 8, 2001 (ZBA01‐ 12). Town records indicate that this property is in compliance with the FAR.   There may be a discrepancy in Assessor’s Office records regarding Gross Floor Area, as the Assessors  do not utilize the zoning definition of Gross Floor Area, which excludes certain elements (e.g.,  stairway, elevators)   HEIGHT   The property received a Variance on May 8, 2001 (ZBA01‐12) which allowed the proposed chapel to  exceed the maximum height provisions of ZR 5.1.1 and ZR 7.3.5.  PAGE 1   All other structures are either legally nonconforming, or conforming, as described in the “detailed  existing structure analysis” on page 13. This nuance has not been addressed as there is no proposal  to change these structures, nor is there a violation of the regulations.   NON‐INFRINGEMENT AREA   The 100‐foot Non‐Infringement Area required in ZR 3.1.4.2 is not a requirement for this property. All  of the encroachment within this area has pre‐dated town zoning regulations. There are numerous  historic aerial photographs that depict activity up to the edges of land area, which sufficiently  document a legal pre‐existing nonconformity of this requirement.   FLOOD HAZARD  No  findings  were  made  regarding  the  Flood  Hazard  Overlay  District,  as  the  structures  are  existing  structures, and no changes are proposed.   COASTAL AREA MANAGEMENT  No findings were made regarding the Coastal Area Management Overlay District, as the structures are  existing structures, and no changes are proposed.   RELIGIOUS PRACTICE  In 2000, the Federal government passed the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act  (“RLUIPA”). It is a civil rights law that protects individuals and religious institutions from discriminatory  and unduly burdensome land use regulations. Per the U.S. Department of Justice, “RLUIPA protects the  religious exercise of “persons,” defined to include religious assemblies and institutions in addition to  individuals.” RLUIPA has been used, for example, to protect houses of worship, individuals holding  prayer meetings in their homes, religious schools, religious retreat centers, faith‐based homeless  shelters, soup kitchens, group homes, and other social services.  Religious exercise covers a wide range of activities, including operation of homeless shelters, soup  kitchens, and other social services; accessory uses such as fellowship halls, parish halls and similar  buildings or rooms used for meetings, religious education, and similar functions; operation of a religious  retreat center in a house; religious gatherings in homes; and construction or expansion of schools, even  where the facilities would be used for both secular and religious educational activities.”  As a Federal civil rights law, the protections of RLUIPA trump any locally‐enacted zoning regulations.  Towns seeking to limit the activities of religious institutions have frequently been struck down by this  law. A town seeking enforcement actions against a religious institution is wise to do so only in clear‐cut  cases, to limit expose to a civil rights violation.  justice.gov/sites/default/files/crt/legacy/2010/12/15/rluipa_q_a_9‐22‐10_0.pdf      ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 2  2. BACKGROUND  On  July  30,  2017,  Ms.  Penelope  Townsend  of  Masons  Island  submitted  correspondence  to  the  First  Selectman regarding Enders Island. There are several assertions that activities at Enders Island are not in  compliance with Town laws, particularly the zoning regulations, and that the town is ignoring apparent  violations. The Department of Planning received this correspondence August 1, 2017. An investigation  commenced. On August 14, 2017, Ms. Townsend augmented this correspondence with a formal zoning  complaint (17‐054). Three other complaints were filed as well (17‐055, 17‐056 and 17‐057). On October  31, 2017, Ms. Townsend submitted additional materials for the Department to review.  On August 17, 2017 Candace Palmer, Zoning Official and Jason Vincent, Director of Planning, conducted a  site  inspection  of  Enders  Island  and  toured  each  building  with  a  member  of  the  St.  Edmund’s  Retreat  organization.  We  did  not  observe  any  activity  that  appeared  to  be  in  violation  of  zoning  during  that  inspection, and a note to file was made: “No violation.”   However, we felt there was a need to investigate the full details of the history of Enders Island to provide  context as to how this facility operates in the face of what appears to be a direct violation of Town of  Stonington laws.     SITE OVERVIEW  CAUSEWAY TO MASONS ISLAND  PARKING  BOAT LAUNCH / DOCK  OLD BARN / ASSEMBLY HALL   KOLBE COTTAGE  CHAPEL   ST. MARY’S HALL  SHED CHAPEL  ST. MICHAEL’S HALL  ENDERS HOUSE  MAINTENANCE BUILDING  SEAWALL    ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 3  OUR APPROACH  This report has been compiled by the Stonington Department of Planning in response to complaints made  regarding Enders Island’s compliance with Town of Stonington Zoning Regulations. Because of the nature  of the assertions, every effort has been made to detail the history of this property to understand whether  the complaints were valid, and whether an enforcement action should be taken by the Zoning Official.   Before we address the complaint, it is important to understand the context of how Enders Island “fits”  into Town of Stonington Zoning. We are often asked, “a Retreat Center is not listed as a permitted use in  the RC‐120 District. How can Enders Island operate in violation of the regulations?” Understanding the  framework of zoning is important part of the overall assessment of Enders Island.   First, local zoning is not a static set of rules applied independently of other laws. Town Zoning is enabled  by  State  and  Federal  law,  and  must  comply  with  the  enabling  legislation  and  the  United  States  Constitution.  Laws  evolve  over  time  through  amendments  and  court  decisions,  especially  those  that  address how public rights can trump private property rights. All of those elements must be understood  for the Town to apply its regulations.   “The Four Dimensions of Zoning”    While  an  activity  might  not  be  found  in  the  Town  Zoning  Regulations,  the  activity’s  existence  may  be  enabled elsewhere. It could have a state or federal protection, resulted from litigation, or received permits  under a prior version of the regulations. The obvious answer is often not the correct answer.   ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 4  Some of the Town’s Zoning Regulations, while well‐intentioned, may not be legally‐authorized in light of  this  overall  framework.  It  is  important  to  understand  how  an  enforcement  action  is  going  to  be  adjudicated if the property owner appeals the Town Official’s determination. A law enforcement strategy  that is conducted irrespective of the implications of the outcome of the decision is a risky endeavor for  the community. Therefore, it is critical that there is a compelling governmental interest and basis for which  to act.   PROPERTY HISTORY SUMMARY  When reviewing the zoning compliance of Enders Island, it is important to understand the history of how  the Island has been used, and how that history intersects with local zoning regulations. In the past, several  complaints about Enders Island have incorrectly asserted that the RC‐120 zoning in place today was in  place when zoning was adopted in Stonington.     In actuality, we discovered that there are four “zoning eras” that apply to Enders Island, since sold by  the Enders to the Society:  1/1954 – 7/1961  7/1961 – 7/1977  7/1977 – 8/1979  8/1979 – Today  NO ZONING  ZONED RA‐3  ZONED RU‐1  ZONED RC‐120  NO PERMITS   REQUIRED  LAND USE PERMITTED   BY RIGHT  LAND USE PERMITTED   BY SPECIAL PERMIT   LAND USE PERMITTED   BY SPECIAL PERMIT    Many of the people we have spoken with during this investigation were under the impression that there  were only two (blue and orange) eras. That perspective could lead someone to the wrong conclusion, as  a lot has changed, over time. The following pages provide additional context regarding the zoning  regulations during each era.       ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 5  PRIOR TO THE ADOPTION OF ZONING   1/1954 – 7/1961  7/1961 – 7/1977  7/1977 – 8/1979  8/1979 – Today  NO ZONING  RA‐3  RU‐1  RC‐120  Enders Island was acquired from Alys E. Enders by the Society of Saint Edmund, Inc. on January 8, 1954.  The Society of Saint Edmunds made improvements to the property to use it as a novitiate and retreat  center  for  a  specific  group  of  people  (Diocese  of  Norwich  priests).  This  purpose  is  listed  on  the  deed,  however, provisions in the deed are not enforceable by the Town. Rather, it provides historical context of  the  intended  reason  for  the  transfer  of  the  property  and  that  Enders  Island  has  been  operating  as  a  nonsecular  lodging,  event  and  assembly  /  retreat  facility  since  October  of  1954.  Various  documents  support that the use of the Island, in this manner, pre‐dates the adoption of zoning.  ABOVE, LEFT:1934 Aerial Photograph of Enders Island. ABOVE, RIGHT: 1970 Aerial Photograph of Enders Island. These images  depict a property that was fully utilized by the property owner. Note that the property was (and still is) groomed to the edges.  SOURCE UCONN Map and Geographic Information Center (MAGIC)        ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 6  WHEN ZONING IS ADOPTED (RA‐3)   1/1954 – 7/1961  7/1961 – 7/1977  7/1977 – 8/1979  8/1979 – Today  NO ZONING  RA‐3  RU‐1  RC‐120  The Town of Stonington adopted Zoning Regulations in July 1961 and zoned the property “RA‐3,” which  allowed churches and places of worship as a permitted use (“as‐of‐right”). A religious retreat is a place of  worship. In this instance, the entire Island, and all of its buildings constituted a “place,” rather than it  being  confined  to  a  single  structure.  Various  documents  from  this  era  identify  that  the  Enders  Island  retreat facilities were being used by many different groups, both secular and nonsecular purposes and  not  solely  as  a  “retreat  for  catholic  priests”  or  a  training  center  for  official  novitiates.  See  Apostolate  Center Activities 6/27‐8/31/1977 on page 19.  We have found no files for any activity operating under the “permitted use” category, at the time zoning  was  adopted.  It  is  assumed  that  when  zoning  was  adopted,  property  owners  conducting  an  activity  determined to be legal under the zoning regulations were not required to secure a permit to continue  doing what they were doing prior to the adoption of this new law. That certainly was the case for most  land uses in Stonington at that time. Further, it is highly likely that no legal expert would have anticipated  the risk of not documenting zoning compliance, especially when the use is deemed legal conforming /  permitted.   WHEN THE ZONING MAP IS FIRST AMENDED (RU‐1)  1/1954 – 7/1961  7/1961 – 7/1977  7/1977 – 8/1979  8/1979 – Today  NO ZONING  RA‐3  RU‐1  RC‐120  In 1977, the Town of Stonington amended the zoning map for this property from “RA‐3” to “RU‐1.” This  amendment (“zone change”) made the church / place of worship use subject to the Special Use Permit  process. The operating retreat center did not have a Special Use Permit to operate, and it could be argued  that it would have been considered as a preexisting, legal nonconforming use at that time.   However, making such a determination involves a nuance regarding a permittable use (via special permit),  being  in  place  without  a  permit.  You  will  see  that  this  point  is  made  moot  in  the  1979  zoning  map  amendment  and  that  retreat  operations  were  in  place  prior  to  this  amendment.  Various  documents  support the use of the Island for secular and nonsecular lodging, events and assemblies during this era.   CURRENT ZONING (RC‐120)  1/1954 – 7/1961  7/1961 – 7/1977  7/1977 – 8/1979  8/1979 – Today  NO ZONING  RA‐3  RU‐1  RC‐120  In 1979, the Town of Stonington amended the zoning map for this property from “RU‐1” to “RC‐120.” This  firmly created three nonconformities for the existing retreat center:  1. Churches and places of worship are not allowed in the RC‐120 (Enders Island zone). The pre‐existing  retreat center became a preexisting, legal nonconforming use.   2. Non‐profit associations, clubs, museums, or art institutions, minimum lot requirement – five (5)  acres. Gift shops up to 1,000 square feet and snack bars up to 100 seats (available only for non‐ ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 7  profit organizations) are able to apply for a special use permit via ZR 3.1.3.7. The retreat center  would be an eligible activity.   3. The RC‐120 zoning district introduced the concept of Gross Floor Area, via a Floor Area Ratio (FAR).  The  RC‐120  allowed  a  0.025  FAR.  Existing  buildings  on  Enders  Island  were  in  excess  of  this  new  requirement.  As  such,  the  total  Gross  Floor  Area  on  the  Island  became  a  preexisting,  legal  nonconforming bulk.   4. The  RC‐120  zoning  district  introduced  the  concept  of  a  non‐infringement  area  (i.e.,  buffer)  from  natural resources. Site development had already encumbered the entirety of the Island, making this  a preexisting legal nonconforming buffer.   Various  documents  support  the  use  of  the  Island  for  secular  and  nonsecular  lodging,  events  and  assemblies – a retreat center. These documents pre‐date the zoning amendment. Town land use officials  took no enforcement action at this time, likely because they understood how legal nonconformities are  treated under State enabling legislation ‐ i.e., “allowed to continue.” A preexisting, legal nonconforming  use  is  a  property  right  that  adheres  to  the  land  not  with  the  operator,  and  the  right  to  continue  its  operation is entitled to Constitutional protection – considered our highest societal values.   Preventing the use from operating could expose the town to a 5th Amendment Takings Claim under the  Bill of Rights. Legal nonconforming uses have to be (1) lawful and (2) in existence prior to the adoption of  zoning.  After  reviewing  historic  records,  and  the  claims  by  the  property  owner,  the  retreat  on  Enders  Island passes both of these tests; see C.G.S. §8‐13a.  As such, it does not matter who the operator is, it does not matter who the owner is, it does not matter  what  the  intention  was,  it  does  not  matter  how  the  operation  is  conducted,  provided  there  is  no  “expansion” of use, except in conformance with the Zoning Regulations. Expansion is a term of law within  zoning nonconformities; see page 23.  ASSESSMENT OF COMPLAINT  This is our initial evaluation based on the information available at Stonington Town Hall:  CLAIMED ZONING  VIOLATION  EVALUATION   Spiritual Bed and  Breakfast ($240‐$350 for a  romantic evening)   Enders  Island  has  had  overnight  accommodations  since  its  inception  as  a  retreat center. The concept of a retreat and novitiate (deed language and  original  operation  at  the  Island)  involves  overnight  accommodations  and  meals.  Marketing  those  accommodations  using  conventional  lodging  terminology, such as a “bed and breakfast,” does not make this a new “use”  under the  zoning  regulations.  A  retreat has lodging  and  meals.  A  bed  and  breakfast has lodging and meals. By using the transitive property, a bed and  breakfast is a type of retreat, or vice‐versa.   In general, “bed and breakfast” is an activity characterization that has made  lodging  and  meals  (typically  only  breakfast  when  the  rule  is  applied  by  language purists) within a single‐family residence. This has been deemed to  be tolerable approach in many neighborhoods, and a land use permit process  has  resulted.  When  you  get  to  the  essence  of  a  bed  and  breakfast,  it  is  lodging  and  meals.  How  a  venue  informs  its  “customers”  about  said  opportunities is not something that is regulated by zoning. (We had this issue  ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 8  CLAIMED ZONING  VIOLATION  EVALUATION      Rental space for retreats    Gift Shop     Office of Catholic Psych  institute   Recovery residence,  recovery retreats, and 12  Step Programs     with Mystic After Dark, which was a unique way to market dance recitals,  rather than being the night club neighbors expected it to be. In that case, the  business  marketing  was  effective  at  enabling  the  community  to  look  for  other flaws in their business operations.)  