EPHRATA BOROUGH ZONING HEARING BOARD MINUTES May 15, 2024  MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF:  James Kiefer, Glen Mellinger, Jons Sullenberger, Greg Martin  Chad Ochs  Zachary Rineer, Zoning Officer Victoria Storz, Solicitor Raymond Danyo, Court Reporter  VISITORS:  Nancy Aronson, Marie Sipler, Joseph Giles, Larry Alexander, Susan Paul, Kathy Cotillo, Joanne Eshelman, Rob Eshelman, Linda Spotts, Christina Fisher, Helen Honyara, Liz Tronsor, Gisela Woerner, Carl Woerner, David Lutz, Vincent Burkholder, John Speak, Jr., Linda Martin, Phil Ferrin, Anna Marie Palm, Don Strothers, Barb Marty, Dan Sweigart, Linda Kegerreis, Val Messner, Robin White, Sheila O'Rourke, Deborah Chabak, Tammy Galbreath, Tim Barr, Michael Bongiovanni, Brandy Seiler, Darian Taylor, Norby Santiago, Alicia. Jackson, Jan' Wenger, Pam Malkemes, Andres  Zorrilla, Kristin Elliott, Ryan Shue, Virginia Dillio  Mr. Kiefer opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m.  Mr. Martin made a motion to approve the April 17,2024, minutes. Mr. Mellinger seconded the motion  and all voted int favor.  Mr. Rineer provided confirmation of thei following:  The meeting agenda was posted on the Borough's website and at Borough Hall no later than 24 The meeting agenda included al listing of each matter of Borough business that will be or may be the subject of deliberation or official action at the meeting. There were no changes made to the meeting agenda after it was posted. The meeting agenda was made available to individuals in attendance at the meeting. There were no requests to add a matter of Borough Business to the meeting agenda. Mr. Mellinger made a motion to approve the agenda. Motion was seconded by Mr. Martin and passed Mr. Kiefer read the notice for the purpose oft the hearing to consider a Special Exception for a short-term rental. Relief is sought under section 319-27(15) of the Code of the Borough of Ephrata. The subject property is located at 38 Martin Avenue in al Residential Low Density Zoning District. The applicant and Ms. Storz requested that Mr. Danyo swear in Ms. Zeiset in advance of testimony and then confirmed the  hours in advance of the time of the meeting.  unanimously.  owner is Cheerful Retreats LLC., 12228 Pleasant View Road, Ephrata, PA 17517.  Zoning Administratofsposting: requirements for the hearings.    Zoning Hearing Board May15,2024  Page |2  Ms. Zeiset testified that she is the majority owner of Cheerful Retreats LLC along with her husband and two other partners. She restores old, run-down homes to provide income for her family. The property hosts larger families that come to town for weddings, funerals, holidays and local tourist attractions. The Mr. Martin asked Ms. Zeiset about the property rules. Ms. Zeiset stated no pets are allowed and that it has a maximum of twelve people with five bedrooms and a pull-out sofa. She stated that the property is Mr. Kiefer asked if there was any signage, as that would have to meet Borough requirements asv well. Mr. Kiefer asked Mr. Rineer if he had checked the parking. Mr. Rineer stated that the property meets Ms. Storz asked if the property was being rented out to more than one person at a time. Ms. Zeiset Mr. Martin made a motion to accept the application for 38 Martin Avenue. Mr. Mellinger seconded the Mr. Kiefer read the second hearing notice for the application to consider a Special Exception for the expansion ofa a non-conforming no-residential use, to add crematory facilities to a commercial building used for ai funeral business. Relief is sought under section 319-65.C(3) and 319-65.F of the Code of the Borough of Ephrata. Int the alternative, a variance is sought under section 319-12 of the Code oft the Borough of Ephrata. The subject propertyi is 106 E. Fulton St. in al Residential High Density zoning district. The applicant and owner is Giles Sipler, LLC, 100 W. Main St. Ephrata, PA 17522. Mr. Kiefer recused himself from the hearing and requested that Mr. Mellinger continue the hearing. Mr. Mellinger requested that phones be turned off or silenced and asked Ms. Storz to proceed. Ms. Storz explained partys status as opposed to public comment and asked ifanyone wished to be granted party status. Party status was requested by Vince Burkholder of 1701 E. Fulton Street, Dan Sweigert of 129E E. Franklin Street, Val Messner of 12 Lauren Lane, Kristin Elliott of 177 E. Fulton