Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

regular meeting of the planning commission and we have the pledge of allegiance is first on our agenda it allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic nation under God indivisibley and justice for much.

All right. So, first item on the agenda is under new business is the Amtrak memo.

Yeah, I think I emailed this around to you folks. Um, there's nothing really for us to do about it, per se. Amtrak is indicating that they're going to be increasing the security level around their right of way up and down their 429 mile right ofway between um New York and the Canadian border there. Um again, not much for us to do other than they've indicated they want to use the planning commission as their town contact for when they do things here in town. Um there's a four-page letter. I also made made copies of just the pieces of this that is relevant to us which is pages 52 through 61 I think it is. Um you don't need the entire figure. I can make I can send you color copies if you'd like them. But yeah, they're not they're not changing right away. They're just basically indicating that

they don't want people trespassing. They don't want people tampering. They don't want people getting injured. So, they're going to take additional measures to increase the security around the right of way. Um, and they need sort of a contact group here in town. And it was suggested by Rivercon that they use the planning commission. So, that's really what this is. It's just sort of an introduction of the fact that this is what they're doing. And you guys will be a point of contact for for future Amtrak communications of this sort. Anybody have any questions about it? What is the purpose of the rightway? Are they building a a pier a dock at the end of that road?

Well, okay. There's two different things. One of which is the rightway going all the way through the town, which is a change along the river. They're building the new um bridge there and they're going to demolish the old bridge, but there's no plans by Amtrak at least to have any new dock or anything else there. They're they're literally going to build a new bridge, demolish the old bridge, and then go away. Um, so if you go down Shore Road Yep. and they now built this road that goes through the marsh and wetlands commission go through go to the water. What is at the end of that road? That's how they access it. Construction access.

Yeah, it's construction asset. The bridge doesn't start there, right? No, no, no, no. You're actually waiting. So, well, actually, they need to modify the rail line because in order to build a bridge that's whatever 50 ft south of the existing bridge, the rail line has to tie in. You can't just hard turn with the train. So, it's a longer stretch that needs to tie in to be built. So, that is just to help build the rail line and build in the bridge. It's to help build the rail line. So, I was thinking that they're perhaps building some platform down there. just work from it material is that is that

they're doing that on the site in Sabbrook too a lot more in fact on the on our side but yeah if you if you go down to the end of that road I've been down to the end of that road yeah there's sort of a a staging area that is down there it's not very big honestly um but again that's that's where they're sort of doing this side of the you know of the bridge if you go to the old Sabbrook side it's a much much bigger operation there pretty much bought out most of the marinas down there at least rented them and are using all the marina space for for all the material. I see. So the bridge will actually come to that particular place. No place. No,

at the very very end of the road there is already the railroad tracks. So what the what the point is that if you go down to the end of the road, the railroad tracks there are going to move slightly there so that when you get all the way to the water, they they will be 50 feet off. And again, the the new bridge is designed to handle 75 miles per hour. So if you're traveling at 75 miles an hour, you need to move the only reason I'm asking the questions is I was wondering about the use of that road to the town after this work is complete. Gone. They're removing that road. Yeah, it's just access. No place to go. No place to go. Yeah. Well, the tracks

there's still no place to go because it drops you off the railroad tracks and you're not allowed to be at the railroad tracks. So, it's also basically, you know, if you go through there on both sides is title. So, there's nothing you're going to do out there. And and you know, if it weren't for the fact that Amtrak is completely exempt from any local regulation, we wouldn't really have them plowing this road to get there. But, you know, they can pretty much do what they want. Um, but once it's done, the theory is it's going to be restored and all of that's going to come out. Okay. So, I don't see it having any future use.

No, no future use. Um, the other thing that is likely to happen is Ferry Road is going to be used at some point for access down there to get there. Um Martha Shoemaker has committed Amtrak to repaving that road when they're done because they're expecting that the large amount of really heavy equipment that's going to go up and down that road is just going to demolish that road to the extent that it's going to need to be repaved when they're finished. So expect Ferry Road to have increasing amounts of fairly heavy truck traffic as this progresses more toward our our side of the of the bridge there. Um and again that the trucks the road was never meant to handle the level of truck traffic and the the heaviness of the trucks that are going to go over there. So it's going to tear up the road when they're finished. They've committed to repaving the road

in seven years whenever that's going to be um Mr. Rio. So we'll see when we get there is going to go. We got to go start back here someplace. Okay. and have the railroad tracks curve to connect to the new bridge. Then they'll rip out all the other junk that's over here. When will they complete that prop? What's the schedule? That's the question. Seven years if everything goes exactly as planned about seven years

that kind of work. So just to see the scale of that thing the reality of it I I don't know the answer but let's let's let's say seven years and we'll see where we are in seven years. Um, you know, seven years for the government is almost like forever. So, um, yeah, they're telling us seven years. We we'll see what we are. Okay. Any other questions regarding the Amtrak now? Okay. All right. So, on to election of officers.

I guess we just elect a a chair and a and a vice chair. Correct. You can let the secretary if you want to you have a clerk you don't usually usually have right never had a secret usually it's chair to vice chair and you up to you can make people can make nominations for whatever and we'll go from here okay I nominate you Rob McCartney for chair okay seconded so I guess we'll stick with chair any other nominations for chair okay being nom take a vote And all those in favor. Can I be opposed? Just cuz. No. Just kidding.

All right. Uh, nominations for vice chair M. Michael Aurelio. Let's get a second for each of them. Okay. And again, theoretically, it's just the five regular members who get to to vote on this. I was going to ask that to be sure. Okay. I'd second that. You're seconding. Second. Yeah. Mike Oriel. Yes. Um I'll second Todd as our actually see is a alternate allowed to nominate someone.

That's why I jumped in and said you got to have an actual member nominate. Um so you need again you're only you're limited to the five people who are actual full members who can who can nominate. So that's where you again if you want to have Todd then somebody else needs to nominate Todd. You can nominate Todd but that's that's where we are. Okay. Right.

I'll nominate Todd. Okay. Second for lack of a second. Then it's Michael Oral. So we'll uh take a vote. Take a vote of our regular members. All those in favor? Hi. Okay. Congratulations, folks. Okay. All right. Congratulations. When's the inaugural ball? November. Okay.