The  rate  for  which  a  venue‐to‐customer  transaction  is  valued  at  Enders  Island is not under the control of zoning. It can be free or for a fee, of any  amount. The value of these transactions does not play a role in determining  the intensity of the transactions.   While initially solely a retreat used by nonsecular professionals, zoning does  not get into the spiritual and organizational philosophies of the users of a  place / space. Whether the retreat is secular or nonsecular is outside of the  scope  of  the  Regulations.  However,  the  2015  correspondence  from  St.  Edmunds  Retreat  (see  EXHIBIT  6)  indicated  that  they  operate  a  religious  mission‐based retreat center (nonsecular), which is consistent with how the  Island has been used prior to the adoption of zoning.   People lodging on the Island may venture off of the Island for other purposes.  Zoning officials should not be checking the itinerary of guests.   Further,  for  some,  a  religious  retreat  may  be  romantic.  Zoning  does  not  involve itself in such nuances as to how an individual may find respite, how  they define romance, or an opportunity to connect with a venue. While this  retreat center may have been originally developed for nonsecular purposes,  it is not limited to that classification under zoning.  It is envisioned that anyone that attends the retreat is paying a fee. It does  not matter what is rented. There are no restrictions on this activity in the  zoning regulations.   This activity seems consistent with other non‐profit operations and places of  worship/assembly. Often, a church hall is available for rent, perhaps for a fee  or a donation. Neither are inconsistent with regular practices or the zoning  regulations.   There is a false belief that non‐profit organizations are not businesses.   The gift shop is accessory to the retreat operations. Has it always been there?  Unknown. Is it a violation of zoning? Not likely. The space it occupies (several  bookshelves  in  a  common  area,  subject  to  the  honor  system),  and  its  functionality  are  that  of  a  very  minor  accessory  activity  in  support  of  the  operations of the retreat. It is not a retail operation.   A gift shop of up to 1,000 square feet can receive approval as part of a special  use permit (ZR 3.1.3.7.1) in the RC‐120.   It is reasonable to expect that Enders Island has administrative office space  in furtherance of their mission and operating the retreat center. That space  may  be  occupied  by  other  administrative,  ministerial,  or  mission‐oriented  offices without creating a violation of zoning. Mental health is an important  part of spiritual development.   Enders  Island  began  operating  a  recovery  program  in  1967  (endersisland.com/history).   This aligns with the concept of a retreat. Zoning does not consider the retreat  user,  the  term  of  the  retreat,  or  retreat  purpose.  For example,  whether  a  restaurant  serves  Italian  or  Mexican  cuisine  is  not  something  that  is  considered in a zoning permit proceeding.  Further, the U.S. Fair Housing Act prevents zoning from discriminating as to  who is using the property, especially when the users are a protected class  ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 9  CLAIMED ZONING  VIOLATION  Sacred Arts Institute  EVALUATION      Public Use of the Island    (e.g., race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, national origin). The  Fair Housing Act defines a person with a disability to include (1) individuals  with a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more  major  life  activities;  (2)  individuals  who  are  regarded  as  having  such  an  impairment;  and  (3)  individuals  with  a  record  of  such  an  impairment.  The  term “physical or mental impairment” includes, but is not limited to, diseases  and conditions such as orthopedic, visual, speech and hearing impairments,  cerebral  palsy,  autism,  epilepsy,  muscular  dystrophy,  multiple  sclerosis,  cancer,  heart  disease,  diabetes,  HIV  infection,  developmental  disabilities,  mental illness, drug addiction (other than addiction caused by current, illegal  use of a controlled substance), and alcoholism.   Additional Fair Housing Information:  justice.gov/crt/page/file/909956/download  This activity occurs within a multi‐purpose assembly space on the Island.  Providing retreat attendees with an artistic expression outlet is aligned with  the retreat concept. For some, art is therapeutic, and there are numerous  studies that support such methodology.    Having it branded as an “institute” does not seem inconsistent with a retreat  attribute. There is a perceived additional value resulting from this marketing  program/approach. It does not make it a new use.   Aligning that program with college credit does not seem out of sync with a  retreat. When the retreat center was operated as a novitiate it is highly likely  that  the  completion  of  spiritual  exercises  led  to  some  “educational  recognition” or opportunity for advancement. Whether that recognition is  marketed as “college credit,” or some other knowledge‐based commodity,  does not matter to zoning. It is solely marketing – creating a perceived value.  Further, an assembly activity that comes with college credits does not make  this activity a college or university.   Officials  at  Enders  Island  have  submitted  documents  that  the  use  of  their  property by members of the public is aligned with their nonsecular mission,  and protected by the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act  (“RLUIPA”),  which  was  enacted  by  the  Federal  government  in  2000:  “In  addition,  [public  programs]  are  consistent with  the  Mission  “by  producing  other programs and services that answer the call for evangelization of the  Church  and  the  world.”  SEE EXHIBIT  6  8.3.2015  Letter  from  Christopher  J.  Rixon  to  Stonington  First  Selectman  George  Crouse  This  would  not  be  a  violation of zoning. A property owner allowing other people to access their  property  is  not  something  that  is  regulated  by  zoning.  Further,  the  mere  presence of people on private property, for no fee, does not make it a park,  or commercial use.   Public access at Enders Island would meet the objectives of the Connecticut  Coastal  Management  Act,  which  is  partly  implemented  via  local  zoning.  Enders Island is in the town’s Coastal Area Management Overlay District ZR  7.3). Public access to marine or tidal waters is considered a high value policy  for the State of Connecticut, and any changes of use of this property would  seek to secure a water‐dependent use (likely to be public access). As such,  the presence of public access, for non‐commercial purposes, could never be  a violation of Town zoning. The government cannot force a property owner  to provide it (as it does via CAM) as part of a permit process and then make  the provision of it illegal. Therefore, providing it without a permit is legal.   ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 10  CLAIMED ZONING  VIOLATION  EVALUATION   The use of a space by the public for passive recreation (i.e., public access)  does not make the space a park under town zoning regulations. The creation  of countless miles of trails and waterfront public access points throughout  the community, without any permit from local zoning officials, should serve  as sufficient documentation of town policy and standard zoning enforcement  procedure regarding this issue.  Churches and places of worship are social places, and by their evangelical  nature, are rarely limited to members‐only.   State zoning enabling law does not provide a mechanism to address changes  in  traffic  volumes  resulting  from  intensification  of  a  preexisting,  legal  nonconforming use. See the concept of intensification on page 23.   As  a  preexisting,  legal  nonconforming  use,  the  Island  is  protected  from  government imposition of additional transportation infrastructure as part of  the continuation of the legal use of the property.   Perhaps zoning officials could consider this concern if an expansion of the  facility  were  proposed,  however  off‐site  transportation  improvements  are  likely to be considered exempt from local land use control.   Resort is a marketing term. What is the difference between a retreat and a  resort?  Neither  terms  are  defined  in  Stonington’s  Zoning  Regulations.  A  retreat  that  has  opulent  amenities  versus  one  that  invokes  sensory  deprivation  is  not  a  nuance  that  falls  within  the  zoning  regulations.  Someone’s opinion of posh is someone else’s opinion of crass. Both concepts  are absent any community‐established standards.   State enabling law does not provide a mechanism to address property value  impacts related to a preexisting, legal nonconforming use.   Increased Traffic   Insufficient Access to  Enders Island     Property is operating as a  resort   Property value impacts    Hours of operation   There  are  no  zoning  limitations  on  the  hours  of  operation  of  activities  at  Enders Island. The zoning regulations do not include such a mechanism for  preexisting, legal nonconforming use.   This has become a  commercial operation   Stonington’s  Department  of  Assessment  considers  Enders  Island  as  a  Tax‐ Exempt entity, which is supported with documentation from the IRS.  Religion  is  a  product,  as  much  as  it  is  a  representation  of  beliefs.  The  marketing  (perhaps  perceived  as  commercialization)  of  religion  is  fundamental to the evangelism of faith.  The  differences  between  a  non‐profit  and  a  for‐profit  (so‐called  “commercial” operation) is the reason they exist. For‐profit companies are  generally  founded  to  generate  income  for  entrepreneurs  and  their  employees, while nonprofits are generally founded to serve a humanitarian  or environmental need (i.e., mission based).  Nonprofit organizations need revenue to pay bills and religious organizations  can legally engage in activities that generate income that is unrelated to their  tax‐exempt requirements as long as the unrelated business activities are not  a substantial part of the religious organization’s activities as a whole.           ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 11  3. FULL PROPERTY ASSESSMENT  GENERAL ZONING INFORMATION  The Enders Island property is presently zoned:   RC‐120, a residential zoning district (ZR 3.1); current use of the property is a preexisting, legal nonconforming  use; Activities conducted on the property could request a special use permit under ZR 3.1.3.7 non‐profit  associations, clubs, museums, or art institutions – minimum lot requirement is five (5) acres.    FHOD, Flood Hazard Overlay District – new structures, and substantial improvements to existing structures  require compliance with the Flood Hazard regulations, as part of the permit process (ZR 7.3); and    CAMOD, Coastal Area Management Overlay District – proposals for new construction and activities that  require zoning approvals may require a Coastal Area Management review as part of the permit process (ZR  7.7). Various activities are exempt from review (ZR 7.3.8).    See “FINDING” on page 1    ASSESSMENT OF BULK REQUIREMENTS    MINIMUM  LOT AREA  FRONTAGE  FRONT  YARD  SIDE YARD  REAR YARD  MAXIMUM  HEIGHT  FLOOR AREA  RATIO  RC‐120  REQUIRED  120,000  square feet  300   feet  75  feet  75   feet  100   feet  25  feet  0.043  PROVIDED  422,532  NONE1  VARIOUS2  0.0954  NOTES  1 The  property  does  not  have  frontage  on  an  existing  state  or  town  highway  (“street”).  The  lot  has  been  in  existence prior to the adoption of zoning, and is thereby a legal nonconforming lot. The frontage requirement  would only impact the lot’s ability to be provide frontage in order to be subdivided.   2 This property is peculiar, and as such does not easily and readily lend itself as to how the yard requirements  would be applied. Each building needs to be evaluated based on the regulations that were in effect at the time  of construction. Most buildings are likely legal nonconforming because of the restrictive nature of the RC‐120  district. The 25‐foot maximum height was adopted in 1979 when the property was re‐zoned from RU‐1 to RC‐ 120  (Stonington  Zoning  Regulations  Edition  #7);  ZR  7.3.5,  adopted  on March  31,  1986,  also  has  a maximum  height  for  projects  within  150’  of  Mean  High  Tide  (24’).  A  Variance  of  the  maximum  height  provisions  was  granted for one building (Chapel 50.5’).   3 Variance was granted to increase the Floor Area Ratio from 0.04 to 0.083  4 This Floor Area Ratio number is solely based on the Assessor’s Office records regarding Gross Floor Area. It does  not factor in the items exempted from consideration, or that land area has been reduced, over time. The Floor  Area  Ratio  was  adopted  in  1979  when  the  property  was  re‐zoned  from  RU‐1  to  RC‐120  (Stonington  Zoning  Regulations  Edition  #7).  Further,  there  has  been  no  new  Gross  Floor  Area  added  to  the  property  since  the  issuance of the variance. There is no reason to believe that the property is in violation, rather it is important to  understand and address perception. Changes to the Gross Floor Area definition may also have created some  non‐conformities. This would need to be assessed if any new Gross Floor Area is proposed.   5 The RC‐120 district has a 100’ non‐infringement area. The entire Island has had intrusions within this buffer  prior to the adoption of the non‐infringement area in 1979.         ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 12  DETAILED EXISTING STRUCTURE ANALYSIS   The following information was extracted from the Stonington Land Records   ASSESSOR  STRUCTURE  NAME  FUNCTION  SQUARE FEET1  ID  LAND USE CODE  9060  Church MDL‐94  (GROSS BUILDING  AREA)  HEIGHT2  YEAR BUILT  St. Michael’s  Hall  Apostolate  Center   Lodging: 28  rooms, 56 beds;  meeting rooms  (3), gift shop  178‐1‐1‐1  Seaside  Chapel  chapel   178‐1‐1‐2  Shed    178‐1‐1‐3  Chapel of Our  Lady of the  Assumption  chapel   178‐1‐1‐4  9060  Church MDL‐94  4,181  50.5’  178‐1‐1‐5  9060  Church MDL‐94  15,287  68’  1920s No Zoning  178‐1‐1‐5  9060  Church MDL‐94  2,616  28’  1998 RC‐120 Zone  178‐1‐1‐6  9060  Church MDL‐94  2,759  35’  178‐1‐1‐7  9060  Church MDL‐94  2,760  35’  178‐1‐1‐8  9060  Church MDL‐94  2,880  37  178‐1‐1‐9  9090  Conservation  MDL‐00      Lodging ‐ 19  beds; dining (4  areas); chapel;  commercial  Enders House  kitchen; event  venue; meeting  space; retreat  facility   meeting space;  Maintenance  utility space’  Building   laundry facilities   Office; lodging:  Kolbe Cottage   12 beds  Offices; lodging:  St. Mary’s Hall  1 suite  Offices; meeting  Angell Hall   space; event  space   Shed    TOTAL   88 beds   9,428’  9090  Conservation  MDL‐00  9090  Conservation  MDL‐00  44’  1970 RA‐3 Zone  219      185      160    40,475    2002 RC‐120 Zone  1930s No Zoning  1930s No Zoning  1930s No Zoning    NOTES  1 Gross Building Area is from the Town of Stonington Street Cards, developed and maintained by the Assessor’s Office. This is  not a zoning compliance analysis, as no new construction is proposed. Further, when the last building was constructed on  the property (Chapel), the Planning and Zoning Commission determined that the Enders Island was in conformance with the  maximum gross floor area as part of that review.   