Street, and Jane Wenger of 41 S. Maple Street, William Ecenrode of 36 Michael Court, Anna Marie Palm of32 Michael Court, Don Strothers of 50S. Maple Street and David Lutz of 54 Michael Court. Mr. Mellinger asked if there were any objections to these individuals being granted party status. There being none, Ms. Storz asked Mr. Danyo to swear int the individuals, applicant and representatives for Ms. O'Rourke of Gibbell Kraybill & Hess LLP began by introducing the applicant and representatives: Marie Sipler, Good Sipler and. Joe Giles of Gravenor Sipler Funeral & Cremation Centre, Inc., Robin White from Gibbell Kraybill & Hess LLP, and Ernie Kassoff from Facultatieve Technologies, manufacturer oft the Ms. O'Rourke stated that the propertyi is a commercial building with multiple garage areas and a storage warehouse, built int the 1980's as part of the Paul L. Gravenor Home for Funerals and has been used as a  guests frequent local shops and restaurants.  near the hospital andi is also listed on the travel nurses website. Ms. Zeiset said nothing was there now, and it was not planned.  the parking requirements.  stated that one person rents fort the family or group. motion and the motion passed unanimously.  testimony. Once sworn in, Ms. Storz asked the applicant's attorney to begin.  FTHI Cremator.    Zoning Hearing Board May 15, 2024  Page 13  funeral home purpose since it was built. The area was zoned light manufacturing when built, and later zoned residential; the business isap pre-existing non-conforming use. In: 2023, the applicant purchased the propertya along with other properties associated with the Paul L. Gravenor Home for Funerals. They are proposing to add a crematory unit for people and a crematory unit for pets. The unit proposed is high-quality modern technology with 24-hour support when the equipment is in operation. Ms. O'Rourke stated that there will be almost zero percent chance of external impact and no modifications tot the exterior of the building, except for a small chimney coming out oft the roof. The applicant is asking for an expansion of a pre-existing, non-conforming use. The ordinance allows the expansion ofa ar non-conforming use by special exception, so long as the existing building floor area is not increased by more than fifty percent. There is no proposed increased floor area, and no additions or modifications to the building. The crematory units will be within the existing floor space. Ms. O'Rourke stated that this is the same use, and this would be an expansion of that use. In the alternative, they are asking for a substitution, which is also allowed by special exception. Ms. O'Rourke also made a minor oral amendment to the application, reflecting a variance from Section 319-79.2.1, which is the time limitation to obtain a permit when a special exception or variance is granted. The ordinance allows 18 months; however, they would like to extend it to 21 months for the Ms. O'Rourke called upon Ms. Sipler to testify as owner of the property and to state her credentials. Ms. Sipler explained the job responsibilities ofa a licensed funeral director. She stated that the responsibilities include the safe handling and preparation of human remains, including embalming, directing funerals, counseling families on arrangements, and coordinating death certificates and disposition permits for Ms. Sipler testified that she obtained her funeral director's license in May of 2015 and that she has knowledge oft the equipment and technology usedi in funeral and cremation centers and the laws and Ms. O'Rourke stated that Ms. Sipler is a fact witness related to the property and business and she would also like to qualify Ms. Sipler as an expert int the operation of funeral and crematorium centers. Ms. O'Rourke asked Ms. Sipler to confirm that the testimony she will provide regarding the operation of at funeral and cremation center willl be to a reasonable degree of professional certainty. Ms. Sipler Ms. O'Rourke asked the Board to refer to Applicant's Exhibit A. She asked Ms. Sipler to clarify and Ms. Sipler estimated that the current volume ofr requests for cremations is around 80 per year but anticipates a volume increase. Ms. Sipler estimated the volume for the pet crematory: at 200-300 per Ms. Sipler stated that the typical working hours would be 7:00 a.m. to around 3:00 p.m. and on occasion in the evening, depending on the arrangements. She confirmed that the unit will have remote support  pet crematorium only, to focus on the primary crematory unit for people.  