All right. On to it's under future business. So, the lot line modification. is the the Wline modification file. Okay. Um we have here council for the applicant. Um we have an updated plan which I guess he's probably going to be discussing with you. We also have correspondence from attorney Cassella um which is being passed out now by Julie. Um based on it's been sort of some revisions or some modifications that have occurred since your last meeting. Um attorney Cassella has reviewed this final version of the plan and believes it is um ready to be acted upon with some conditions I set forth in the letter.

So with that wants to come forward, we can go from this. Do you have your own copy of this or do you want to work? Okay. Well, why don't we picture just one of you move over this way or why don't you move over this way and that way we'll create a distinction something in the center of the table for perfect final version of the plan. Hi everybody.

For the record subone um I live in town. I practice law in town for the last 25 years I believe and I and I and you rarely you will rarely see me at zoning meetings because um I'm out of my comfort level but every once in a while a client will say listen this is very simple and after 50 more years of practice you would think that I would know enough that when somebody says that I should run but I trying to help this fellow out uh with Mr. M fellow and his wife, but I've only met him several times. So Jeffrey Richards and his wife Linda on a very very small parcel of property. It's a undersized property is nonconforming and so forth. Fortunately, he lives next to uh uh Christine Pitchings who owns a like almost a five parcel acre plus a 25 parcel acre that's continuous to contiguous to that. So the simple plan was Christine is willing to part with a of this small piece of the four or four and a half acre 4.83 83 acre lot that she has that's sitting there vacant and uh she's willing to sell a portion of it to uh to the Richards, Mr. and Mrs. Richards. Um so, you know, on paper that's that's good. Um but it's not that simple. So, so in the end, uh I think where we're at is based on the last drawing um so that we don't have to um flag wetlands and so forth. I mean, it would have seemed that when you take a a

two let's see 29 acres that the Richard has and you add uh

you're trying to make it an acre. Yeah, they're trying to get trying to make it a little bit bigger and when you take the 4 point something acre and you leave it over four, it'd be okay. The problem is is that when you create a new the question is whether the 4.8 4.08 acre lot is itself sustainable as a building lot for the future and Christine has no plans to to develop it. However, you know, the future owners might. Therefore, Christine has agreed to um and I think that if this commission agrees with and allows this uh this slotline division uh modification, Christine, it would be incumbent upon her to add her 4.0 zero something acres to a 25 acre lot to give a 29 acre lot and would leave the richers with a little over an acre. So, I mean, it would seem to me a win-win situation. Um, but in the end, it made it more simple when Christine said, "Yeah, I don't care because I'm not going to build on it." So, I think that what attorney Cassella has indicated, and you could correct me if I'm wrong, council, uh that um uh if if you were to see your way to approve this uh LA line modification, the um it would be contingent upon review and acceptance by your uh your attorney, attorney Cassella, uh to review the two deeds that would be passed. Christine would be deeding uh the 779 acres or whatever to uh to my client um the Richards and she would also be required to deed the 4 point something acres to join her 25 acres. So she'd end up with

a 30 acre lot. Richards would end up on a 1acre lot. It would seem to me that at this point that there it would be hard to think that it's a it and my client was right in the end. It's a simple thing. But but it's only it's only after Christine agreed to to merge her lots together. Um at some point in time in the future should she want to do something different. She's got like 30 acres to figure that out which is not a bad thing. But that's but that would be did I summarize that correctly?

You summarize that entirely correctly. Um again at this point what I would ask that the commission do is approve the lot line modification based on this map and per attorney Cassella's conditions um that future deeds be reviewed by legal counsel. Is that acceptable you folks? Is that acceptable to you? You see a ton except yeah just so just do so this whole and it's just I think everything's distorted based on size but this whole piece is what is going to them that's correct okay and it leaves Christine with still four that remaining four acres or whatever her piece is actually over here and her bigger exactly correct

one of the fights we had and we before we fight okay okay one of the disagreements was whether we needed to get an actual survey of the rest of the land, which would have been very costly. And so the answer was, as long as it's being merged into the other lot, we don't really need a survey for it. The only thing we need a survey for is this piece of the transaction. So that simplified things dramatically. And here we are tonight with the simplified piece of only what is being merged into his client's lot. Any questions? perhaps can answer. Sounds simple. Thank you. Simple for me. You sound like somebody just came to my office in September.

I'd like to make a motion that we accept the application as explained. Approve. Not accept approve to approve it using forth and attorney gel correspondence. Second. All right. Motion's made and seconded. Uh any discussion? All those in favor? I Okay. Okay. He wants to basically

Great. Um, so the next item that is on the agenda is the plan of conservation and development. Sort of ties into the the it referral that's after that. But yeah, there's no independent reason to talk about it tonight. I sort of put it in there because it was in there as a placeholder from last time. Um, but it really is, you know, tied to the um the referral application that comes next. So if you want to just move to onto that, I can sort of get get into my discussion of that as well. Okay. Yeah, let's and well, I know there are some people that want to talk about the plan of conservation development. I will sit down and then

Yes. So, let's I just we can talk about that now. Um because it's also in light of, you know, the Connecticut housing regulation that's still kind of in flux, I think, and just some people had some questions. I want to make sure what we need to if there's anything we need to be doing about the POCD. And

my I've been talking to some legislators and the the law that was recently passed is nowhere near what's going to be it still is going to have a lot of thinking around. though to react too much to this interim legislation, I would think sit back and wait another whatever the session, however long it takes for him to get it kind of straightened out, but because it's not what's

what's law now is not what's going to be very shortly. And tied into what Todd just said, um I met this afternoon with two members of my zoning commission, uh Paulo Orzel and Michael Foliano. Um they would like to form basically a 8002 task force for the town. Um which would consist of two members of planning, two members of zoning, and a member of the board of selectmen to sort of coordinate how the town would be responding to this new legislation and working with Rivercco to figure out what we need to do. Um, so I don't know if that your thoughts are your representative

as a delegate to the river cog. Uh, if I just report back a little bit, you're right. Um, the the legislation still requires a lot of interpretation and the office of policy and management has to do that. they have to define some of the terms in the legislation and the scheduling and and and all that. Uh also it looks like you know the river cog is going to be uh the main focus. The cogs are going to develop plans for municipalities that you could elect to follow or the town could elect to go on their own and do their own plan if they don't go go along with that one. But Rivercog's going to play kind of a major role. So in a sense you're you're right. We still don't

you don't know what we got to do.