2 Height  as  depicted  on  “Data  Accumulation  Plan  Site  Plan,  prepared  for  Our  Lady  of  Assumption  Chapel,  Saint  s  Society  Retreat & Novitiate,” prepared by Cherenzia & Associates, LTD, dated December 19, 2000. Plan was signed and stamped by  Nathan D. Lauder, P.L.S. #15762; T‐3 vertical accuracy  3 Row color codes correspond with zoning eras      ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 13  DETAILED HISTORY   NOTE: Some details may be missing because they have yet to be discovered. This is what we have found:  DATE  8/24/1910  3/1/1920  ACTIVITY  Thomas B. Enders, M.D., a Yale‐educated graduate of  the College of Physicians and Surgeons (Columbia) and  Hartford surgeon purchased Enders Island from the Daughters  of Charity of St. Vincent DePaul  Dr. Enders purchased a right of way from the Masons Island  Company and proceeded building a bridge connecting Enders  Island to Masons Island (i.e., causeway)  1924  Enders house built (various additions through 1934)  1/16/1932  Dr. Enders conveyed Enders Island to Mrs. Enders on January  16, 1932  REFERENCE  endersisland.com/history  Aerial Photograph  UCONN MAGIC   1934  ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 14  DATE  ACTIVITY  REFERENCE  Aerial Photograph  UCONN MAGIC  195/1   1/6/1954     1/8/1954   9/30/1954  10/9/1954  Religious retreat documented (“young men… would spend  a year of prayer and study here”) addresses lodging,  dining, assembly and education land use activities  Facility for nonsecular training (Novitiate) and retreat  (Norwich priest) use  Ownership transferred to Society of Saint Edmund Inc.;  operated as a novitiate (facility for laypersons seeking  membership in a religious order) and religious retreat  The purpose listed on the deed, particularly the “who” is  occupying the religious retreat, is not something that  zoning enforces  Retreat activity pre‐dates Town Zoning per property owner  correspondence dated 8/3/2015, which coincides with  Town records;  Hilda Johnson release    Letter granting permission for the Society to come into the  Diocese of Norwich  ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 15  Letter to Mrs. Enders from  Very Reverend J. T. Purtill,  S.S.E., Society of Saint  Edmonds  DEED 100/331;    DEED 103/302  Letter from Bishop Flanagan  to Father Purtill, S.S.E. – See  EXHIBIT 1  DATE  ACTIVITY  REFERENCE   10/13/1954  10/15/1954  10/21/1954  “It is understood that this House is to serve, primarily, as a  novitiate for the Community [Edmondites], but I express  the hope that it will serve to carry out the other good  works which are proper to your Congregation, as time goes  on [intent to serve entirety of the mission]   Letter recognizing that the permission to come into the  Diocese of Norwich is to benefit the community, not just a  training center the Edmondites   “We will be most anxious to repay you and the diocese for  this kindness by a devoted ministry.”  Society of Saint Edmund Inc. secures tax exempt status for the  Island    “In return, we express the hope that this work [novitiate]  and pour other ministries [intent to serve entirety of the  mission] may be the source of good to the church of  Norwich.” ‐ Fr. Purtill    The novitiate training applies equally to those who wish to  become brothers, dedicated to God whatever manual skill  they possess. The society over men between 18 and 35  year of age opportunity to lead a religious life as a lay  brother… [not just a “novitiate”]  7/7/1961  Town of Stonington adopts Zoning; Property is zoned RA‐3 (ZR Section 3.11 “Table of General Use  Regulations”):    “Churches and similar places of worship, rectory,” and  “Community center” are listed as a “Uses Permitted By  Right”   “Recreational facilities incidental to schools and churches”  require a Special Permit;   Gross Floor Area definition adopted   RA‐3 Bulk Requirements (Section 3.12):  Minimum lot size: 15,000 square feet   Front Yard: 30 feet  Side Yard:12 feet (total of 30 feet)  Rear Yard: 50 feet  Maximum Height: 30 feet  Floor Area Ratio: Not applicable   8/1964  Vincent B. Maloney, S.S.E. – Superior, St. Edmunds Novitiate   12/8/1965  Second Vatican Council completed    2/23/1966    8/12/1966  No.7 – Various youth groups would visit the Island monthly  (Vocation Club)  No. 7 – Non‐novitiates (St. Bernard’s high School students)  would stay over on weekends   No. 7 – Vocation prospects and their parents visited, and  some had a retreat  Edmundite Youth Program – many boys attend retreats  ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 16  Letter from Father Purtill, S.S.  E. to Bishop Flanagan – See  EXHIBIT 2    New London Day Article – See  EXHIBIT 3  Stonington Zoning  Regulations Edition #1,  Effective 7/7/1961   Religious retreat / place of  worship would have been a  permitted use;  Permit records are  incomplete from this era;  Semi‐annual report  Transformed the isolated  novitiate training approach;   Semi‐annual report  Semi‐annual report  DATE  ACTIVITY   1967   Formal recovery ministry was established at what had  become known as "St. Edmund’s Retreat  “The story of Recovery Ministry on Enders Island began in  1967 when Father Joe Waite came to the Island and met  with his sponsor”  REFERENCE  endersisland.com/history  endersisland.com/golf  Aerial Photograph  UCONN MAGIC  1970   10/26/1970  2/15/1971  3/29/1971  Events held to earn revenue discussed (Encounter). Terms  profit and break‐even are used   Obvious that the Encounter program was designed to  bring young men to the Island for retreats (non‐ Edmundites / non‐Norwich Diocese priests)  Retreats held for theology seminarians and subdeacons (non‐ Edmundites/ non‐Norwich Diocese priests)   Retreat held for young priests from the Archdiocese of  New York (non‐Edmundites/ non‐Norwich Diocese priests)  ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 17  10/26/1970 SSE House  Meeting minutes  2/15/1971 SSE House  Meeting minutes  3/29/1971 SSE House  Meeting minutes  DATE  ACTIVITY   5/3/1971  3/29/1972  5/7/1972  4/8/1974  Discussion about Encounter program (see 10/26/1970  minutes)  New London Magicians Club meeting and show            REFERENCE  New Life Singers holding rehearsals in the barn  Dunwoodie retreat (likely Saint Joseph’s Seminary)   Mystic Ecumenical Council retreat  IV. Term “Novitiate” proposed to be eliminated   VI. Groups of retreats planned  X. Documentation of fee for retreats   Marriage encounter weekends for Lutheran couples  Several non‐Catholic group picnics and outings scheduled   Faculty workshops and retreat for [Mohegan] College  proposed   Boy Scout outing   5/3/1971 SSE House Meeting  minutes  3/29/1972 SSE House  Meeting minutes  5/7/1972 SSE House Meeting  minutes  4/8/1974 SSE House Meeting  minutes  1982 report “1978‐1982  Apostolate Center”  Statement of Income and  Expenses   3/28/1977 SSE House  Meeting minutes  1976  Edmundite Apostolate Center formed   6/30/1976  $9,351.75 for retreats  3/28/1977  Use of Island facilities for 1976:  21 seminarians made private retreats for 92 days   56 individual diocesan priests made private retreats for  221 days   46 individual religious made private retreats of 120 days   More than 600 visitors signed the guest book    64 students attended vocation workshops for 203 days   135 persons participated in one‐day programs of  ecumenical nature   459 students attended one‐day retreat programs for High  Schools    294 visitors stayed on the island for a total of 400 days   AA meetings – three each week with average attendance  of 80   Charismatic Prayer group – one each week averaging about  25 people   Future use of the Island was considered:  1. Directed Retreats   2. Marriage Encounters  3. House of Prayer  4. Days of Recollection of Priests in the diocese  Beginning of efforts to promote (marketing) the Island as a  religious retreat center   7/11/1977  Re‐zoned to RU‐1 Rural (ZR Section 3.11 “Table of General Use  Stonington Zoning  Regulations Edition #6,  Regulations”):   Effective 11/21/1976   “Churches and similar places of worship, rectory” and  “Community center” now require a Special Permit    “Non‐profit associations, clubs, museums or art institutions  on 10 acres” added to special permit use list (lot was once  listed as being over 10 acres)  ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 18  DATE  ACTIVITY  REFERENCE   8/31/1977  RU‐1 Rural Bulk Requirements (Section 3.12):   Minimum lot size: 120,000 square feet   Front Yard: 75 feet  Side Yard: 75 (total of 150 feet)  Rear Yard: 100 feet  Maximum Height: 30 feet  Floor Area Ratio: Not applicable    Property does not have a special use permit to operate as  a religious retreat / place of worship, therefore the use  becomes legal nonconforming, as it is no longer permitted  as‐of‐right, and it does not conform to the permit process  requirement;   Picnic for Multiple Sclerosis   St. Luke Picnic   10 priests from Diocese of Hartford   priests from Diocese of New York (Bronx)   Norwich Youth Ministry (25 people)   10 nuns   United Methodist group (30 people)   Married couple   Mystic Marriage Encounter Group picnic (40 people)   Noank Baptist Church Picnic (25 people)   Wethersfield CCD teachers (30 people)  Future events:    Oceanology Club   Seabury Episcopal Church Group    Toronto Seminarians arrive for holiday    Montville CCD group    St, Alphonsus – New Canaan CYO   Our Lady of Lakes CYO  Advertising various weekend retreats and group rates  o Marriage encounter  o AA retreat  o Youth retreat   Rates include overnight and meals   6/1978  See “The Directory, Section III Retreat Facilities,” page 380:  Edmundite Apostolate Center, Enders Island Mystic, CT 06355;  Reverend Paul McGuillen, SSE, Director, Thirty‐five rooms  12/31/1978  Summary of activities from 7/1‐12/31/1978  Private retreats 56   Marriage encounters 166   Engaged encounters 79   Parish groups 83   Organizations 164   Day of recollection 65   Evening of recollection 25   Community retreat 10   Singles retreat 13  ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 19  Apostolate Center Activities  6/27‐8/31/1977 – See  EXHIBIT 4  “Journey of Awakening, a  Meditator’s Guidebook,” by  Ram Dass, ISBN 0‐553‐28572‐ 6, originally published June  1978  Apostolate Center Activities  7/1‐12/31/1978  DATE  ACTIVITY  REFERENCE   Disadvantaged children’s day 26   Deacon program 202   Creative initiative foundation 26   Women’s retreat 43   School groups 224   Charismatic retreat 30   Youth ministry 352   Seminary retreat 19   Guests 260   Religious / social activities 578  TOTAL 2,421  MEALS SERVED 5,320  Income $31,017  8/20/1979  1981  10/28/1997  Re‐zoned to RC‐120 (Section 3.2; Now 3.1):   Introduction of Non‐Infringement Area buffer (ZR 3.25)   “Churches and similar places of worship, rectory”  eliminated as a permitted or special permit use   RC‐120 Bulk Requirements (Section 3.21; Now 5.1.1):   Minimum lot size: 120,000 square feet   Front Yard: 75 feet  Side Yard: 75   Rear Yard: 100 feet  Maximum Height: 25 feet (NEW)   Floor Area Ratio: 0.025 (NEW)    Property use becomes more nonconforming (legal  nonconforming) as religious retreat / place of worship is  eliminated as a permitted or special use permit via a  change in zoning designation;    The new floor area ratio also made the property legal  nonconforming from a bulk perspective;   Books for Apostolate Center and St. Edmunds Novitiate  House separated    Apostolate Center is used 84% of the year with over 4,000  retreatants in 1981‐1982   Projected 1978‐1982 Apostolate Center retreat revenue  $424,762.51   Zoning Permit to build a 20’x30’x13’ tall maintenance  building; issued by Joseph Larkin – Zoning Enforcement  Officer   Completed in 1998 per Assessor’s records    Zoning Permit to demolish and replace a building     Zoning Permit to put an addition on a shed  ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 20  Stonington Zoning  Regulations Edition #7,  Effective 8/20/1979;  1982 report “1978‐1982  Apostolate Center”  ZON97‐279;    ZON98‐250  ZON99‐228  DATE  ACTIVITY  REFERENCE  Aerial Photograph  UCONN MAGIC  1999   6/15/1999  9/22/2000  4/5/2001  3/20/2001  3/20/2001  Floor Area Ratio increased from 0.025 to 0.04 in the RC‐ 120 District.   This amendment would have reduced the degree of legal  nonconforming bulk on the property, but the property still  exceeded the amount allowed;  Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000  (RLUIPA ‐ 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000cc, et seq.) signed into law by the  Federal government   Coastal management approval for the chapel – Denied because  maximum height was not in compliance with the code  Site plan application denied because maximum height was not  in compliance with the code  Zoning amendment to change regulations. Denied  ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 21  PZ9917RA;      PZ0114CAM  PZ0115SPA  PZ0116ZC  DATE  ACTIVITY   5/8/2001  6/7/2001    Variance application to increase height to from 25’ to  50.5’; increase floor area ratio from 0.04 to 0.083 to enable  chapel to be built    The current gross floor area is now in conformance with  the zoning regulations via the issuance of this variance  Site plan approved; Bulk Table on approved / PZC‐signed plans  has “N/A” for required yards (side, front, rear) indicating that  the Commission did not feel that yards applied to this property.  Theoretically, yards do not matter on an island that has no  abutting property owners.  Department of Planning administrative zoning permit aligned  with PZ0126SPA approval   12/6/2002  Certificate of Zoning Compliance for the Chapel  10/31/2003  ST. EDMUND OF CONNECTICUT, INC. incorporated   12/29/2003  Ownership transferred to St. Edmund of Connecticut Inc.    St. Edmund of Connecticut, Inc. (landlord) leases space to  St. Edmund’s Retreat, Inc. (tenant); 25‐years  RLUIPA explicitly protects “leasehold” interests in property  ‐ See 42 U.S.C. 2000cc‐5(5);     3/7/2006  Gross Floor Area zoning definition amended.  12/14/2007  Zoning Permit issued for new fire escapes on Building #2  3/23/2011  5/19/2011  7/7/2011  7/11/2011  7/28/2011  11/30/2011  1/13/2015  3/24/2015  8/3/2015  2/2017  Letter from Keith Brynes, Stonington Town Planner, that no  additional permit is required for the recovery program. No  increase in number of beds proposed.  Letter from Keith Brynes, Stonington Town Planner, that the  rehabilitation program is consistent with the [legal non‐ conforming] retreat operations  “The use of Enders Island by St. Edmunds Retreat, Inc.”  prepared by Mystic Neighborhoods Preservation Association,  Inc.   Gross Floor Area zoning definition amended.  Correspondence from Town Attorney, Tom Londregan,  regarding potential application   Correspondence from Mystic Neighborhoods Preservation  Association, Inc., regarding zoning compliance  CT DEEP Certificate of Permission #20103101‐MG issued  Blog post from a Sacred Art program attendee: http://cjkennedyink.blogspot.com/2015/03/st‐michaels‐ institute‐of‐sacred‐art.html  Correspondence from Attorney Christopher Rixon regarding  nonconforming uses at Enders Island  US ACOE Prepares Draft Finding of No Significant Impact, Draft  Environmental Assessment,   ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 22  REFERENCE  ZBA01‐12;  Certificate of Variance  464/817  PZ0126SPA  01‐239ZON     BUSINESS ID 0764322  DEED 543/873   DEED 556/601;    07‐408ZON          SEE EXHIBIT 5        SEE EXHIBIT 6    DATE  7/30/2017  8/14/2017  8/17/2017  1.11.2018  ACTIVITY  REFERENCE  Correspondence from Penelope Townsend the First Selectman  Rob Simmons  Four zoning complaints filed  Site inspection by Zoning Official and Director of Planning – No  violations were observed during the inspection. The Director of  Planning had inspected the property a decade earlier in  response to neighbor concerns. He noted no physical changes  to the operations on the island.   Enders Island Zoning Compliance Report issued to Planning and  Zoning Commission for review   SEE EXHIBIT 7  #17‐054 – SEE EXHIBIT 8;   #17‐055 – SEE EXHIBIT 9;   #17‐056 – SEE EXHIBIT 10;   #17‐057 – SEE EXHIBIT 11;        4. ADDITIONAL CONTEXT    NONCONFORMING USES IN CONNECTICUT  The  right  to  continue  a  preexisting,  legal  nonconforming  use  is  protected  by  state  law.  Connecticut  General  Statutes  Section  8‐2(a):  “…Such  regulations  shall  not  prohibit  the  continuance  of  any  nonconforming use, building or structure existing at the time of the adoption of such regulations. Such  regulations shall not provide for the termination of any nonconforming use solely as a result of nonuse  for a specified period of time without regard to the intent of the property owner to maintain that use…”  It is a vested right, that adheres with the land.   