burials, cremations, donations, and traveling out ofs state.  regulations applicable to funeral and cremations centers.  affirmed.  confirm Items 1 through 9i in the exhibit.  year, based on residents alone.  provided by the manufacturer throughout working hours.    Zoning Hearing Board May 15, 2024  Page 14  Ms. Sipler confirmed that thet funeral industry is highly regulated and: subject to a professional code of conduct for funeral directors, with the highest ethical conduct for counseling families and conducting services, proper disposal of human remains, with specific rules and regulations. In Lancaster County cremations cannot be performed within 24 hours of thet time of death, and approval must be given by the coroner prior to cremation. The funeral director is required to have the permit in place and the Ms. Sipler confirmed that the facility is typically inspected by the State and is subject to USDA and Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection regulations for air quality, including the Pennsylvania. Air Pollution Control Act. The facility is subject to a permit and inspections. Scientific documentation that the equipment will operate below the emissions thresholds for permitting is Sipler stated that the unit will not emit any odor. Ms. Sipler explained how mercury enters the cremation process. Ms. Sipler cited a 2020 risk assessment in the Canada. Journal of Health that found no indication that mercury vapors released in the cremation process are a significant risk tol human health. Ms. Sipler confirmed that the units will not make noise to be heard off the property, will be compatible tot the neighborhood, will not create any additional truck traffic, willl have no outdoor storage, and The representative from Facultatieve Technologies, Ernie Kassoff, was sworn in and provided additional Ms. O'Rourke requested that Applicant's Exhibits 1-8 be entered as evidence. There were no objections. Ms. O'Rourke invited the attendees with Party Status to address questions to Ms. Sipler and Mr. Kassoff. Regarding the unit monitoring, Mr. Burkholder asked Ms. Sipler if she had tested the internet speeds at the property. Ms. Sipler stated that she has not. He asked Ms. Sipler to guarantee that there would be no smell for any neighbors at any distance. Ms. Sipler affirmed. He asked ift the hours would be Monday through Friday or through the weekend. Ms. Sipler stated that it would depend on the client's needs, and! Saturday morning or evening was a possibility. Mr. Burkholder asked why Ms. Sipler didn'tapply to have a uniti in Reamstown. Ms. Sipler replied that she didn'thave the space in Reamstown. Mr. Burkholder asked about the smell. Mr. Kassoff. stated that if the cremation process was done properly, there would be no smell. Mr. Burkholder asked if the equipment was controlled by the internet. Mr. Kassoff stated that the controls were in the unit, that it is a stand-alone operation, with the abilityt to remotely monitor the controls over the internet. Mr. Burkholder asked Ms. Sipler if the exhibit pictures were taken before or after the Gross Run restoration. Ms. Sipler stated that the pictures were taken Mr. Sweigart asked Ms. Sipler if she: stated that the typical cremation releases 0.456 grams of mercury. Mr. Sweigart's calculation for a: 180-pound bodyi is! 5.6 parts per million and he asked Ms. Sipler if she considered that an issue. Ms. Sipler stated that her research and studies indicate that mercuryi is not an issue. Mr. Sweigart asked if Ms. Sipler was familiar with forever chemicals- = PFOS. Ms. Sipler stated it was not part of what she does as a funeral director. He asked if she was aware oft the issue of environmental persistence. Ms. Sipler replied she was not aware of that issue in regulating a crematory. Mr. Sweigart asked how many cremation facilities are located near schools. Mr. Kassoff responded that  family membern must authorize it as well.  required, as well as record-keeping and reporting.  present no harm to public welfare or health.  testimony about the unit and its environmental impact.  during the two-week time after the Public Notice for the hearing.    