Exactly. I we we know some of the things that are going to be in there. We know for instance that you will be allowed to build housing in commercial zone. Um so you know some of the major pieces of that legislation we know but we don't know all the details or anything else right but there was suggestion that two people work with zoning from planning to come up with possibilities of how you might want to address both both the impact on zoning and the impact on the

COPD the the theory was that we need sort of a a working group to interact with Rivercog and and again see how whatever the new legislation is going to be and if there are if if we need sort of point people to provide information or we need point people to report back as to what's going on having sort of a task force regarding this particular legislation would be helpful I again they literally just happened at 1:30 this afternoon so I don't know how sort of fully baked this idea is. But again, since I was meeting with you guys tonight at 5:00, I figured I would at least come to you and say, "This is what they were they were thinking and do you guys have any interest in in

I did send a note to Martha and I suggested that, you know, they should appoint somebody to kind of honcho this whole project and make sure that we're getting the appropriate boards and commissions together so that we work on it together. we don't go as we typically do in sequential and then don't communicate and that it would be better off if we had a coordinated effort, you know, with zoning, planning, affordable housing, whoever else. So I haven't heard the fin of any facts. I don't know what they'll do, but that was my suggestion. Anyway,

I don't necessarily need an answer tonight, but yeah, again, I I did talk to Foliano and Orzel 130 and wanted to just bring forward their suggestion that we, you know, create some sort of task force specifically to to deal with this legislation. Okay, I think that I think that uh makes sense. Um, from what I understand, the zoning the first part of their zoning amendments are basically technical amendments bringing them up to date. Yeah, we rearranging the order, but no really significant change.

It happened. So, I mean, this legislation happened late enough in the process that we didn't want to try and reopen the process and try and catch up with whatever this legislation was going to say because also we thought it was probably going to change. So, the thought was nail down this version of the regs and then in the next version in phase two, we'll deal with a whole bunch of other issues, but we'll also try and catch up with whatever the regs end up looking whatever the legislation ends up looking like. So, that's true.

I think that makes sense. I mean from our perspective the planning how how do we want to plan for what's going to happen and affordable housing and or just you know expanding the the opportunities for different types of housing in town. I mean that's what we should be doing and would probably help us adjust the plan of conservation and development for the future and and working with zoning. might suggest some changes to the zone that might encourage that.

The other thing to mention which is Martha has now mentioned to me twice in the last four days. Um Martha is probably going to be actively pushing to guys to for this commission to merge with the zoning commission. So I don't know how you feel about that and that's not say that again. Okay. The first selectman is considering pushing fairly aggressively for this commission to merge with the zoning commission for a com combined planning and zoning commission.

I know your previous chair was adamantly opposed to that. Um I think she's looking at the change in leadership as a possible time to get that move through. Um she's also saying that she's having a very hard time recruiting volunteers and just for yeah to have fewer people needed for the the commissions. um potentially to merge the commissions. And again, that she mentioned it to me again at 8 o'clock this morning. She mentioned it to me during my budget hearing on Monday, right? Um I'm not telling you where we are in the process, but I'm just letting you know that be be prepared for that to be brought up as a topic again this year. Okay.

History-wise, were we consolidated at one time and zoning commission? My understanding it was right Rob early on like in the 70s or 80s. I mean older older than older than that. I've been I remember Bobby Pearson before before Bobby with Barbara Dietrich. Yep. Was head of the planning commission. So it might have even been the 60s that they were that they were combined that that it was Yeah. one. I mean look at the history and

yeah from from my earliest few municipalities where they're separate. No, there's about 50. Um, so it's not I mean like most municipalities have them combined, but again there are particularly amongst many smaller ones um smaller towns rather there about 50 that have separate commissions including um Old Sabbrook um Westbrook and a lot of the other shoreline areas do. I mean, you go to Farmington and it's planning zoning wetlands on one commission, right? Um, but they meet like weekly um to get through their business. Um, you know, I'm not sure you guys want to do, but uh

and again, I'm not telling you one way or the other what the plan is. I'm just letting you know. She has mentioned it to me twice in four days. So, you should probably be aware if she's mentioning it twice in four days, it's not it's not going away. That would require what? Ordinance to change, right? Every ordinance is a town meeting. So yes, you don't have a charter, but yes, it would require a new ordinance and as a new ordinance, it requires a town meeting. Um, and then it would require presumably a new election because you guys have separate election or you guys are, you know, appointed, but I mean, you would need a new election for whatever that combined board. Well, depends on how the ordinance is written.

Yes. Though I mean I I can't imagine you would have a combined planning and zoning commission appointed. Um almost a revised ordinance that may grandfather the current members depending on how many members are on it. I would I would expect that there would probably you would probably go from five zoning commission members to seven. It's my guess. But I mean the ordinance can say anything at that point in time. You can write it to say almost anything at that point in time. So it could work out because some of us oldsters might want to get fiveyear term is a long term. The terms could change.

Yeah, a lot of things could change, but I just I figured since again since this happened twice in four days that it's worth bringing to you that I'm I'm hearing a lot about snap. So okay. Um so it's just plan of conservation and development. I just haven't I we should probably continue to have that on our agenda as an item to discuss in the future as different things are coming up that that are affected by it. So I was wondering

should we have should we sort of have some points on to what needs to be changed in the current uh plan um of development? what needs to be what issues do we need to think about you know and will be incorporated um into the zoning right so so um you know affordable housing for instance was was mentioned if we look at the the constant you know what we have now at the planning de uh development guide the the things that we have in there about municipal housing growth about the town's affordable housing about sewer systems are all wrong. Okay, they all need to be rewritten. So,

could you expound on that for me? I for instance, the the sewer system. Okay, the sewer system says that the plan is to avoid sewers. That is correct. That is, you know, but I'm not sure that's the plan anymore. Sure it is. Why? Please expound. Why? Why would you think that we're incorrect in the way we are headed now?

Well, first of all, we're going to have a couple of the beach communities are moving forward, okay, with the sewer system. All right, so we already have the the intention of Old Lime Shores is to move ahead. The intention of Miami Beach is to move ahead and Old Colony. So, so the one who is not moving right so far as the town okay

is the is is sound view but I should say the sound view area. So so we are going to looks like we're going to land up having this pipe down route 156. So if we look at the South View area and we look at its future development and its ability to develop right uh and we look at the issue of the DP telling us okay or telling the town that they need to take action and they've already investigated the fact that sewer systems okay or septic systems you know we can't go to more advanced septic systems both because of the soil conditions in that area and because of the water table and because it's in a flood zone. So sewers make a lot of sense for that sound view area especially if the if we have that commonality of the pipe plus it would also allow some possible development in that area to help with the affordable housing issue.