It can be a difficult concept for people to understand the relief valve that was placed within the state  zoning enabling laws. There can be uses that are not permitted within a community, but because they  were  in  existence  prior  to  the  town’s  zoning  law,  they  are  allowed  to  continue  as  preexisting,  legal  nonconformities. Further, over time the courts have determined that some changes to these preexisting  uses is likely to occur as a result of new technologies, market forces and other factors. As a result, the  concept  of  “Expansion”  (not  allowed)  versus  “Intensification”  (allowed)  of  a  preexisting,  legal  nonconformity has evolved.   TYPES OF USES IN ZONING  ALLOWED  NO  PERMIT  PERMIT  NOT ALLOWED  SPECIAL  PERMIT    NONCONFORMING  PREEXISTING LEGAL  ILLEGAL    ZONING CONCEPTS: “EXPANSION” VERSUS “INTENSIFICATION”   Per the treatise “Land use law and Practice,” by Robert Fuller, Connecticut courts have provided the  following factors for whether the activities on a property are within the scope of a nonconforming use:  1 The extent to which the current use reflects the nature and purpose of the original use  2 Any differences in character, nature and kind of use involved  ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 23  3 Any substantial difference in effect upon the neighborhood resulting from the difference in the  activities conducted on the property.   The burden of proving Expansion or Intensification rests with the Town. Ultimately, for Enders Island the  Town needs to frame this discussion within the confines of RLUIPA, i.e., “[D]oes the government action  place  substantial  pressure  on  a  religious  institution  to  violate  its  religious  beliefs  or  effectively  bar  a  religious institution from using its property in the exercise of its religion?”  CONNECTICUT COASTAL MANAGEMENT ACT – WATER DEPENDENT USE   As  required  by  the  Connecticut  Coastal  Management  Act  (CCMA)  waterfront  sites  should,  in  most  instances, be developed with water‐dependent uses, unless site specific characteristics prevent such use.  General public access to coastal waters, as used in the statutory definition of “water‐dependent uses,”  are  uses  or  facilities  which  provide  for  recreational  use  or  enjoyment  of  coastal  waters  and/or  their  adjacent shoreline by the general public. General public recreational use and enjoyment includes, but is  not  limited  to:  fishing,  hiking,  boat  launching,  birding  or  wildlife  observation,  and  general  passive  enjoyment of scenic waterfront coastal views and vistas.  DOES PASSIVE RECREATION REQUIRE A PERMIT?  No.   Historically, the Town of Stonington Planning and Zoning Commission has not required permits for the  creation of open space, public access, or trails anywhere within their jurisdiction. These amenities have  always been considered a “value added” element that does not warrant mitigation of potential adverse  impacts.   It is often believed that the community benefits of public access, trails, and undeveloped open land far  outweigh any potential short‐term impacts resulting from hikers, bird‐watchers and people enjoying a  picnic.   WHAT IS A RETREAT?  Stonington’s Zoning Regulations do not define the term “retreat.” As such, we are forced to follow the  colloquial  use  of  the  term.  In  searching  out  the  meaning  of  the  word,  we  queried  Merriam  Webster  dictionary, which defines it as:   a place of privacy or safety:  refuge (shelter or protection from danger or distress)   a period of group withdrawal for prayer, meditation, study, or instruction under a director  merriam‐webster.com/dictionary/retreat    Rutherford, TN had a draft zoning definition: A facility owned and operated by a non‐governmental entity  for the purpose of providing a rural setting in which temporary lodging, camping and / or conferences,  meeting, and event facilities are provided with or without compensation.  WHAT IS A RESORT  In searching out the meaning of the word, we queried Merriam Webster dictionary, which defines it as:  ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 24   a place designed to provide recreation, entertainment, and accommodation especially to  vacationers.  merriam‐webster.com/dictionary/resort    It appears that a retreat is a type of resort.    APPENDIX  Website Details:  CATHOLIC PSYCH INSTITUTE  What Services Do We Offer?   Marriage and Family Therapy   Individual Therapy   Pre‐Marital Couples counseling   Vocational Counseling   Parenting Workshops for Defiant Behavior   Mindfulness Workshops for Dealing with Stress and Anxiety   Individual and Group Therapy for Healing from Sexual Trauma  Why Do We Do It?  Pope John Paul II called mental health professionals to pursue their training in an atmosphere of Truth,  Beauty, and Goodness. This means that a Catholic Psychologist is a person trained in the psychological  sciences as well as philosophy and theology. A Catholic Psychologist believes that all truths are derived  from the Source of truth, and therefore cannot contradict each other.  The  integration  of  a  Catholic  understanding  of  the  human  person  and  sound  principles  of  psychology  creates an environment where your individual dignity is respected while proven methods of therapeutic  intervention are applied.  RECOVERY RESIDENCE  We are a post‐treatment, transitional sober living community for young men primarily between the ages  of 18 and 30 —grounded in the spiritual principles of the Twelve Steps. Since 2006, we have  helped shape the lives of numerous young men to live healthy, fulfilling, and successful lives in long‐ term recovery. We take particular interest in helping college‐aged students return to school and begin  thriving academically. We help college graduates develop the necessary tools to pursue a professional  career, and assist the vocationally‐inclined in gaining and maintaining employment. Our ongoing mission  is to instill in each young man the confidence and abilities he needs to be an active participant in his  family, his community, and his own recovery.      ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 25  EXHIBITS    EXHIBIT 1 10.9.1954 Letter from Bishop Flanagan to Father Purtill, S.S.E.   EXHIBIT 2 10.13.1954 Letter from Father Purtill, S.S. E. to Bishop Flanagan  EXHIBIT 3 10.21.1954 New London Day Article  EXHIBIT 4 8.31.1977 Apostolate Center Activities Report  EXHIBIT 5 7.28.2011 Letter from Tom Londregan, Town Attorney   EXHIBIT 6 8.3.2015 Letter from Christopher J. Rixon to Stonington First Selectman George Crouse  EXHIBIT 7 7.30.2017 Letter from Penelope Townsend to Stonington First Selectman Rob Simmons  EXHIBIT 8 8.18.2017 Zoning Complaint #17‐054  EXHIBIT 9 8.18.2017 Zoning Complaint #17‐055  EXHIBIT 10 8.18.2017 Zoning Complaint #17‐056  EXHIBIT 11 8.18.2017 Zoning Complaint #17‐057    ENDERS ISLAND ZONING COMPLIANCE REPORT   1.11.2018  PAGE 26  EXHIBIT 1 2 3 BROADWAY NORWICH, CONNECTICUT October 9, 1951; Very Rev. Jeremiah T. Purtill, S.S.E., Superior General Fathers of St.- Edmund St. Michael's College Winooski, Vermont ?iioar Father Purtill: By virtue. of this letter, I formally approve the erection of a Religious House for the Fathers of St. Edmund in theDiocese of Norwich, the House to be located on Enders Island, in the Town of Stonington, Connecticut. 7 It'is understood that House is to serve, primarily, as a novitiate for the Community ut I express the hope that it will serve to carry out the other good works which are proper to- your Congregation, as time goes on. I'am sure the priests and peole alike will welcome the Fathers of St. Edmund to our Diocese, and none, of course, 'will be more delighted to have you than the Bishop. This will be. the first new religious house to be established in our Diocese and I know your prayers are joined to mine that it will be a fruitful source of blessings both to us and to your Community. Devotedly yours in Christ, Maw 72% Bishop of No SOCIETY OF ST. EDMUND EXHIBIT2 OFFICE OF THE SUPERIOR GENERAL October 13, 1954 Host Reverend Bernard J. Flanagan, D.D. Bishop of Norwich 213 Broadway Norwich, Connecticut Dear BishOp Flanagan: Thank you for your letter of October 9th in which you formally approved the erection of our house on Enders Island in the Town of Stonington. I do not need to tell you again our deep gratitude to you for permitting us to work in your diocese and for having made possible the gift to us of Enders Island. We will be m%%t anxious to repay you and the diocese for this kindness- a devoted ministry. With all good wishes, I am, Very sincerely yours in Christ, 9% Palatial Enders Island Estate Assumes New Role?Novitiate for Catholic Orde - The Society of SL Edmund, to which Mrs. Thomas B. Enders last January bequeathed scenic Enders island of! the southeast end of Mason's Island. Stonington. took over the property this week. The Very Rev. Jeremiah T. Purtcii. a Pawcatnck native who attended Stonington High school, was at the estate this week and told The Day the noviliate staff will move here Nov. 1. A graduate or St- Michael's College which the society founded in .190! near Burlington. Father Purtill in 1946 was elected superior general of the society, its highest post. 'He had taken ad? vancEd degrees from Notre Dame university and the University of Ottawa and formerly was master EXHIBIT 3 of novices for the society. In charge of all members and works throughout the world. he resides in St. Joseph's hall. adjacent to the campus 0! St. Michael's at Winon- ski Park. Vt. Mrs. Alys Enders. widow of a Hartford physician who erected the_ mansion and had installed a costly seawail and extensive gar- dens provided that her secretary for 25 years. Miss Hilda Johnson, and other employes could have the use of the estate for two years from her death last Jan. 30. They relinquished, that right but rc- malned on the island to assist fl?n making the transfer to the socket)? which was completed this weeii. Priests Will the It THE NEW LONDON, CONN, EVENING DAY THURSDAY, 2,1 the larger by a. vehicular bridge across a rock strewn strait. will be used by the society as a novitiate (replacing St. Joseph's novltiato at Putney. Vt.) and will be available for days of recollec- tion and private retreats by priests of the diocmc of Norwich. Father Purtill said today: "The Society of SL Edmund is deeply grateful to his excellency. Bishop Bernard Flanagan, _for the opportunity to work in the diocese of Norwich. The splendid gilt Enders island by Mrs. Alys _came to us through the solici of Bishop Flanagan. ?The first work of the society a the Norwich diocese will be /tho opening of St. Edmund's The private island. connect to success at this work we rely upon the good prayers of the priests and people of. the diocese. 'In return, mi express the hope that this work our other ministries may be source of good to the church 01' Norwich." The superior general said the Very Rev. Arthur A. Rivard, who spent ten years in teaching and ten as a missionary in the math, will continue'aa master of novices. in charge of'their training. A head of the house is to be desig? nated soon. First (locus nix Father Pnriili explained that initially there will be [our priests. {our brothers of the order, and ur novices stationed on the novltlato 6n the property. For them-mom; and. A. chapel is to be construct- - to complete the conversion from .m secular. Alter the second year of college .work in connection with St. Ed- {rounds Junior seminary at Wt: the novicn makes a ton- with the religious habit. Then begins one year of basic training in religious life "Secluded from all distractions and the novice is given a full year to test his vo? cation. Tho vows of poverty. chas- tity and obedience are made known to him in their fullest meaning. The rules and constitutions of the Society of St. Edmund are studied. Meditation. prayer life. the moss. spiritual reading and Latin are his daily life." Completing this year on Enders island. the novice will become a. fully professed member or the so- ciety and return to St. Michael's [or two years in tho scholasticalc. The ?nal four years of preparation are spent either at. St. Edmuml's Major seminaryin Burlington (it- self housed in a. three?story brick mansion or colonial style) or at the Gregorian university in Rome. The climax is reached in the ceremony oi? ordination Training for Brothers -'Ths novitiato training applies 5equally to those who wish to'be? come brothers, dedicating to God whatever manual skill they possess. The; society. otters men between 16 and-?35Jyears ?of "age opportunity to Acadia religious life? as'n. Jay brother. places for them in mission territories. schools and colleges. ?Edmund Rich. 'horn at Abingdon. England; taught mathe- matics at Oxior'd university "and. after studies in Paris, later iec~ tuned in theology. In.u15.he was named. Archbishop 'of Canterbury but: died b.1240 while in Exile for striving? tailorca to abide by"! the- provisions of the Magna Charts and to respect" the rights of the church; St. Edmund's remains are en'? shrined in the abbey church at and there in 1843.1". the .AVen; "John. B. Muard founded _tbs? order. At the begin; _ning- of the c_entury..the society .also was forced into calls by an anti-clerical government in France. P-Llfa began anew in- -the United ?Statels in '190! with' the founding" of St. Michael's and now the so- Zci t'y does. missionary; parish edu- onai imd' preaching activities in Vermont, Alabama. New York and North Carolina. having also conduct of pai-ishcs in England day retreat and I: then clothed (r Franca and Canada. if Apostolate Center Activities June 27, 1977?Au st 31, 1977 q? PAGE1 Week of June 27 Garden area: picnic for Multiple Sclerosis. St. Luke picnic. 10 priests from Diocese of 5 priests from Diocese of N.Y. (Bronx). Fr. Alfred Merusi, Fr. Charles Giancola, Bro. Michael Jacques cousin and nephew. Week of July 4 Norwich Youth Ministry office. Fr. McMahon's neices. Bro. Tansey and 6 boys. Irence Stebbins and friend Velma Phillins. Norwich Youth Ministrv .office with 25 persons. Week of July 11 Sr. Patricia, Sister Madeline Spear, Sister Helen, Fr. Peter Brown with 10 students. Fr. Burke. United Methodist group (Gales Ferry) 30 persons-picnic. Larry Matteau?s-parents, Joe Hait's nephew and niece. Week of July 18. Rav Doherty and 3 guests, Fr. Stankiewicz and his two sisters, Sister Roberta. Frank McMahon's mother. Summer Associate Program thru 8/22, Fr. John Burke. Harry and Mrs. Scully. Week or July 25 Sr. Polworth. Harry Scullv and wife leave Tuesday. Week of August . Summer Associate Program. Frs. Critella and DiMaio. Fr. Janowski's sister and her husband. Meek of August 8 Picnic?Mystic, Marriage Encounter Broup. Mr. Mrs. Scully and Rita and Marv. 4 Franciscan Friars?St. Hyacinth College order of Friars Minor Cove, Granby, Ma. St. Patricks parish C.C D. grOUp. Week of August 15 Mainstreet House picnic?40 persons. Frs. James Heft and Tim Eden. Scholastics retreat. 2 priests?Springfield Dioces: Ed keoyask and Dick. Sr. Susam Merrit. Stan Deresienski and Damien Evans. Mr. Mrs. Barewicz and guests. Joe McLaughlin, John Meagher. Noank Baptist Church picnic~25 persons. Rev. - Gerry Konaczyuski. Meek of August 22 Edmundite Retreat. Nethersfield C.C.D. teachers?30. Sr. Claudette and 2 sisters. hEek of November 1 Week . PAGEZ Day of Rec. Program. Retreat for Deacon Rick Aibamonti. of November 1% Week 1 Youth program, Fr. John Zaionis. Fr. Stack. Dr. Mrs. Charies Poirier. of Nov 21 40 students, Day program, Fr. Robert Lysz. Oceanology ciubi Week Week of Nov 28 of December 5 Week Seaburv Episcapai church group, Day Program. (pianning) of December 12% Week Sr. Susan Merritt. Toronto Seminarians arrive for Christmas hoiidays. of Dec. 19 Week Candidates workshop; Week of December 26 I of January 2 Week Montviile C.C.D. retreat425 persons. of Januarv 9 Week of January 16 John Meagher. N. E. Training Institute?13 persons?John Sevanson. Greenwhich retreat? 21 persons Fr. Andrew Curack. Waterford Presbyterian group. C. C. D. group. Week Week of January 23 Russ Wise. Fr. Gokey. Week of Januarv 30 confirmation retreat-45 persons of February 13 St. Aiphonsus New Canaan C. Y. D. Kevin Caiiahan and 2 students. Our Lady Of Lakes C. Y. 0. EXHIBIT 4 Meek or Mar 22 PAGE 3 Intercommunity Novitiate picnic. Mary Poiworth. Laymen's retreat: Jack Murphy~5?1O persons. Meek of Max 23 Fr. Moran: Mt. Caivarv Retreat House (4 Men 2 Momen). Dick Tom B?rub? parents. Fr. Leo and John Burke. 8th gradeers. JoAnn Fabry~Fairfieid CT.- Masters Schooi rescheduied from 6/17. Sr. Merit companion, Sr. Bianche. 30 sisters For outdoor picinic. Meek of dgn?_? St. Bridgets Guiid?Moodus-33 St. Raphaei?