Zoning Hearing Board May 15, 2024  Page 15  each state regulates the distance from a school. Pennsylvania DEP has strict regulations regarding crematories and emissions. Mr. Sweigart asked ift there was a concern about the 0.456 grams of mercury. Mr. Kassoff: stated this number came from a studyi in 1978 and the mercury from fillings is now practically non-existent. Mr. Sweigart asked Mr. Kassoff about environmental persistence. Mr. Kassoff  reiterated that mercury is no longer being used for dental work.  Mr. Sweigart asked Ms. Sipler ifa a facility located 181 feet from the sidewalk and road can provide dignity and privacy for families. Ms. Sipler stated that the facility has three entrances. The human remains are brought into the facility through the garage, which has ample room to completely enclose the vehicle and provides complete privacy. Mr. Sweigart asked if there were any concerns about the facility being Ms. Messner asked how the crematory would affect the residents' property values. Mr. Kassoff replied that crematories have no impact on property values. Ms. Messner asked if Mr. Kassoff had ever lost a loved one and had them cremated near his home. Mr. Kassoff replied yes. Ms. Messner asked what degrees Mr. Kassoff holds. Mr. Kassoff stated that he does not hold a degree but relies on reports from third parties that study emissions, the odor, the smokestack, and that all locations in North America pass the environmental regulations. Ms. Messner: asked Mr. Kassoff for addresses of the locations and he Ms. Messner asked if the exhaust from the roof was being monitored visually for any black smoke malfunction. Mr. Kassoff responded that audacity sensors will sound an alarm if there is smoke in the stack and an oxygen sensor modifies the oxygen to prevent smoke. Ms. Messner asked how often the uniti is checked and recalibrated. Mr. Kassoff stated standard maintenance was 500-600 emissions to ensure everything is functioning correctly. Ms. Messner asked what action would be taken if there were complaints from the neighborhood regarding smoke. Mr. Kassoff said that the PAI DEP would contact the Ms. Elliott asked what fuel source would be used. Mr. stated that UGI would be running gas lines to the property once the facility was approved. Ms. Elliott asked for details about the animal crematory and what is emitted. Mr. Kassoff stated that it was basically the same as the human unit, with adjustments made for the physical differences between humans and animals, with animals having more hair, fat and oils. Ms. Elliott asked ift the unit eliminates thet fats and oils. Mr. Kassoff replied that fats and oils are Ms. Elliott asked why the industry is strictly regulated by the DEP ift there are no health concerns. Mr. Kassoff stated that iti is regulated to maintain emissions standards. Ms. Elliott asked what other things besides the body and medical implants would be goingi into the combustion. Ms. Sipler stated that most remains would bei in ai berboard/cardboard container. It has the capability to burn a casket, but there is Ms. Elliott asked how many pounds the unit can burn. Mr. Kassoff explained that the unit can burn up to 1100 pounds. Ms. Elliott asked if there are stricter regulations for 1100 pounds. Mr. Kassoff said they are Ms. Wenger asked ift there were any notifications for the children that go to the school. Ms. O'Rourke  located close to a school. Ms. Sipler stated she has no concerns.  stated he could give her al list of220 facilities.  facility and reports would be examined from the monitored process.  combustible fuel and that the body itself is fuel.  no need fora a casket in cremation.  the same.  replied that notice was posted and it was also in the newspaper.    Zoning Hearing Board May 15, 2024 favor.  Page 16  Mr. Martin made a motion to goi into executive session. Mr. Sullenberger seconded and all voted in Upon returning to regular session, Ms. Storz stated that the purpose of the Executive Session was for the Board to receive solicitor advisement and that the hearing would be continued to the. June 19, 2024 Zoning Hearing Board meeting. More questions and public comments will bel heard at that time. Mr. Martin made a motion for continuance to. June 19, 2024. Mr. Sullenberger seconded and all voted in Mr. Mellinger made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Martin seconded and all voted in favor.  favor.  The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. 3Rine  Zach Rineer  Zoning & Codes Administrator