Let me go for a second. Rob knows a lot more about it than I do because he's on the WPCA. But let let me

which recommended to do it. Could I The consent order that we have in place from the Connecticut D is a sewer, excuse me, is a is a pollution abatement order. It's in no way to be used for increased development in the area. Number two is that you keep bringing up the pipe. The pipe is going to be sized to serve the area that's affected by the consent order only. Number the next item there eastline, you have to pump that waste from the beaches all the way up the hill by Rocky Neck to this pump station down by Bridebrook. East Line doesn't want it. They do not they do not have the infrastructure to take any more sewage. East Lime has just passed the moratorum that no more development takes place in East Lime because they do not have the sewer capacity. Then after it leaves East Lime, it has to get dumped all the way to Waterford. And I don't know about water about Waterford's capacities, but I do know that the sewers treatment plant in New London cannot take any more waste. New London sew sewage treatment plant is at capacity as right now. So to think that you're going to change old lime into Waterford by putting it a bunch of sewers, it it nobody wants it. According to state law, you can't we can't build another sewer treatment plant because you can't discharge into Long Island Sound. It's against the law.

Can't do it. God, they they reached agreements. Yeah, understanding their capacities though they they corre corre correct plus the other peace communities are moving forward now. How could they possibly move forward if those issues exist?

No, you we're both saying the same thing. I believe that yes, there is an agreement between the the old line communities and East Lime to accept the waste as planned. But to think that we're going to change the the amount of development at in the beach communities because of these sewers is not part of the plan. Is that basically generally true? Yeah. Okay. I mean I may

you know so I guess the one question would be I mean to his point it's more about I mean are we really are we really practicing sewer avoidance if we do have this little area that has been considered for sewers you know it I agree in general 99% of the town is sewer avoidance absolutely it's this little tiny area that if there's sewers all around it you know are we really does it make sense to keep avoiding and it's sort of in between you It's not just a clearcut of no sewers, right? Because they are going to be there. Yes.

My understanding too, Ty, come here because you're more familiar with Sound View. So, if you had one of those lots for instance, that were cleared in Sound View. So, one of those buildings that were knocked down, it's now an empty lot. They I thought they had the right and the ability to connect to the sewer and build something on. Yes. the vacant lots that are the building lots are able to be built on. Yeah. So if you have So it would allow that's much new development. It's just it would allow them to be redeveloped so that you could put a house on it that you know you wouldn't have the limitations of a septic system. So meaning you know your areas would fit better.

So so would help with housing to some extent. Right. But these are one of the topics we would right talk about about when we get into the housing issues. You know, we'll know more about how much the sewer size would be and what the you know volumes are and what properties would be affected. But I would agree it's it's focused down there because they're going to have a whole series of problems with rising sea levels, the poor soils, and we got to keep that for tax base that

there's I also heard some discussion about you you can tell is is the town discussing what takes place on the north side of Let's say we're where uh we know that the big Y plaza has been purchased, but I understand there's controversy about the north side. Okay. What hap that land is for sale on the north side and which I mean Andy's Plaza has been for sale for years now. Um, I don't know if that's that's the one you're referring to or if you're referring to the the the piece I've talked to one let's say that um the hideaway. So the hideway is

Yeah, that's Annie. Yeah, the Annie's closet there. I mean, the truth is that the people who have come to talk to me about that site have all assumed that whoever buys that site is knocking everything down there and starting from scratch. um that again I I can't tell you what will eventually happen, but since I've been here now basically three and a half years, um I've had five or six different developers come in and talk to me about that site, all of whom have pretty much told me that the only way it makes sense is to wipe it clean and start from scratch. Um, so how that factors into any of this, I can't really tell you for sure, but um, in its present configuration, I don't really see a future for that site. It is basically

right falling down, right? And there are sort of capacity issues down. So yeah, I mean you know well so we were discussing that like the issue should the should the town like let's say a developer goes in there and comes to the town says I want to do this right and then the town has to evaluate whether or not it's in the zoning capability you know so we're reacting does it make more sense for the town to be take initiative so that so that is it is it in the realm of feasibility that the town actually gets involved with that by taking an investment interest in all right such that

investment interest I I don't think well the town buys the town if that real estate is realion

so if the town was to you know buy the property for instance so I was thinking I was thinking that perhaps the town needs the ability to act where you have like a piece of property, especially in a commercial district, all right, that's sort of vital to the future of the town. So, if you have something that meets that kind of criteria, the town should have the means, okay, to request funding to deal with to deal with that before that. So, they don't have to be reactionary to say, "Yeah, no, we don't want, you know, we don't want that. We do this." But they can actually help plan what takes place there. It's sort of like the Halls Road minor a minor halls road, right? We lost you lost a big one, but you could do a little one. You could do that side. They got the sidewalk money now. Is that is that something?

I don't I don't think the town wants to be in the development business. Tell you based on the fort trouble situation that buying of private land for public development was wildly unpopular in New London when they tried to do it there. I I don't know that it's going to be any more popular here.

And there our our company built the the major uh redevelopment project in New London. was State Street. They turned State Street right in front of City Hall into a pedestrian mall. I was a little kid, but our company built it. There were businesses that were going concerns when they built it and in five years they were all gone. They all went out of business. So multi- multi-millions of dollars we got paid to do something that people sitting at a planning commission thought would be a great idea and it fell on its head and they ended up tearing it all out again. So now I was

Wasn't that part the crystal ball that kind of knocked them out? No, that was no way way before malls ever started. There were no malls. No, there were no malls. But I mean I'm saying when the crystal ball came no it it just it still the town's not going to get in the real estate. Yeah. In this case the town and there are there's certainly cities where you know if they've got old mill buildings and you do a brownfield redevelopment I mean that's a situation where it's very different but in this case I mean it's still a viable property at the moment. I mean maybe barely but it is. And so the town doesn't want to for sale right you can buy it right. What I what I will say is yeah it's a good idea. We could plan.