_ Bridgeport?8th grade. Cathoiic Guiid for blind. 25 Ervda Vocation Directors. Mr. Mrs. Jacques. Week of June 12 Noank Baptist Church picnic. 2 iadies from Greenfieid Park. Mr. Mrs. Ortaie. . Meek of June 19 . Mrs. McMahon. Paui Pinard'group-SS persons, Sr. Susan Merit.- Meek of June 26 Paui Pinard group?55 persons. S.M.C. aiumni picnic. 6 priests from Spring? fieid Diocese?Fr. Richard Riendeau. Bro. Francisco Chavez, Quota ciub-Mesteriy, R. I. Daughters of Isabeiia Day of Recoiiection. C.C.D. group~John Saboi, Mike McMorrow's mother sister; Sue Novack's parents. reek Willi/.2 Summer Associate Program, John Stankiewiz, Frs. John Burke Nave Benton Leo Diiva Langiois, Daughters of the Hoiy Spirit, Mr. Mrs. Drtaie. Beets? Mac}? Sr. Madeiine A Spear, Summer Associate Program, Fr. Evans: C.Y.0. picnic?St. Francis, Warwick, Fr. Jeff Conway 5 students, Ralph Ditucci, Orai Schooi students Retreat: Fr. Jim Carini Summer Associate Program, Fathers Mike Motta, Traxi and Metzier? Hartford Diocese, Mr. Frved, Mr. Mrs. Rev. Edwin Moran 3 companions (Mrs. Moran, Mrs. Ann irefz Sister Bianche Barette, S.S.A.), Fr. Arthur Rivard Mrs. Louis Divard, Fr. Lanoue, Jim Betty Michaeis Ann, Noank Baptist Church-Rev. Pratt; picnic, St. Patrick's parish picnic, St. Vincent? Bridqeport?3D persons. ,vibrant-mo: SSW-821.0 PAGE4 EDMUNDITE APOSTOLIC CENTER SCHEDULE - 1977-1978 (Continued) Only Weekends stilLavailable: 12-14 Marriage Encounter (60) Sept: 2-4 and 9_11 19-21 Retreat (30) Jan.: 13-15 2 a June Weekends: une 9 JU1Y 1 Jul 7-9 2 .. 2-5 Associate Program and 1 23 with Assumptionists (10) August: 426 9?11 S.S.E. Chapter 16-18 S.S.E. Chapter 23?25 S.S.E. Chapter Joly Weekends: 14-16 Marriage Encounter (60) 28?30 Marriage Encounter (60) August Weekends: 11?13 18120 25-27 i KY Lin: fulfil M?r??j nu, cam-5 LCT I mas-r5 TELEWJONE 7U$M3Gu?ez .. .. a? ?55? 313%? 458%. weih?x?mweme' .4 5mm"! (-mnnumily of Priests and b?r- 'ihrrs. xc'n'mg'rhe in I?t'u'ixhr's. and PAGES 930% RATES: I Overnight and no Meals $9.00 Overnight and 1 Meal $12.00 (Breakfast) . Overnight and 2 Meals $15.00 (Breakfast Lunch) . .Overnight and 3 Meals 4 $20:00 2? Overnights and 4 Meals?-?_ $25.00 2? Overnights and 5 Meals $30.00 2~ Overnights and 6 Meals $35.00 3- Overnights and 7 Meals $40.00 3? Overnights and 8 Meals $45.00 3? Overnights and 9 Meals . $50.00 SINGLE RATES: Per Daye I $20.00 ALL RATES CAN VARY UPON THE SIZE TO HELP YOU Edmund?te o4p01?ofa t5 denies. ENDERSISLAND CONNECTICUT 06355 TELEPHONE: [203] 536-0565 APOSTOLATE CENTER EXHIBIT 4 SUMMARY PAGE 57 JULY 1 - DEC. 31, 1978 Private retreats 56 Marriage Encounters 166 Engaged Encounters 79 Parish Groups 83 Organizations 164 Day of Recoiiection 65 Evening of Rec011ection 25 Community Retreat (not members of house) 10 Sing1es retreat 13 Disadvantaged Chiidren's Day 26 Deacon Program 202 Creative Initiative Foundation 26 Women's Retreat 43 Schoo] Groups 224 Charismatic Retreat 30 Youth Ministry 352 Seminary Retreat 19 Guests 260 Religious/Sociai activities 578 Totai 2421 EDMUNDLTE CONDUCTED Fr. La charite 2 Fr. Con1in 1 Sister Joanne 5 Fr. Cray 1 Youth Ministry _1 Totai 15 LENGTH OF STAY One night 209 Two nights 500 Three nights 67 Four nights 27 Five nights 42 Edmunditz aqpoatofatz dentist ENDERS ISLAND CONNECTICUT 06355 TELEPHONE: [203] 536-0565 EXHIBIT 4 Six nights Seven nights Eight nights Eighteen nights HUD-DON gumsgg 6F 5320 INCOME Income received $28,436.19 Income due 2:581.00 Tota1 $31,017.19 CONWAY, LONDREGAN, SHEEHAN MONACO, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 38 HUNTINGTON STREET, Po. BOX 1351 EXHIBIT 5 NEW LONDON, CONNECTICUT 06320?1351 A 1 {860) 447-3171 1 Fax (860) 444-6103 mmvsonwaylondregancom KEVIN w. CONWAY OFCOUNSH. THOMAS J. LONDREGAN FRANCIS T. LONDREGAN 0935?2003) THOMAS J. LONDREGAN5P MICHAEL w. SHEEHAN RALPH J. MONACO ?5.11 BRIAN K. ESTEP JEFFREY T. PATRICK J. JONATHAN T. LANE BOARD ED TRIAL ATIGRXET M50 July 28, 2011 William Haase, Planning Director, And All Land Use Commissions Town Of Stonington *0'4 152 Elm Street :9 Stonington, CT 06372 554;} it? Re: St. Edmunds? Retreat 537-; an ?Fourteen Bed Treatment Facility for Substance Abusive Men :33 2 (Intermediate and Long-term Care)? 3?s} Enders Island, Mystic, CT $2 a) c: 01 Dear Bill and Board and Commission Members: William Haase, Planning Director for the Town of Stonington, has asked us to analyze several zoning issues arising from St. Edmunds Retreat?s (?St Edmunds? or the ?Society?) application for a Certi?cate of Need to the Connecticut Of?ce of Health Care Access relating to a fourteen bed treatment facility for substance abusive men, providing both intermediate and long?term care (90 days and 18 months rCSpectively) for recovery from substance abuse. As I dictate this letter, the Town does not know if an application will be made to the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Zoning Board of Appeals. DISCUSSION Facts .St. Edmund?s Retreat, Inc. owns and operates an ll-acre island retreat center called Enders Island. St. Edmund?s Retreat, Inc. was organized in 2003 as a 501(c)3 nonpro?t corporation. In 1954, Alys E. Enders transferred the property to the Society of St. Edmunds (the ?Society?) for use as a novitiate and retreat for priests of the Diocese of Norwich. The Society claims that that the EXHIBIT 5 - PAGE 2 property was so used until the 1970?s, when the need for a novitiate waned. The Society?s website states that it has been hosting retreats at the property since 1969.1 Enders Island is located in an (residential coastal) zone. Neither the current use of the property as a retreat, including the provision of ?rehabilitative services?, nor the proposed use as a substance abuse treatment facility are permitted in the zone. Zoning Regulations, Sec. 3.1. The retreats are open to members of the public on a non?religious, non?demoninational basis. A signi?cant number of these retreats appear to focus on alcohol and drug addiction and recovery. This corresponds to a statement in the Certi?cate of Need Application (the ?Application?) that ?For over forty-two years, Applicant has also dedicated much its efforts to helping those who are in recovery from addiction.? It seems clear that the programs offered by St. Edmunds were and are comprised of ?directed, guided and private retreats for lay, religious, and clerical individuals and groups of many faith traditions, spiritual development workshops, adult education,twelve step recovery programs, and sacred art workshops.? The Application goes on to state that ?Over the years it has become one of the Applicant?s missions to expand its repertoire of recovery based workshops, programs, lectures and. offerings.? In fact, the Enders Island website states that the center is open to business organizations and can ?sleep and feed up to 70 individuals in a variety of facilities.? It advertises that the center is ?Open to the public? and hosts 16,000 visitors per year. Other secular events which apparently have been hosted at Enders Island include: Annual Spring craft fairs air?eld University?s MFA Program in Creative Writing The Connecticut Bead Society?s 2011 Bead Retreat The Denison Pequotsepos Nature Center?s Evening Garden Party The Waterford School Board Workshop meeting regarding a new Strategic Plan The Mystic Garden Club Flower Show I In the Application, St. Edmunds now proposes to establish an intermediate and long?term treatment facility for college age men experiencing substance abuse problems. In the Application, the Society denies that it will provide medical treatment to individuals entering the rehabilitation program: Each student will have already completed a detoxi?cation program. It is not the intent of the Applicant to provide detoxi?cation services. Instead, detoxi?cation or medical needs of each person will be provided by licensed medical partners in the local community. Applicant?s role will be to provide safe, sober and a supporting community. The Society claims that this intermediate and long-term program is a ?natural extension of Applicant?s mission.? In support of this statement, the Society states that it has acted as a location One interesting iSSue not addressed here is whether the restrictions in the deed from Alys E. Enders to the Society of St. Edmunds transferring the property prohibit use of the property for any purpose other than ?as a novitiate for said society and as a place of retreat for the priests of the Diocese of Norwich.? An analysis of the law of restrictive covenants, particularly the law governing ?changed circumstances? would be necessary. Generally speaking, restrictive covenants must be narrowly construed and are not extended by implication. A substantial change in circumstances, including changes involving the needs of the Diocese and/or Society of St. Edmunds would require a court, sitting in equity, to alter, change or expland the restriction on the gift. EXHIBIT 5 PAGE 3 for meetings associated with various twelve-step meetings Alcoholics Anonymous, Alanon, etc.) since 1969. Whether these meetings, or any retreat or service associated with them, entailed any type or form of medical treatment (as opposed to spiritual support and counseling) remains unclear. Analysis 1. Whether the use of Enders Island for retreats redates zonin making that particular use a pre-exiSting, nonconforming use that may be continued notwithstanding adoption of zoning regulations in 1961. The property appears to have been used for religious purposes since 1954, prior to the enactment of zoning regulations in 1961. The original religious purpose involved spiritual retreats for novitiates and priests of the Diocese of Norwich. In 1969, St. Edmunds? began offering rehabilitative services to non-clergy and members of the public. The question is whether this event constituted an impermissible expansion of the nonconformity or was merely an intensi?cation of the nonconforming use. This is a factual analysis that will require the Society to submit evidence that: (1) its current activities predate zoning; or (2) that its current activity is an intensification and not an enlargement of its preexisting nonconforming use. If the offering of retreats and rehabilitation services to non?clergy and members of the public represented an expansion of the nonconformity, then St. Edmunds would have to comply with zoning regulations existing at the time of the expansion unless a constitutional or statutory protection applies (analyzed below). If the event constituted simply an intensi?cation of the nonconforming use, then the use would be grandfathered as part of the preexisting nonconformity. As you know continued use of a property that constitutes a preexisting, nonconforming use is protected under General Statutes ?8-2 and Connecticut case law. In response to any enforcement action, St. Edmunds might raise a defense of municipal estoppel. The Society would have to prove the elements of municipal estoppel, namely: (1) an authorized agent of the Town did or said something calculated or intended to induce a person to believe that certain facts existed and to act on that belief; and (2) the Society exercised due diligence to ascertain the truth and not only lacked knowledge of the true state of things but also had no convenience means of acquiring that knowledge; and (3) the Society had changed its position-on the facts; and (4) the Society would be subjected to a substantial loss if the town were permitted to negate the acts of the municipal of?cials who granted the license permit. ,To answer these questions, each use or activity undertaken at Enders Island must be analyzed separately in light of the then-existing zoning regulations and any subsequent amendments, to determine whether each use or activity is, in fact, pro-existing, nonconforming. Any use or activity, that is found to be pre?existing, nonconforming must then be analyzed to determine whether the use or activity was expanded, or merely intensi?ed, over time. The ZBA Commission will have to conduct a hearing on these factual issues. EXHIBIT 5 PAGE 4 -2. Whether the application of the Town?s zoning regulations to the activities being conducted on Enders Island violates the United States Constitution or the Connecticut Constitution? The Society may argue that even if its treatment facility is not grandfathered or is an enlargement of a preexisting nonconforming use, or even if the Society acknowledges it is in Violation of local zoning it may claim a federal right to conduct such activity under either the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and/or the Fair Housing Act (FHA). Only owners of land are proper parties for a RLUIPA claim. Tenants or lessees of property are not proper parties to raise a RLUIPA claim. 3. Whether the contemplated use of Enders Island for intermediate and long?term care substance abuse treatment programs is protected by the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000, 42 U.S.C. ?2000cc gt The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibits the government from ?prohibiting the free exercise? of religion. Similarly, Article 1, Section 3 of the Connecticut Constitution provides that ?The exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination, shall forever be free to all persons in the state; provided, that the right hereby declared and established, shall not be so construed as . . . to justify practices inconsistent with the peace and safety of the state.? In addition, the RLUIPA prohibits the government from: [I]rnposing or implementing a land use regulation in a manner that imposes a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person, including a religious assembly'ior institution, unless the government demonstrates that imposition of the burden on that person, assembly or institution (A) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (B) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest. The Board or Commission cannot render a decision that ?unduly burdens? the applicant?s practice of religion as that term has been legally defined unless there is a very direct, narrow and ?compelling" governmental reason for doing so. The issue of what would constitute a substantial burden with respect to any application depends upon a number of facts to be presented to the Board or Commission. The Board or Commission must act neutrally with respect to the application and place no burdens on the application not generally applying to other applicants. If bias is evident, that bias will be considered a ?substantial burden.? RLUIPA does not require that a Board or Commission grant relief to a religious applicant that it would deny to a secular applicant, however, the Board or Commission must take into consideration any burdens claimed by the applicant and may make some accommodations to the applicant for religious reasons. The Society, as applicant, will have to present its claims on how any denial or modi?cation of its application would be a substantial burden to its practice of religion. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals has recently ruled that land use laws?impose a substantial burden on religious applicants only if such applicants are treated differently than secular applicants. In summary, local zoning cannot place an unfair burden on religious practice unless there is a compelling governmental interest. There is no burden unless one shows discrimination. One EXHIBIT 5 PAGE 5 cannot discriminate against a religion. If there is no discrimination or disparate treatment there is no violation of law. If the law is applied in a neutral manner, there is no violation of the law. Accordingly, the neutral application of legitimate land use restrictions, including planning and zoning ordinances and considerations, will not operate to trigger the substantial burden test applied under the This will be a factual analysis whether the Town?s planning and zoning - authorities applied the restrictions or conditions of zoning in an arbitrary, capricious or unequal manner. The Society will have to answer these questions. 