We can plan. And the other thing I will mention amend changes the zoning to make it more thes under the new legislation. Um while we are not transit oriented because we don't have a train station or a bus station or any of those things. We can claim to be transit adjacent because we are next to Old Sabbrook and therefore we can develop certain zones in town transit adjacent and use certain benefits in the state to help us do that. That's one of the things that will need to be looked at under the new legislation whether we want to be considered a transit adjacent municipality or not. Um that has certain benefits but it also has certain costs. So that's one of the things that's going to be discussed by this commission going forward. I am sure is whether is that the virtues of being transit adjacent and whether what that they would do to our zoning regulations.

So that's Eric to move this a bit so we can ultimately get out of here. Um should we do a vote on whether or not we want to participate in this um joint I don't know if you need to take to do a vote or not. The chairman just sets it up. Well, I mean, you can certainly get a consensus. Do you think this is a good idea? And then you can ask for volunteers for who wants to join the the body if this is something that is is that the planning commission is is amendable to. Is it an official request that we do this or they're just still talking about it? I think somebody

Martha wants to set up a meeting and again she's she's going to set it up as a temporary body so she doesn't have to go and create it by ordinance and all the rest of it there. she can as an ad hoc member create a temporary body like the 250 celebration there. So yeah, if if this is created, we're going to try and have a meeting relatively soon. So if the chairs meet, then Rob can look for a volunteer to Yeah. to be on it. So then maybe that's what we just wait for. Wait for the chairs to meet

and you know, well again if you're interested in volunteering, let Robert me know and and we will keep you in mind for that for that group. Okay. But again, Martha's behind it at this point. Paul Arzel's behind it or Mike Foliano's behind it. So, it looks like we're sort of creating some momentum to to get this together. So, if you're interested, please let Robin know and we will try to get again set up some sort of beginning meeting to make this happen here. Okay, great. We are we are we we're on PC.

So we'll keep PCD I guess on our agenda in the future just as because it is going to be impacted by some things but we can move on to the petition to amend the zoning regulations.

Okay. Um again folks we have um I did send out the the links and everything else to the the regulations. We have some hard copies here if you guys want physical hard copies to play with. Um we do have and you have in front of you from Rivercog a letter stating that it is um consistent with the regional plan of conservation and development which is not necessarily something you guys need to come up with but it's certainly good to know that Rivercog has now sort of voiced its support of the REGG rewrite. Um, I did give you guys a memo, a copy of which is also in front of you that gives you potential reasons why you could find support in the PCD for the zoning regrite. Um, as Michael Aurelia mentioned earlier, this was not meant to be a substantive overhaul in the sense that we didn't change the uses in zones. We didn't change the zone lines. We didn't do a lot of major changes to affordable housing or to um issues such as mixed use or accessory apartments. All of that we kind of kicked to phase two of the uh rewrite. This was meant to be sort of a reorganization so that we had regs that were consistent with the current statute but were also easier to use. Um, if you are familiar with the current regulations, if you want to know what uses you're allowed to do in each zone, you have to go individually zone by zone and take a look. There is now a use table where you can just look across and down and see in every zone what's allowed in that zone. It makes it much easier to to work with. Um there are also we broke the definitions out into uses and um sort of terms of of use. Um there are additional definitions of things that were used in the regs but were never defined in the

hopes that it would give developers or property owners a better sense of how to you know interpret the regulations. It would also give the zoning commission a better understanding of what the regulations were supposed to mean. Um again by statute they are obligated to come to you folks for your evaluation of whether it's consistent with the POCD. Um you need to report back consistent or inconsistent. Um the difference is if it is inconsistent with the POCD they need a supermajority of 4 to one to adopt it. Um if it's consistent with the PCD they simply need a 3 to2 majority to adopt it. Um, and again, the memo sort of lays out reasons why I think it probably is consistent, but again, this is your commission and your opportunity to to ask me questions or give comments regarding it.

When do we have to have this opinion? Is it next? When are they having hearings? I mean, the the first hearing is next Monday night. Okay.

The 12th. The second hearing, we've already been to keep it open, is February 9th. The The difficulty is this. Your meeting this month happens to be early, you're in front of them. Your meeting next month is not until after they meet next month. So, if you don't vote on it tonight, you would either need to hold a special meeting or you would vote on it at your next meeting. The zoning commission would then need to leave their hearing open until March to adopt because they would need to wait for your response in February. So, I'm not telling you you have to vote tonight. Take your time. Do what you need to do. Um, but the difference is again a possible February adoption versus a possible March adoption.

Okay. I would like to spend some time looking at it even though I understand it's it's relatively routine. I I just haven't had a chance because of the holidays and the travel. So yeah, I I agree. I get a chance to look at it in any detail. So I mean I've seen your summary and stuff. That's absolutely again fair. Fair fair enough. We do have the option to have a special meeting if we needed to just have the one item on the agenda to do this. I I wouldn't be opposed to that before there, you know, the zoning commission meeting to have have a special meeting just on that. Yeah, it's a good idea. Yeah, give us some time maybe at the end of the month or

beginning early next month, whatever works for for folks. Okay. Well, we need a to make a motion on that or you could just get if you're going to set a special meeting, I would like you to do that tonight by vote just because that way, you know, we get, you know, theoretically to call a special meeting requires a vote of the commission here. So, I would like you to set that date so that when we do the minutes, the minutes go out with that date set already. So, um, are you looking at like if February calendar I was say February 5th, which would be the first Thursday in

um, February, would put you again ahead of the zoning commission's 9th meeting. Um, again, that that I'm just throwing out dates. Feel free to pick whatever you want, but again, you usually meet on Thursdays, maybe January 29th, week before that. January 29th, 29th. Yeah. And that if that sounds good, what day is that? Thursday. It's the last Thursday in January. 29th at 5:00. I will reserve a room. If it is not this room, you will know within the next couple of days what room you're going to be in because we obviously need to get that out as well. We need a motion. And

you need a motion to have a final motion. We have a special meeting January 29th in this building 29th at 5 p.m. Second. Second. All in favor? I homework assignment is the rags. Read the rags and be ready to vote. Got it. You said you have copies of the hard copies. You have a couple hard copies. You right. You brought I I hand or we can pick them up. Oh, the actual physical copies of the rags themselves. These are the new draft rags. I did not. Okay. If you want ones, we will print them out. Stop by the office. Stop by the office and get them. Um otherwise, it's online with

it is online. And if I No, no, no. We're talking about the actual 200page documents. You can get them online. Get them online. I did. If anyone needs a hard copy, let me know and we will print out a hard copy for you and make it available. Okay. Is that online version like a red line strikeout? Um, it isn't. However, I can get you one of those as well. Okay. Those are also we didn't want to put the red line version online because it would just I think cause confusion, but we do have the If you could send that out to us if that's available, that'd be great. I know it's probably pretty messy, but