4. Whether the contemplated use of Enders Island for as an intermediate and long?term care substance abuse treatment programs is protected by the American with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. ?12101 5:1 319:? Title II of the ADA provides: quali?ed individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity. 42 U.S.C. 12132 (1994). The ADA was enacted in part to prevent the isolation and segregation of individuals with disabilities and to promote their assimilation into the mainstream of. all aspects of community life, including housing. Under the ADA, local governments are explicitly prohibited from. administering zoning procedures in a manner that subjects persons with disabilities to discrimination on the basis of their disability. The ADA also requires such entities to make reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities. Under the ADA, an individual is considered disabled if he suffers from ?a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of such individual.? While alcoholism is considered an ?impairment? within this de?nition, a person must still show that the impairment limited one or more of his ?major life activities.? The ADA defines ?major life activities? to include ?caring for oneself,? as well as ?thinking, communicating, and working.? ?Merely having an impairment does not make one disabled for purposes of the If a person or group comes within the de?nition of disabled under the ADA, they must be afforded a reasonable accommodation. municipality discriminates in violation of the FHA, the ADA, or the Rehabilitation Act if it refuses to make changes to ?traditional rules or practices if necessary to permit a person with handicaps an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling." The determination of whether a requested accommodation is reasonable requires, among other things, balancing the needs of the parties involved. In particular, an accommodation is reasonable under the FHA ?if it does not cause any undue hardship or fiscal or administrative burdens on the municipality, or does not undermine the basic purpose that the zoning ordinance seeks to achieve.? The plaintiff asserting a reasonable accommodation claim under the ADA or FHA must identify a traditional rule or practice neutrally applied before a request for an accommodation triggers the protections of those statutes. The Society would have the burden to demonstrate its request for a reasonable accommodation. EXHIBIT 5 PAGE 6 Like the ADA, the FHA makes it unlawful to discriminate ?in the sale or rental, or to otherwise make unavailable or deny, a dwelling to any buyer or renter because of a handicap.? The FHA requires that recovering addicts be afforded an equal opportunity to live in clean, safe, drug~free neighborhoods. Discrimination is de?ned to include ?a refusal to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to afford [a handicapped] person equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling.? Like the ADA, the prohibition extends to municipal entities, including zoning agencies and planning authorities and the decisions rendered by these agencies and authorities. The FHA only applies to dwellings, which includes ?any building, structure or portion thereof which is occupied as, or designed or intended for occupancy as, a residence by one or more families.? There are two basic factors courts use to determine whether a facility constitutes a dwelling, rather than a shelter (which is not protected by the ADA or FHA): (1) whether the facility is designed for occupants intending to remain for a signi?cant period; and (2) whether the occupants View the facility as a place to return to. With respect to the second factor, courts tend to ask whether the occupants treat the facility as their home- For example, performance of household tasks such as cooking, cleaning and laundry have been identi?ed as indicators that the facility is functioning as an actual dwelling, as opposed to a temporary shelter. It is not clear exactly what activities the participants in the proposed substance abuse treatment program will perform. The nature of the activities will be critical to a determination of whether the facility quali?es as a dwelling under the FHA. If it does, then the Town must analyze the issue of reasonable accommodations as set forth above. The Society must show that the FHA would apply to its programs. CONCLUSION Any determination will involve a factual analysis and ?ndings to determine whether or not any federal law trumps local zoning. If you or any of the agencies? members have any questions please do up} hesitate togiye me a call. TJL:djk F:\Files\Stonington\3700\3792 St Edmund's Substance Cntr?dtr to town 7 23 ?due EXHIBIT 6 PAGE 1 - - i CHRISTOPHER J. RIXON REIDAND RIEGE, RC. . ATTORNEY ONE FINANCIAL PLAZA HARTFORD, CT 06103 Phone: (860) 240-1052 Cell: (860) 514?4334 Fax: (860) 240-1002 crixon@rrlawpc.com COUNSELLORS AT LAW August 3, 2015 VIA OVERNIGHT MAIL Hon. George Crouse, First Selectman Town of Stonington 152 Elm Street Stonington, CT 06378 Re: St. Edmund?s Retreat, Inc. Dear Mr. Crouse: This letter is in response to issues raised by a few residents of Mason?s Island in correspondence to you with respect to the use of the real property and improvement at Enders Island by its tenant, St. Edmund?s Retreat, Inc. for a series of concerts this summer. Nothing in that letter, from the Mystic Neighborhoods Preservation Association, Inc. although it is copied to the Town of Stonington?s zoning enforcement of?cer, alleges a violation of any speci?c provision of the Town?s zoning regulations; however, we infer that the authors of the letter expect the Town to ?nd a basis on which to act in a manner detrimental to rights. Because the accusations are general in nature, so will be our reply. SER is a Connecticut non-stock, nonpro?t corporation, which was organized as and is operated exclusively for charitable purposes within the meaning of Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. The Mission of SER is: ?To proclaim in' word and deed the Gospel of Jesus Christ in the light of the Catholic Faith. St. Edmund?s Retreat seeks to ful?ll this mission by providing for the ministerial formation of priests; by offering retreats, spiritual development and educational programs for lay men and women, religiOus sisters and brothers, and priests; by producing other programs and services that answer the call for evangelization of the Church and the world; and by providing a place of retreat for the priests of the Diocese of Norwich.? Since the time of the establishment of St. Edmund?s Retreat in 1954, Enders Island has required charitable contributions to maintain the facilities and grounds of the Island and to sustain the furtherance of the Mission. The proposed concert series, in part, serves the fundraising needs of SER. In addition, these concerts are consistent with the Mission ?by 22480000162768}! HARTFORD New HAVEN WEST HARTFORD Hon. George Crouse EXHIBIT 6 August3,2015 PAGE 2 Page 2 producing other programs and services that answer the call for evangelization of the Church and the world.? The concert series is a means to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the attendees. The core of the retreat house?s activities predate the 1961 enactment of the Town of Stonington?s zoning regulations and are prior, nonconforming uses in Which SER has vested property rights. The zoning regulations and map have been amended many times since then without ever addressing outdoor concerts. While we cannot pinpoint the argument in the MNPA letter, musical performances at Enders Island clearly pre?date any releVant regulatory provision. As a general matter, we believe it to be the case that in light of the centrality of song to Catholic religious observance for many centuries and its inevitable usage at Enders Island continually since 1954 that the specifics of where and by whom instruments are played and lyrics are sung will be of little moment to showing that it was already occurring when whatever regulation that music supposedly violates went into effect. However, the chilling effect of the prospect of any zoning enforcement investigation or other of?cial action against SER because of musical performance events on Enders Island presents an even more significant concern: The concerts planned by SER are activities protected by a Federal civil rights law, 42 U.S.C. ?20000, et seq., the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 RLUIPA prohibits imposition of a ?substantial burden? on religious activity through land use regulatory processes and, moreover, requires that religious institutions be treated at least equally with secular ones. Section of RLUIPA mandates that [n]o government shall impose or implement a land use regulation in a manner that imposes a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person, including a religious assembly or institution, unless the government demonstrates that imposition of the burden on that person, assembly, or institution? (A) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (B) is the least restrictive means of furtherng that compelling governmental - 1 interest. 1 See also Section52-57la of the Connecticut General Statutes, which provides in part: The state or any political subdivision of the state shall not burden a person?s exercise of religion under section 3 of article ?rst of the Constitution of the state even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in subsection of this section. The state or any political subdivision of the state may burden a person?s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person (1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest, and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest. 2248 00001627683. 1 EXHIBIT 6 PAGE 3 Hon. George Crouse August 3, 2015 Page 3 Under Section 5(5) of RLUIPA ?The term ?land use regulation? [includes] a zoning law, or the application of such a law, that limits or restricts a claimant's use of land if the claimant has an ownership, leasehold or other property interest in the regulated Section 5(7) of RLUIPA states, ?The term ?religious exercise? includes any exercise of religion, whether or not compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief.? This latter clause has been held to specifically include a concert series hosted by a religious organization. [The] concert series has a religious purpose, in that it enables the church to collect ?nancial contributions to further the church's mission, and provides members with an opportunity to meet and educate non-members in the community about [the organization?s] religion. Episcopal Student Found. V. City of Ann Arbor, 341 F. Supp. 2d 691, 701 (ED. Mich. 2004). The argument that the neighborhood association raises in its letter, that the Masons Island streets are private, not only ignores the fact that there is an express, deeded right and easement to use those streets in favor of SER, but also directly undercuts any claim that there is a legitimate ?compelling governmental interest? to vindicate the purely private interest asserted by invoking zoning enforcement powers for the benefit of the private parties making the complaint. The equal terms provision of RLUIPA, Section provides that ?No government shall impose or implement a land use regulation in a manner that treats a religious assembly or institution on less than equal terms with a nonreligious assembly or institution.? We read the correspondence from the MNPA to you as inviting an ?individualized assessment? of events proposed to be held on Enders Island and possibly some new, ad hoc restriction on use of the property that is different from the Town?s past practice with respect to not only Enders Island but also similar, but non?religious properties. The Town cannot defend discriminatory land use action against a religious institution on the basis that only the religious institution was the subject of complaints by neighbors. See Third Church of Christ, Scientist, of New York City v. City of New York, 617 F. Supp. 2d 201, 205 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) aid, 626 F.3d 667 (2d Cir. 2010) (municipal action against catering events at church taken at the behest of ?prominent, in?uential people? such as partners in major law ?rms violated RLUIPA). SER and its affiliates have enjoyed the peaceable use of Enders Island since 1954 prior to the adeption of zoning regulations by the Town, and that use, consistent with the Mission, must be allowed to continue unfettered by any discriminatory measures urged by its neighbors to be taken by the Town. It must be noted that contemporaneously with such use has been a longstanding open dialogue with neighbors on Masons Island and contributions over the years by SER toward the maintenance of the roads on Masons Island (over which SER has an express, deeded right and easement). The signatures of eight of those neighbors are not A person whose exercise of religion has been burdened in violation of the provisions of this section may assert that violation as a claim or defense in a judicial proceeding and obtain appropriate relief against the state or any political subdivision of the state. 22480.000/627683.l EXHIBIT 6 Hon. George Crouse PAGE 4 August 3, 2015 Page 4 representative of the majority, many of whom are expected to attend one or more of these concerts. For over 61 years the retreat house has operated Enders Island in keeping with the Mission and during that time the residential density of Masons Island has increased dramatically. pre-existing use cannot now be limited because of this increased density and agitation by persons who chose to build or move to Masons Island and, themselves, contribute to the traf?c congestion they complain about. Ver truly ours, Ora Christopher J. Rixon Cc: I?eith Brynes, AICP, CZET, Town Planner 3. andace Palmer, Zoning Enforcement Of?cer Timothy 1. Duffy, Esq., Chair of the Board of Trustees Father Thomas RX. Hoar, SSE, President, St. Edmund?s Retreat, Inc. Frank J. Marco, Esq. 22480.000/627683.1 PENELOPE TOWNSEND MASONS ISLAND 1 32:1 EXHIBIT 7 Iuly 30,2017 PAGE 1 First Selectman Rob Simmons Town of Stonington 152 Elm Street Stonington, CT 06378 Dear Mr. Simmons: Enclosed is my letter to the USACE regarding Section 14 Shoreline Erosion Protection Enders Island, Stonington, Connecticut that I said I would copy to you. It is clear from my letter that I do not support this project. Putting aside deed restrictions, I will focus on issues directly concerning Town matters and jurisdictions. Enders Island is an RC-120 district. Zoning ordinances were implemented after the Society of St. Edmund was deeded use of the property for a novitiate and a retreat for priests of the Diocese of Norwich. Since both of these uses were in place prior to adoption of zoning, they are grandfathered uses. According to the Enders Island website, the following are some of the current uses: Spiritual Bed and Breakfast ($240-350 for a romantic evening) Rental space for retreats Gift Shop Satellite Office of the Catholic Institute Recovery Residence Sacred Arts Institute (partnering with Holy Apostles College and Seminary and Offering courses in calligraphy, woodcarving, mosaic, watercolor, etc. High school students can earn college credit.) Recovery Retreats 12 Step Programs How did this happen? According to Planning and Zoning there is no information on special use permits issued for Enders Island. Many of the listed uses are not eligible for a special permit in an district. Two variances were granted in 2001. The hardships for these variances were not mentioned. I have a meeting with Jason Vincent and Candace Palmer at which time, I hope to review the activities listed on the Enders Island website and confirm which uses might be allowed under code and which have a special permit in place. After reading the code, none of the uses, except a bed and breakfast and then only with special permit seem to be allowed. I am confused. How can a Town ignore code violations? I am also confused as to why the Town would support a project that has misrepresentations in the Public Notice and more importantly states the property is open to the public for recreational uses, a use not allowed in an RC-120 district and clearly not grandfathered. What are the consequences of that choice? In our conversations and comments made to the residents of Masons Island on july 27, you have stated that there is no Town money committed to the Enders Island project and it is a way to leverage Federal dollars and only requires the Town checking a box supporting the project as the Town has done for other projects. You mentioned that Mr. Vincent is working with Enders Island. Unless he is doing this on his own time, the Town is paying him and any other Town employee working on this project. Isn?t this Town money spent for this project? I appreciate the Town is working with local agencies and trying to capture Federal dollars to reduce local costs. In this instance, there are significant unintended consequences in trying to be a helpful neighbor and seeking Federal dollars none of which the Town is required to replace. How can the Town check a box supporting a project, the justi?cation for which ?public use? is a zoning violation? Does that mean that the Town wishes to create an area of public use in a residential neighborhood that can only be accessed by private roads? I don?t understand. The expenditure of Federal money means the Federal government has decided that Enders Island is a public area. That ?nding would change the character of a part of Town. How does that align with current zoning? How can the Town justify taking an action in violation of its own ordinances? How does the Town explain ignoring its own standards for granting special permits that no adverse effect will result to the character of the district? In my many, recent conversations with the Diocese of Norwich and the Society of St. Edmund it is clear that Father Hoar is not connected to or controlled by either group. He is a priest that is an agent for and President and CEO of St. Edmund Retreat and St. Edmund of Connecticut of Connecticut both 501 corporations. Neither organization is controlled by, responsible to, or under the auspices of The Society of St. Edmund or the Catholic Church. Most people assume that St. Edmunds is a church but apparently, it is not. Both Corporations in their papers of incorporation agree to do nothing unlawful. Is not complying with zoning ordinances considered unlawful? After reviewing and considering the impacts to the Town and the obligation of elected officials to operate within the law, I hope that the Town reconsiders and does not check the box to support this project. I believe you and your colleagues are honorable people. I know that this is not an easy decision but I trust that you and your colleagues will uphold your oath and abide by the laws of the Town. Sincerely, Penelope D. Townsend 860 245 3698 cc Selectman Michael Spellman Selectwoman Kate Rotella Melinda Carlisle Charles Hamm Robert Martin PENELOPE TOWNSEND MASONS ISLAND July 30, 2017 The Army Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road Concord, MA 01742-2751 Re: Section 14 Shoreline Erosion Protection Enders Island, Stonington, CT Dear District Engineer: The proposed shoreline erosion protection project on Enders Island, Stonington, Connecticut does not meet the criteria for USACE participation. Enders Island is not a public facility. By deed restrictions and Town zoning ordinances, Enders Island is not permitted to serve the public. The Public Notice dated July 6, 2017 contains signi?cant factual errors. Enders Island is owned by ST. Edmund of Connecticut, Inc., a 501(c)(3) corporation in the state of Connecticut. Exhibit 1, a tax card from Stonington, CT and Exhibit 2, a deed granting title both name St. Edmund of Connecticut, Inc. as the owner of record. The ?rst sentence in the section headed Purpose and Need for Work is false. It states, The Catholic Church?s Archdiocese of Connecticut owns and operates the Enders Island facility (St. Edmund?s Retreat) and associated property.? The Diocese of Norwich has con?rmed that the Catholic Church does n_ot own or operate the property. St Patrick?s, the local parish in Mystic, and the Diocese of Norwich stated that Enders Island is not a church or a parish. The Society of St. Edmund headquartered in Vermont, has also no connection, control or legal standing to St. Edmund Society of Connecticut, Inc. The second sentence in the same section, It is used by many church and non-church related groups as a retreat center and is open to the public on an equal basis regardless of religion.? misrepresents the types of activities allowed on Enders Island by deed restriction and local zoning. In promoting the activities not allowed by conditions stated in the deed, St. Edmund of Connecticut, Inc. appears to be in jeopardy of no longer having a legitimate claim for use of EXHIBIT 7 PAGE 2 the property. The deed [Exhibit 3) gives title to The Society of St. Edmund provided the property is used solely for religious purposes set forth, a novitiate for the Society and a place of retreat for the priests of the Diocese of Norwich. The deed states that failure to use the property for the stated purpose renders the conveyance void and of no effect. The footnote on the second page of Exhibit 4 documents the Society?s understanding of the deed. Public use of the property voids the ownership. The deed transferring title to St. Edmund of Connecticut is also subject to the original restrictions, Exhibit 2. The transfer of title is also questionable, as it was not provided for in the original deed Exhibit 3. Enders Island is zoned RC-120, coastal residential. The uses existing prior to the adoption of zoning ordinances are grandfathered. Grandfathered uses are a novitiate and a retreat for Catholic priests of the Diocese of Norwich. Town zoning regulations in the prohibits public or private recreational facilities, churches, wellness centers, schools, community centers, or congregate living. The complete list of activities allowed by special permit, and those not allowed is available online in Stonington Zoning Ordinance 5.1.2. By code, non- conformities may be reduced, but not expanded. The Town has issued two variances, one for height and the other for lot coverage. It has not issued any special use permits. Opening the grounds to the public as a recreational area for walking, biking, swimming, picnicking and ?shing is not compliant with the zoning code or deed restrictions. There is no provision of the code that allows public use of Enders Island. The Public Notice states that Enders Island is accessible via a causeway to Masons Island. A study commissioned by the Town looking at local dangers resulting from rising oceans noted the vulnerability of the causeway to Masons Island. Currently all residents are directed to leave the island in major storm events as the causeway may ?ood and in fact has. The preliminary thinking is that the causeway needs to be replaced by a bridge for which there is no current funding. There is a second causeway that narrows to one lane and connects the private road owned by Masons Island residents to Enders Island. This is a private causeway that must be maintained by the owner, St. Edmund of Connecticut Inc. for continued access. In the purpose section, it is stated that 17,000 visitors annually go to Enders Island. Currently the intersection of Route 1 and Masons Island Road is a concern for both the Town and State for the level of service. All traf?c to Enders Island must use that intersection. Once on Masons Island, traf?c must travel over a mile of private roads. It was never intended that commercial traffic travel this private space where children play and ride bikes. In addition, there are significant safety, security and liability concerns for island residents resulting from increased traffic to Enders Island. The purpose section mentions concern for proper function of the septic system with continued erosion of the seawall. The majority of the structures and the septic system are located in the BOO-year ?ood zone on Enders Island. The State of Connecticut controls approvals and monitoring of the septic system. The structures and septic system are at significant elevation and should be much less of a concern than the causeway connecting Enders Island to Masons Island. EXHIBIT 7 PAGE 3 The impact to eelgrass beds and local ?sheries has yet to be determined. Both resources have suffered in recent years from the increase in cladophera that smothers eelgrass. There are unanswered questions about the effect the proposed revetment will have on wave activity and how it will affect neighboring properties. Residents are also concerned about structural impacts to the private roads as a result of heavy equipment and materials transported across them. The proposed project has no provision for a public hearing. In summary, the proposed project does not meet the criteria of public use and bene?t. The project involves a property with unclear title and potential legal action. Town zoning and deed language restricts public uses beyond what is grandfathered, which is speci?c uses for the Catholic Church. Long-term use is uncertain due to causeway access. The Project Notice gives inaccurate information and is de?cient in that regard. Continuing this project is inconsistent with Section 14 criteria and does not qualify for Federal participation and funding. Sincerely, mm Penelope D. Townsend Property Owner 860 24s 13698 Cc Rob Simmons, First Selectman Stonington, CT Robert Martin, President of Masons Island Property Owners Association Melinda Carlisle, Commodore Masons Island Yacht Club Iames McAuley, President Masons Island Fire District Property Location: 4 ENDERS ISLAND 1 MAP 1/ 1/ 5/ BLDG 1 I State Use: 9060 Vision _Accquet#010772900 ?Card. 1 of 2 Print TOPO. I UTILITIES LOCATION. . i- 81' EDMUND OF CONNECTICUT INC 1 evel All Public 1 Paved 2 Suburban Description Code Appraised Value Assessed Value 2,183,800 1,528,600 6.1371,962,900 1,374,100 STONINGTON33.100 06355 - SUPPLEMENTAL DA TA . ?3 Additionamwners= Other 11): 178 I 1 . 9 CENSUS T: 7053 URV M: V65 - . COCC: I ZISION FLOOD LDG ZON E: - . .: GIS ID: 178-1-1 ASSOC Total 4,194,000. 2,935,800 RECORD OF OWEESHIP - BK- SALE DA TE 11/11 v/ SALE PRICE VIC. - PREVIOUS ASSESSMENTS - A ST EDMUND OF CONNECTICUT INC 543/ 873 12/29/2003 1 Yr Code A3sessea' Value Yr, Code ASSessed Value 5 ?Yr. Code Assessed A-Value . SOCIETY OF ST EDMUND INC 103/ 302 0 2016 21 1,528,600 2015 21 1,528,600 2014 2.1 - 1,528,600 . 2016 22 1,374,100 2015 22 1374,1000014 22 I 1,374,100 2016 25 33,100 2015 25 33,100 2014 25 - 33,100 "It Total: 2.935.800 T_o?_at: 2.935.800 Total: 2.935.800 EXEMPTIONS OTHER ASSESSMENTS This signature acknowledges a visit by a Data Collector ar Assessor Year Type Description Amogmi' Code Descripiion Number Amount Comm. Int. 0 IAAX PARISH HOUSE 12-81(14) . 2,935,800.00 APPRAISED VALUE SUMMARY Total; 2 93, Appraised Bldg. Value (Card) 1.813500 ASSESSING NEIGHBORHOOD Appraised XF (B) Value (Bldg) 0 SUB NBHD New Street Index Name Tracing Batch Appraised OB (L) Value (Bldg) 479300 092"? Appraised Land Value (Bldg) 2,183,800 NOTES Special Land Value 0 SOCIETY OF ST EDMUNDS 2011 - FIRE DIST CORRECTED T0 MJ. RETREAT FACILITY (.70 FOR PERMIT "372 ISSUED ?2012 Total Appraised Parcel Value 4,194,000 ROOMS I valuation Mama: ESIDENCE ROOMS IN ms DOCK DESTROYED 7/12 AREA 2012 REPAIRED SEAWALL, PIER I4X90 556/601 NOTICE OF LEASE EXHIBIT 7 PAGE 4 .LI Adjustment: 0 Net Total Appraised Parcel Value 4,194,000 X3 - - - - - BUILDING PEEMIT RECORD I CHANGE HISTORY Permit ID Issue Date we Description A may! inso. Date Coma. Dorie Comp. Comments Type IS ID Cd. I Par ose/Resuit 05/08/2012 RP Repairs 0 0 REBLD STONE PIER 11/20/2012 SF 58 e-view?Company 11-372 09/07/2011 Remodel 2,000 09/30/2011 100 09/30/2011 REMODEL GAR OF 11/16/2012 GM 26 Idg Permit 99?327 07/19/1999 35,000 100 24xss ISFR ADD 07/03/2012 TH 00 eaanListed 7464 10/01/1997 4,000 100 20x32 EQUIP BLD 9/30/2011 MS 26 Permit 7136 04/01/1997 - - 56,000 100 REROOF 5/ 1 4/2002 RD 00 easur+Listed I LAND LIME TION SECTION . Use Use Unit Acre T. Adi C0618 Description . Zone Front Depth Units Price 1. Factor SL4. Disc C. Factor 1dr Adi. Notes? Adj Special Pricing Fact Adi. Unit Price Land Value 9050 CHURCH MUD-94 4.00 AC 115,200.00 0.3467 5 1.0000 4.00 0920 2.90 SITE 1.00 118531200 9060 MDL-94 5.70 AC 5,000.00 1.0000 0 1.0000 4.00 0920 2.90 XCESS 1.00 330,600 Q9 Onwtv-u-I 2,183,800 Total Card Land Unitsz 9.70 Parcel Total Land AC I Total Land Value: Property Location: 4 ENDERS ISLAND 1 Vision ID: 9396 Account 00772900 MAP 10:178/ 1/ 1/ 5/ Bidgii: 2012., Name: BLDG 1 $0030.: 101' _1 Card 2 -of 2 State Use: 9060 Print Date: 07/26/2017 10:05 l? 0 BOX 399 MYSTIC, CT 06355 Additional Owners: ST EDMUND OF CONNECTICUT INC 1 Level TOPO. UTILITIES Lam ENT Public .1 Paved 2 Suburban Description Code Appraised Value Assessed Value 1,528,600 2'2 UPPLEMENT A DA TA 2,183,800 . 1,962,900 47,300 COM LN 21 1,374,100 CM OTB 25 33,100 613 7 STONINGTON, CT 6I5 FLOOD ZONE: Other 11): CENSUS T: ID: 178-1-1 178 1 1 - ISTRICT: 9 7053 URV M: UB LOT OCC: LDC ASSOC VISION some 4,194,000 2 035,800 j, RECORD OF OWNERSHIP . BK- SALEDATE /u W7 SALE PRICE KC. PREVIOUS ASSESSMENTS (1.0st Assessed Value ST EDMUND OF CONNECTICUT INC SOCIETY OF ST EDMUND INC 543/ 873 12/29/2003 I 103/ 302 0 Yr Coo/e Assessed Value Yr. Code Assessed Value Yr. 2016 21 1,528,600 2015, 21 1,528,600 2014 2016 22 1,374,100 2015 22 1,374,100 2014 2016 25 33,100 2015 25 33,100 2014 21 . 1,528,600 22 1 $74,100 25 33,100 2.935. 800 Total: 2.935. 800 Total: or 2.935.800 EXEMPTIONS OTHER ASSESSMENTS Year Tvpe Descritig ion Amount Code Description Number Amount Comm. Int. 0 IAAX PARISH HOUSE 12-81(14) 2,935,800.00 Total; This signature acknowledges a visit by a Data Collector or Assessor APPRAISED VALUE SUMMARY Appraised Bldg. Value (Card) ASSESSING NEIGHBORHOOD Appraised XF (B) Value (Bldg) SUB NBHD Name Street Index Name Tracing Batch Appraised OB (L) Value (Bldg) 0920M Appraised Land Value (Bldg) . NOTES Special Land Value LAYOUT 2011: REMV CARS 8L LAUNDRY SHED FR OBLDS (CARS, LAUNDRY SHED) LISTED AS 2 OF 2 Total Appraised Parcel Value Valuation Method: Adjustment: 149.400 0 0: 0 4,194,000 EXHIBIT 7 PAGE 5 0 ct Total Appraised Parcel Value 4,1 94,000 BUILDING PERMIT RECORD CHANGE HISTORY Purpose/Result Permit 1D Issue Date Tvpe Description Comp. Date Comb! Comments Date Due IS 10 Cd. Amount lnsg. Date 11/20/2012 SF 58 11/16/2012 GM 26 TH 00 9/30/2011 MS 26 5/14/2002 RD 00 Review-Com pony Permit easur+Listed Permit easur+Lisied LAND LIME VALUA TION SECTION Code Description Zane Front Acre Disc Unit Units Price I. Factor 3A. C. Factor Idlx Adj. 5 Aaj otes? Adj Special Pricing Fact Adi. Unit Price Land Value 2 9060 CHURCH MEL-94 0.00 1.0000 1.0000 1.00 0.00 .00 Total Card Land Units: 0.00 I Total Land Value: 4 J. EXHIBIT7PAGE6 "CWT-CLAIM DEED STATUTORY FORM THE SOCIETY OF ST. EDMUND, INC, whose mailing address is 270 Winoosld Park, VT 05439 {?Grantor?) for divers goon causes and received to its full sansfaction of 31*. EDMUND OF me, does hereby give. and grant unto ST. EDMUND OF CONNECTICUT, INC, its and assigns forever (?Grantee?), all right, ntle and interest of Grantor in and to 11131 certant piece or parcel of property situated in the Town of Stonington. County ochw London and State of Connecticut, known as Island, together with all improvements, if any, located on such land, and together with all easements, and armor rights grantcd to Grantcr and its predecessors in tine {such land, Improvements, and appurtenant ?ghts being collectively referred to as the ?Troperw??. The I?roperty )5 more ?lly described as follows: Bemg known as ?Binders Island,? and situated in Fishers Iskand Sound at the mouth of the River, containing about ten (10) acres, more or less, once as ?Baker?s Island," ?Dodge? 5 Island" and ?Kecland?s Island,? and bomdcd on all sides by the sea, when Property 15 subject to such covenants and as of record appear and as may be binding on the Property, which the Grantee, as part ofthc consideration for this dced, covenants and agrees with the Grantor it shall observe and perform. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the above-described unto the Grantee and the and assigns forever for its and their own proper use and behoofl PAGE no CONVEYANCE TAX COLLECTED LADWIG . TOWN CLERK OF STONINGTON CT SS 2 4? 342315 Book 543, Page 8'73, File Number 2003?000000 -. 2) EXHIBIT 7 PAGE 7 ATTACHMENT msumsoaw IN WITNESS WI-IBREOF, Grantcr has executed this Quit Claim Deed as of the day of December, 2003. Signed, Seaied and Dehvered in GRANTOR: in the presence of: SOCIETY OF ST. EDMUND, INC. . @th 771 97:94:44 55.2, ms Day By: Rev. Rlchard M. My?alyk, $33 i . 