Well, no, actually because because everything is in a totally different place, all you're really seeing in the red line version are places where we added in additional terms or where we, you know, where we made some modification to try and simplify or consolidate some of the language there. So, it's not going to be as messy as you would think. in the in the appendix to the new regulations, there is a table that lists where everything started and where everything went. Okay? So, if you need to figure out, okay, where did this come from? Everything is already laid out in the appendix for you to be able to do that. So, uh,

and that'll be in the the publish thing that you give us that that's already online in the reg that the regs that are the draft regs that are available for everyone already have the appendix attached to it. But again, the red line version I will email out in the morning will have some additional information in it. That would be helpful. Uh Rob, I may not be here for the 29th, but I've already read through those regulations and I don't see any problem with it. So if you count my vote now, you have an alternate will fill your spot that day. Okay, it's good to know.

I had a question. I I understand it's pretty clear why what what's happening in phase one. Can you could elaborate a little bit? What's the goals of phase two? What are we trying to do? What's the

starting in March or whenever the we have the a new you know the the new version of the regs in place um the zoning commission is going to be sort of meeting with stakeholders in town to figure out what in the current regs people don't like or what the regs don't have that they might need. Um they're going to try and meet with each of the boards and commissions in town or at least the ones that are sort of most relevant to the the zoning regulations. They're also probably going to meet with a lot of the commercial operations in town just to see what the you know the new owners of the the strip mall have to say or or people along Boston Post Road. Also during the summer we are planning to have gatherings of people on the shoreline areas who may not be here this time of year. Right. So the goal is to try and go through the community and figure out for the people who have a stake in old lime what about the regs is working? What about the regs is not working? Are there things that we think should be contained in the regs that aren't there? Um, you know, for instance, the zoning board of appeals has already made clear that in the flood zone, going vertically in the flood zone right now, if you're in the setback, is considered to be a requires a variance. If even if all you're doing is going vertically in the flood zone to comply with FEMA, you still need a variance. And ZBA has said, don't send those. If all you're doing is going vertically to meet the flood zone, that shouldn't need a variance. incorporate into your regs that that's just allowed by regulation.

Okay. That's because stairs might intrude into the setback, right? Or something because it's raising. The R10 has a maximum height of 24 ft. Okay. So, you know, going higher in R10 to meet their flood zone requirements is going to get higher than 24 feet. It just has to. So every elevation in the flood zone small lots

you also have issues with almost all of the things are in the sideyard setback or rear yard or front yard set any of the setbacks. So again, the ZBA is saying, "Look, folks, we're granting these variances because we want people to be compliant, but we shouldn't need to be involved here if all you're trying to do is get FEMA compliant, right? I mean, so ZBA has made clear there's a there's a flaw in the regs if we're seeing a dozen of these ZBA applications a year because something's wrong that we keep getting these applications and we keep granting these applications, but then the whole idea of unique hardship is getting lost here, right? Um, so again, ZBA sort of already weighed in on that issue saying we want to have you look at that issue. Um, I know that accessory apartments have been a really big deal in town. You have about the most restrictive accessory apartment regulations in the entire state of Connecticut. Um, so ADUs as something that is important to the town one way or the other probably will be something that's going to get discussed. Where it comes out, I don't know. But right now it has to be a structure that was in place in 1997 and requires a special permit to get a a accessory apartment there. Um so the number of places where you can do that and it's only in the R40 and R80s RU4 RU80 zones by the way. Anything smaller than RU40 you cannot get an accessory apartment. So again the combination of all of those things means people are either doing them illegally or you just aren't getting them. And there is a definite pent up demand for that kind of use in town. So I would expect accessory apartments is to be a big deal. I know per the state, you know, mandates, affordable housing is going to be something we're going to need to look at

in the new regulations.

So it goes back to my thought. It just seems to me that you know the zoning rags basically can implement the PC and where we what the town overall plan is. And if we're having these major changes seems to be we should be reviewing the PZD first to make sure that that's up to date and where we want to you know change is m necessary or if do we want to change it or um you know what what areas do we think are best for affordable housing or accessory apartments whatever it is and then you do the zoning. Well, except we're in the middle of the the zoning now. And my concern is this. Zoning it has sort of

has a north star of they have to meet this document. Okay. If you're moving this document around, it's very hard for the zoning commission to then aim at whatever your moving target is. So, but that doesn't it still doesn't that's not an argument not to make sure this is up to date. They can wait. They're not going to wait, but it's a plan. They're not going to I mean, at the end of the day, at the end of the day, they they are going to adopt regs no matter where this is.

Okay. And they're going to adopt regs, I am guessing, by the end of ne this current year, maybe early next year. So, unless you're going to move really quickly with the PC, I am guessing you're going to be faced with the zoning commission handing you phase 2 rags while you're still playing around with this. So, I don't know how you want to handle that, but I'm telling you right now, zoning commission is is moving quickly on this and can be this is true, but the major changes and not until phase two. Yes, that's this year. Phase two is what I think you know is being addressed by House. Well, absolutely. So, I mean the the

phase be modified before they tried to do phase two. Yeah. It would it could implement what they do. I understand be implementing

but the the process of amending your POCD I am guessing will also take 8 months to a year to go start to finish and that is the same eight months to a year that the zoning commission is working on their reg. So you're going to be again that you're going to be sort of chasing each other to the finish line here. So I I don't know how that's going to easily work out. If you again, the zoning commission wants to hear your input. If you think there are areas that should be in the zoning regulations, they absolutely want to hear that. I'm just not sure that trying to amend this document while they're trying to amend their document is a recipe for a good result.