2 Its: President, Duiy Authorized Alex a. ?til-1 STATE OF VEPJAONT ss. Colchester December, ?2003 COUNTY or (#f?oiml On this the my of December, 2003, before me, the underslgued of?cer, personally appeared Rev. Rlchard M. Myhal?g SSE, Who acknowledged himself to be the Pro?cient and Supencr General of Society of St. Edmund, 1110., and that he, as such and Supenor General, being authorized so to do, executed the foregoing instrument for the purposes therem contamed as ?ee act and deed and the free act and deed of the corporation, by signing the name of the corporation by himselfas Rev. Richard M. Myhalyk, SSE. In Wimess Whereofl hereunto set my hand. of go Superior Court! Notary Public My Commission Expucs: oz/xo/o 7 . RECEWEU FJR RECORD CT. 03 DEC 29 1:6 LADWIG TOWN CLERK 34?15 Book 543. Pane 873. File Number 2001-31: EX H115 IT 3 EXHIBIT7PAGE8 ff? -- . - . (Page 1 of 3) - VOL. 100 PAGE 331 "0 WHDK SHAII COME, GREQTING: KNUH YE, That I, AEYQ E. WNDERS, of Endere Ielend, in the Town or County or ?ew London and State of Gonn- ecticut.-ror-the consideration of One Dollar and other valuable considerations received to my full satisfaction of the SOCIETY OF EDMUND, INCORPORATED, a Corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Vermont end located at dinooeki in said State of vermont, do hereby rmniee, release and torever Quit-Claim unto the said Society or St. Edmond, Incorpor- eted. forever, e11 the_right. title; interest. claim and demand whatsoever no I. the said Releaeor, have or ought to hove in or to all that certain tract or land, together with.the buildings and improvements thereon standing,?ioaatoc in the? Town or Ston- 'ington, County or New London and State or Connecticut. and more terticulerly described as follows: Being known on "Endere Island", and situated in Fishers Island Sound at the mouth or the Mystic River, containing about ten (10) acres. more or lose. once known as "Baker's Inland", "Dodge'c Island", and "Keelcnd'e Island", and bounded on ell sided by-the nee. Being the some premises conveyed to Thomas B. Enderc l, by the Sisters of Charity or St. Vincent de Paul by deed dated August 1910, and recorded in the Stonington Land Records. 01. 5h. Page L66 to which reference is made for a more particular description. Together with all of the right, title and interest granted end given to Thomas B. ?nders by The Mason's Inland Company under its indentnre dated Heron 1. 1920. end recorded in the Stonington Land Records, Vol. 65, pages L33 and L3t to which reference is made for more particular description. . Being the some premises end-interests conveyed to Alye W. Endere by the warranty deed or Thomas B. Endere, dated January 16, 1932, and recorded in Vol. 70, page '302 of the Stonington Land Records. Said premises are cenveyed to and-accepted by the grantee, Society or St. Edmund, Incorporated for use as novitiete for said Society end as a_plaog 6! re- treat for the priests of the Diocese of Norwich, end rm". 2: g?ffrrEXHIBIT 7 PAGE 9 (PageZof3); VOL. 100 PAGE 33:: also subject to the-following conditions. ree- trictione and reservations. hereinafter set forth:- 1. There is reserved to the sold Alye 3. . Enders, during the period of her natural life, the exclusive possession, use. control and man-. egcment of said-premises without any obligation or condition or'eny kind. 2. 'Tpon the death of the said Ali's E. Eudora, Hilde Johnson, of Bolton, Connecticut, and such of the former employees of said Alys E. Eudora es said Hilde Johnson shall designate, shall have, for end during a period of two (2) years after the death Of said Alye E. Eudora, the use, control and management of said premises without any obligation or condition of any kind. TO mm mm To new the premises, with all the appurten- enoee, unto the said Society or St. Edmund, Incorporated, for- ever. provided the name shall be used solely for religious par: poses above set forth. Failure on the part of the grentee, the Society or St. Edmund; Incorporated, to use said property for the above mentioned religious purposes, shall render this agreement of conveyance void and of.no effect, and the above described property shall revert to and become part or the residuery estate or said 51:: E. Eudora, and be distributed in such manner and form an the lens or the State-or Connecticut shall direct it eeid Alia E. Enderc shell die intestate, or. in the event that the said Alye E. Enders shall die teetete. in accordance ?itn the terms or the residuery oleuse_or her Will. IN WHEHEOF, I have hereunto set my hand and . soul, at New Iondon, Connecticut} this day of January. A. Di l95ho - .I . . . Signed. sealed end deliv{The consideration to! this deed is such that no revenue etempe are requireduxm-i?n EXHIBIT 7 PAGE 10 171v - (Page 3 of 3) rm ., a Jam: . - VOL. 3100 PAGE 333 I 6 mm or CONNECTICUT. 0? m'v LONDON. 53' New L?nd?m January 3 3' 195M Pusan-ally appeared 319181' and - seala?r or the fox-again: instrument . and acknowledged the same me, to be her free not: and deed, before . . Ry'd for record - a . I. 1951/. at AM. . .. a? ?106 0? Town Clerk r? ..-. Curr EX Ll Academics - SSELA Mystic - OF SAINT EDMUND ARCHIVES Local Administration 1954-2004 Who 2 h. (4 Boxes) Arrangement ?star-lei is arranged alphabetically. - . Km 86/ 556 proof/V0717. PAGE L1 1954, Alys E. End conveyed to the Society of Saint Edmund a 12?acre island near Mystic, Connecticut. "stand, ,is/now known as Enders Island, was given to the Edmundites for use as a novtiate and a retreat cente%n November 2, 1954, Rev. Evmard Galligan arrived on the island as the first Superior. Although the is nd had a mansbn as well as outbuildings, the Edmundites undertook a number of horovements to make it suitable forthe novitiate. By August 1955, a new chapel was completed and a :auseway linking Enders to nearby Masons Island was begun. Other additions have been completed over the years, with a new chapel dedicated in Dec. 2002. . Hembers of the House worked at St. Bernard?s School in New London, CT, and administering St. Thomas ?on: and Sacred Heart parishes in North Stoningtonand Groton, in addition to running a novitiate. For a time, the island was the home base of the Edmundites Seminary Guid, a fund-raising wing of the society. The Society of Saint Edmund, Connecticut, Inc. is the temporal branch of the Mystic works. Management of ?scal and legal a??airs is usually conducted under its auspices. From 1976 to 2003, the Society ran the Edmundlte Apostolate Center on the island. The Center was the home of successful retreats and spiritual programs including spiritual development, adult education and sacred art programs- Saint Michael?s Insttute of Sacred Art was launched in 1998 and has offered workshops in Early Christen Iconography, Traditional Gregorian chant, Stained Glass, Manuscript illumination Gild?ng, and Fresco. In January 2004, control of most programs on the island reverted to the Diocese. Scope The Mystic collection is arranged alphabetically. It consists mainly of ?les related to either the physical property or to the canoniCal house. Materials related to the Sa'mt Edmund's Novitiate are not found here?they are located with other Houses of Formation.(See Note) The materials include correspondence, records related to the Apostolate Center and yearbooks from the years Edmundites taught at the school. Note A Although the Novitiate ?les are not here, many individual terns may contain the word ?novitiate,? as the island and property were referred? to as Novitiate for some time, both formally and informally. Materials that are directly related to the Edmundite Formation are ?led with Houses of Fermation. Related terms Apostolate Center Saint Edmunds Novit'iate Seminary Guild SSE of Ct., Inc- Folder List Box 1 1 Alys Enders last will and testament, Obituary 2 Apostolate Center Financial Reports and Budgets 1982-1985 3 Apostolate Center Financial Reports and Budgets 1986-1990 4 Apostolate Center Activity Summary 1977-1980 5 Apostoiate Center Programs, Guides, Brochures 6 Apostolate Center Fundraising appeals 7 Apostolate Center Clippings, News Articles, Press releases 8 Apostolate Center Reports "9 Chapel Dedication Dec. 6, 2002 Clippings Correspondence Corbett Correspondence Galligarr Correspondence Gal?gan re: Causeway Correspondence (with Diocese) Correspondence LaCharite Correspondenca McQuillen Encounter Programs 1970?1972 Facility Audi: 1985 Fundraising 1960's History ?nders Island House Chronicle 1986?87 House Minutes 195 5-1968 House Minutes 1971?1983 House Minutes 1984-1989, 1994?95 Parishes St. Thomas More Stonington) ATTACHMENT 15 (Page 1 of 2) EXHIBIT 7 PAGE 11 MII "Iii! isle)?" Ui Parishes Sacred Heart (Groton) Errograms Brochures :Dro perry Appraisal 1992 Property Construction 1970'5-1980'5 ?ro_oerty Construction Improvements 1950?3?1960'5 Property Dining Room Addkion 1977 Property Insurance Infonnation Property Ragsdale Agreement Property Sea Wall DJ Saint Bernard's High School General Saint Bernard's High SchoolYearbook St. Bernard's HS 1966 Saint Bernard's High School Yearbook 1967 Saint Bernard's High School Yearbook 1969 Saint Bernard's High School Yearbook 1970 SSE Inc, of Cl' Board Minutes SSE Inc. of CT budgets and ?nanc-l reports 1991 SSE Inc. of CT Byviaws SSE Inc. of CT Correspondence SSE Inc. of CT Legal Documents 4 323 Correspondence 55 Correspondence 55 Correspondence 33 Correspondence 3-2 Correspondence 56 Correspondence Sf: Correspondence SC Correspondence 55 Correspondence 4?va so correspondence :35 Correspondence 56 Correspondence 55 Correspondence SC Correspondence SC Correspondence SG Correspondence 36 Correspondence 56 Correspondence 36 Correspondence 36 Correspondence 36 Correspondence 56 Correspondence SG Correspondence SG Carrespondence 56 Correspondence 56 Correspondence SG Purti? 1952-58 to Mystic House 56 Purtiil 1958-64 to Mystic House 56' 1953?64 to St Bernard's HS. SG Galligan 1964~70 to Mystic House members 36 Gauigan 1964?70 to Mystic House Superior 56 Galligan 1964?70 to St. Bernard?s H5. 56 Galiigan 1970-74 to Mystic House members SG Galigan 1910-74 to Mystic House superior SG Galligan 1970?74 to St. Bemard?s HS. 56 Ga?gan 197044 Gokey 1914?78 to Mystic House SG Gokey 1974-78 to Mystic House (.LaCharite) SG Gokey 1974?78 to Mystic Parishes St. Thomas More $6 Gokey 1974-78 to Mystic Parishes Sacred Heart 56 Gokey 1974?78 to St Bemard's HS 36 Leary 1978-82 to Edmundite Apostolate Center 56 Leary 1978-82 to Mystic House 56 Leary 1978-82 to Mystic Parishes St. Thomas Mare 56 Leary 1982-86 to Edmundite Apostolate Center 56 Leary 1982-86 to Mystic House 56 Leary 1932?86 to Mystic Parishes Sacred Heart 56 Leary 1982-86 to Mystic Parishes St. Thomas More $6 McLaughlin 1986-90 to Edmundhe Apostolate Center 86 McLaughlin 1986-90 to Mystic SG McLaughlin 1986-90 to Mystic Parishes Sacred Heart 56 McLaughlin 1986430 to Mystic Parishes St. Thomas More *The SSE were never given clear title to the Island. Instead, the Edmundites have use of the island for as iong as they are engaged in the activ?ties laid out above?Training priests or using it for retreats. If they should cease using it for these activities, title reverts to other bene?ciaries of Alys Enders? will- For a full discussion of the topic, see the subject ?les of Superiors Genera! Hart and Myhaiyk, under ?Future of Enders." Created By: Eiizabeth B. Scott December 22, 2004 BBC ktO Maintained by - 2 ATTACHMENT 15 (Page 2 of 2) EXHIBIT 7 PAGE 12 EXHIBIT 8 PAGE 1:2 TOWN OF STONINGTON Department of Planning 152 Elm Street Stonington, Connecticut 06378 Tel. 860-535-5095  Fax 860-535-1023 COMPLAINT OF ZONING VIOLATION Complaint #17-054 Date of Complaint: August 14, 2017 Property Location: Enders Island, Mystic, CT 06355 Map: 178 Block: 1 Lot: 1 Zone: RC-120 Owner of Record: St. Edmund of Connecticut, Inc. P.O. Box 399 Mystic, CT 06355 Complaint: The Island is owned by St. Edmund of Connecticut and not affiliated with a religious organization. Many of the uses on the Island are not permitted in an RC-120 zone. No Special Use Permits have been applied for or issued. Non-conformity uses may not expand and they clearly have. Enders Island has expanded well beyond the grandfathered uses and the impact on the neighborhood is noticeable, especially with increased traffic. Name of Person Reporting: Penelope D. Townsend Address of Person Reporting: 27 Chippechaug Trail, Mystic, CT 06355 Phone Number: 860-245-3698 cell 561-307-0225 For Office Use Only: Verification Inspection Date: 8/17/2017 Violation(s) Toured entire facility accompanied by J. Vincent and Chris Rixon [Consultant for Special Events]. Only one bedroom is designated for “Bed & Breakfast” It is the only bedroom with its own bathroom and is known as the Bishop’s Room as it is where he and other dignitaries stay when they visit the island. There are multiple dining rooms, each a different size depending on the need, [Community dining room, Emmanus dining room and retreat dining room. Commercial kitchen as required by the EXHIBIT 8 PAGE 2:2 Comments: Public Health Dept. Two places of worship, the Fisherman’s Chapel and Chapel of our Lady of the Assumption. The Book/Gift Shop store sells religious books, cards, water bottles, T-shirts with Ender’s Island name. The shop consists of two bookcases with the various items on display. Jams and Jellies are made from the fruit trees on the island and are on display in a cupboard [two shelves] in the same “shop”. Rooms for the retreats share communal bathrooms and are simply appointed. The “Sacred Art Institute” consists of two rooms with a couple tables and supplies stored in free standing cupboards. The “Catholic Psych Institute” consists of one therapist. All activities listed on the web site from Guided Retreats to Prayerful Watercolor appear to be in line with the historical use of the Island. Fundraising is a part of any nonprofit. That the island and the activities are being marketed in a way that is generating more use is an intensification NOT an expansion of a preexisting use. No violation observed. EXHIBIT 9 PAGE 1:1 TOWN OF STONINGTON Department of Planning 152 Elm Street Stonington, Connecticut 06378 Tel. 860-535-5095  Fax 860-535-1023 COMPLAINT OF ZONING VIOLATION Complaint #17-055 Date of Complaint: August 14, 2017 Property Location: Enders Island, Mystic, CT 06355 Map: 178 Block: 1 Lot: 1 Zone: RC-120 Owner of Record: St. Edmund of Connecticut, Inc. P.O. Box 399 Mystic, CT 06355 Complaint: Activities conducted on the premises far exceed those allowable in an RC 120 Zone. Some activities are: operating a resort; advertising as a "Premier Destination"; being used for parties, receptions; fundraising events, workshops, business symposiums; inviting the public to use the area as a public recreation area. The St. Edmunds Retreat website provides more information. A thorough investigation by Zoning Officials will no doubt expose other violations. Name of Person Reporting: Hugh P. McGee, Jr. & Pamela D. McGee hughpmcgee@yahoo.com Address of Person Reporting: 9 Plover Lane, Mystic, CT 06355 Phone Number: 860-536-3905 For Office Use Only: Verification Inspection Date: Violation(s) Comments: See Complaint #17-054 EXHIBIT 10 PAGE 1:1 TOWN OF STONINGTON Department of Planning 152 Elm Street Stonington, Connecticut 06378 Tel. 860-535-5095  Fax 860-535-1023 COMPLAINT OF ZONING VIOLATION Complaint #17-056 Date of Complaint: August 14, 2017 Property Location: Enders Island, Mystic, CT 06355 Map: 178 Block: 1 Lot: 1 Zone: RC-120 Owner of Record: St. Edmund of Connecticut, Inc. P.O. Box 399 Mystic, CT 06355 Complaint: While the rest of us respect the zoning regulations mitigating traffic and property use, the above owner has exceeded regulations. Name of Person Reporting: Charles Hamm Address of Person Reporting: 6 Cove Hill Road, Mystic, CT 06355 Phone Number: 860-572-3984 For Office Use Only: Verification Inspection Date: Violation(s) Comments: See Complaint #17-054 EXHIBIT 11 PAGE 1:1 TOWN OF STONINGTON Department of Planning 152 Elm Street Stonington, Connecticut 06378 Tel. 860-535-5095  Fax 860-535-1023 COMPLAINT OF ZONING VIOLATION Complaint #17-057 Date of Complaint: August 14, 2017 Property Location: Enders Island, Mystic, CT 06355 Map: 178 Block: 1 Lot: 1 Zone: RC-120 Owner of Record: St. Edmunds of Connecticut, Inc. P.O. Box 399 Mystic, CT 06355 Complaint: Extensive commercial traffic and other activities have disturbed the traditional peace and quiet of Mason's Island over the years. This traffic is counter to the Island's historical use and agreement with property owners and negatively impacts property values. Name of Person Reporting: Athanassios Michas Address of Person Reporting: 1 Bayberry Lane, Mystic, CT 06355 Phone Number: 860-572-9819 and 917-673-7301 For Office Use Only: Verification Inspection Date: Violation(s) Comments: See Complaint #17-054