So, I think it would make sense if we could get updates, you know, with the pace peacemail updates as they're going along. rather than them handing us all new zoning regulations and we have to uh say it meets the POC or it doesn't. If they can give us stuff as they're going along, we can review it as as they're going along and we can change the POC if we decide to or not. you know, if if we agree with what they're doing, say, "Yeah, it's a good idea, and it's not a POC, we probably ought to amend it." I think it's we can work together on that. And to be reactionary at the at the end would be difficult

for us to be handed the Encyclopedia Britannica and go through that thing and have to fix it. So to have you say that we ought to change it now. Well, we don't even know what we're aiming at. We don't know where they're going. So, if we can get updates as they finish a I don't know, 25% of it. Go. Here we go. This we're thinking on 25%. What do you guys think? And if there's something we, you know, we want to discuss. I think that's a great way to do it. And

here, Todd, here's what we're aiming at. If you go on the zoning commission web page now, there's a link to the changes to the zoning rigs. Okay? And the goal is as everything new happens in real time, we're going to be updating that page and I will happily every month let the planning commission know what's new on that page so you guys can go take a look.

I think that's a good idea because then we can discuss together rather we all sitting instead of listening to your wife at the dinner table, you're reading the proposed planning zoning rules. I think it'd be booked good if every month you can present it. We can discuss it and say, "Well, you know that fits this, it doesn't fit that. What do you think we ought to do?" Purposes of printing budget. I'm probably not going to hand you pieces of paper. No, that that's I will give you the link to that web page and we'll

all of us have a device here where we can look at it and talk about it. Um, so yeah, but my goal is in real time as the zoning commission makes any changes or as we whatever our plans are, that page will be updated in real time to keep people in the loop as to where we are. So, you know what is ironic though? When they come out with the it seems we come out with new zoning changes, they then come to the planning commission to say, is this in compliance with the POC? And of course, we haven't modified the PCD yet. So it's sort of like wait a minute you know what are we doing? So to you know to point we're behind I think if I could just interrupt

we have a solution to this problem because if we have two people and two people from zoning talking about the housing issues which are probably going to be the most controversial. One of or two of them will be able to talk at our meetings about what in the world they're doing about housing. where are they going about housing before they even, you know, start to really write the rags. I think that's one of the big advantages. And if there's something else that we're really concerned about, whether it's sewers, I don't know if they do stuff, zoning and sewers, but that might be, you know, another topic that's controversial might be put a little committee together so that we're on top of it or we could, you know,

well, and of course, if your commissions are merged entirely, that solves the problem. So that solves the problem and it has one less meeting for staff. You'd be here at 2 a.m. clock in the morning. Well,

you'd probably I I would probably still have two meetings a month at that point in time. Um so anyway, but we we can certainly I agree that that um it keeping your keep you discussing what your planning goals are is definitely an important part of what your role is. Um I'm just not sure that given given the timing that we're going to be able to update this document in time to meet the the schedule that the that the zoning commission We might be able to modify sections of it. You might be or even if you just if our committees joint committee recommends

these are things that we're you know considering in the zoning and we talk about it ahead of time before they do the things and get our input. That's I think we're saying the I think

yeah then we can say you know we could just not modify the whole damn plan. we modify this section that relates to affordable housing or housing or accessory units or whatever it is we could do it piece by piece and it's manageable. Another interesting point I mean there's also these other subcommittees. So for instance there's a subcommittee on affordable housing plan right that that there is a that we have a committee that subcommittee it's an entirely separate committee it's a time and then we have another committee that's the economic plan okay for the town okay

if you're running for the town and you should really have input that's how we did that's how we did the so no but it takes like three it's whatever takes We can't we can't in three months redo the PCD. It's a it's not I mean how long did it take us last time? Not thoroughly.

No, it took Michael's talking about there are if there's things that are impacted in a section, we can certainly look at that and it's worth looking at but not you know not a revision of it. And I think the most controversial things are going to be the things that we're most pieces of easy stuff is the easy stuff. It's going to be the the tough stuff where we really need to talk to them ahead of time and say, "Gee, we don't really like that for this reason." And they're going to be looking for that impact of And again, they're going to be looking for economic

hassle. How's the impact? The goal is all of the commissions, not just yours, should be able to weigh in on the new regs to give them the flavor that they need to address whatever the town the historic district commission, the whoever, you know, historic district commission is right now looking at their signage issues and they want to make changes to the signage issues that the how much of that filters into the zoning regulations, we'll have to wait and see. So long as it doesn't interfere with free speech, I'm in favor of it. Well, that's again, they have powers that we don't have on the zoning commission, but yeah, we we'll get there. Okay.

So, I think we have a technique to be able to get to the critical issues that we need to get to. We just need to get people talking to the zoning commissioners before they make up their minds. So, we see it before and have input on it before they Yeah, I mean, I mean, it would have been nice from the beginning to have everyone together zoning, planning, things involved. What can I say? And kind of work on the overall game plan and the steps rather than just them launching into the zoning. Anything else tonight on on this this issue? Oh yeah. No problem. Okay. Um how about 16 neck?

You know more about that than anybody else in the commission want to know. Um, okay. You guys granted subdivision approval for this site, 16 neck road, um, a couple years back. Um, it has gone horribly sideways in a lot of different ways. Um, the road there, while it's not a town road, is supposed to be built to town road standards. Um, it has not been. Um it we that they were supposed to have their engineers testing it while it was being put in place to ensure that it was the proper thickness, proper consistency, had the right subbase. They did not do that. We then sent our engineers out there to perform this evaluation. They found it was completely defective. Um, also there is a drainage pipe that runs from the catch basins underneath the road to the detention basin. This pipe was supposed to be placed in gravel or something else to hold it in place. It is sitting essentially in mud. Um, the thought is at some point that pipe is going to shift. Um, as you are may recall there is only one way in, one way out to that subdivision. If that pipe shifts and carries the road with it, you will not be able to get to any of the houses on the other side of that pipe, which is Paul's houses. They are on notice. They will not be getting cos until that is addressed. Um, additionally, you had a clearing plan, an erosion control plan. In that plan, um, the first thing they did was cut down all of the trees on the site. Um, there's been a massive amount of erosion. This has gone to wetlands because this the erosion has gone into the wetlands. They owe us a new engineered erosion control plan. They have not provided that uh erosion control plan.

Um one of the houses that they did um start construction on um literally has the garage pointing in the wrong direction. Um, so how about bonds? The bond issues they haven't.

Well, again, wetlands have been all over this with the wetlands impact and those requirements for bonding now that they have not met on the wetland side. Um, they theoretically had Richard Snarski propose a remediation plan for the wetlands. Um, he was supposed to ensure that the work was done to his satisfaction. They sent four guys in there with shovels and no supervision to just dig out some with the saltation in the wetlands. So far, we have not seen anything from Snarski indicating this matches anything he wanted done there. Um, again, there's a lot of wetlands side issues. The wetlands commission has outstanding orders on the site already. Okay. Um where it becomes important from your standpoint is wetlands has authorized its council which is your council um uh at Cassella to start working on litigation to try and enforce some of what's going on there. Um you as the people who granted the subdivision may want to get involved in this to indicate that he is they are out of alignment with your subdivision regulations. Um the

Did we bond as a planning commission the road?

No, because it was a private road, right? So the reason you usually bond is if the town has to go in and finish the road, we want monies to be able to do that because the town was never going to go in and finish the road. We didn't bond for that. However, under the Wetlands Commission's recent action, they are required to now place $50,000 as a bond to repair the work that was done incorrectly so that the wetlands are not further damaged. They need a further $50,000 bond on the wetland side for erosion control purposes. Um, that's $100,000 in bond. We have not seen any of that. Um but that those were not planning requirements because again on the planning side this was all supposed to be private.

Yes. So what would be the range of actions we could take? That's that's the the difficulty um the guy else on the zoning side. Yeah. Um zoning has somebody will do something

and assist order. They have perdm penalties whatever else violation the subdivision plan the penalty under the statute is $500. Not very helpful. Um however your next remedy would be beyond that revoking the subdivision. So that is something else for you to consider doing. And I would not tell you to litigate over $500. But the point is, if Ed Cassella is going to court on the wetland side, it probably wouldn't hurt to have count two being and you're also not in conformance with the the subdivision. Um, just go ahead. I don't explain this to me.

You can build a private road that doesn't meet any standards and could fail. So people who buy lots can't get access to their lots. No, no, but

no. That the the bonding stuff is also so that if you do go belly up and you sold lots, there's nothing's been sold to any people. So, the only thing that's there is a building that they can't do anything with. The only the only way it can be sold to you as a house is if all the stuff is fixed. the guy will eventually sell the thing to somebody or the bank will take it back and the bank will sell it to somebody and somebody will do all to do all the things in order to get in order to get a CEO because right now he he can't get

anything and they're on notice that they cannot get a co and no I mean no somebody's nobody's going to buy a lot they you do research before you a lot cheap lot and they want they want to start construction on Taran Road to Sharon Drive rather. Um they're not able to do so because of the outstanding wetlands violation order on that site. So it's another new house that they want to start another

No. Okay. If you look up the road right now, there are two houses under construction, but they're up the hill, right? There's a third house closest to the wetlands that has a separate violation order under the wetlands order because of the work that was done too close to the wetlands. Yeah. Okay. So,

they want to start construction of two Sharon Drive, but the bank won't advance funds because there's an outstanding assistant assist order for to Sharon Drive. So, they've asked to be on the wetlands agenda for the end of this month to try and show that they are really meeting the requirements of two Sharon Drive. I I don't think they're going to get there, but they're desperately trying to get funds from the bank and the bank is saying, "We're not giving you funds while you have a violation." Okay. So, that's all of that is sort of bringing you up to speed on the subdivision that you've granted. at some point um if it becomes necessary we can talk about revoking the subdivision entirely. Um again the only other if the reason I'm mentioning it is because potentially if we do go to litigation on the wetland side it may be worth sort of yeah you know dovetailing there again the remedy is is no remedy but at least that way it's the court is on notice the lenders are on notice everyone's on notice that they're in violation of the subdivision.

Okay. Doesn't revoking the subdivision though create more problems? Really? Yeah. Revoking subdivision is a half-built road with half built houses on land that isn't

Well, that's that's why that's Yes, you can revoke the subdivision, but that that creates all sorts of problems as well. So again, I I'm not necessarily recommending that you revoke the subdivision today, but um again, if things continue to go sideways there, there's very few other remedies we have. So um again, I'm just trying to give you an update as to where we are with all of this. um and say you will be hearing more I'm sure regarding where we are but don't have to do anything now but next step you're saying potentially for us is to join this this uh yes potentially to with our $500 piece. Yeah. Yeah. Again you're not in it for the remedy. You're really just in it so that

just to notice that that's a muscle, right? Okay. the possible remedies or how I see this thing probably going is that the the bank is going to end up owning it

because the people aren't going to be able to pay for it. So, the bank's going to bank going to foreclose on it and the bank will sell it for whatever they can. Somebody will buy it if the price is low enough and the bank will take that money to recoup some of the money they lent. And if you could buy it for a dollar and you have a chance to sell a couple of $500,000 we can't buy $500,000 house don't for $900,000 house. It might make financial sense if you could buy it cheap enough. So the ultimate remedy is the bank will get it back. The bank will sell it to somebody and somebody if they get it for the right price will fix it.

And just on the financing side by the way just so you keep you in the loop with all of that. um end of last year, um their last loan pretty much seized up there and they were forced to refinance, um which they managed to pull off, but the expiration date of their new financing is January 1st, 2027. Um so they literally are frantically trying to do something this year, which is why they keep calling me and saying, "We have to build lot two. We have to build lot two." Um their problem. Yes. Yes. Their problem. Well, I No, I'm just saying. It'll work out. It's going to take a little while. We bent over back.

I noticed they there was a note that they did this quick. They've been quicking a lot. is it seemed to be my impression was they were doing this because maybe someone else in the family could finance it or No, they were doing it because they they've stiffed a bunch of their subs and they're moving to a new LLC to try and

Yeah. I mean, they didn't pay their original engineer. They didn't I mean, there are a bunch of people they haven't paid. Um they owe some electrician about $50,000. Um, my understanding on the road, by the way, is that the reason they haven't sued the contractor over the shoddy road work is that they never got a contract for that because they were going to do it on the cheap. Um, so they can't enforce the contract that they never got, right? Um, and that's anton just so you know. Okay. Anyway, so um they they tend to work with people who will work for cheap and they get the results of that labor or what you don't pay for in this particular case.

Yeah. Um so yeah, at some point this is all going to seize up and collapse, but I I don't know what some point is exactly. Okay. Could be a while. Is this the same builder that has property up on Lord's Meadow? Yes. That's saying builder. Yeah. Calling them builder is is a Yeah, it's not true. And just to just to update you on Lord's Meadow, by the way,

um phase two Lord's Meadow. Um phase two Lord's Meadow, the road was never completed to the point where it was donated or given to the town. Um we are holding a $100,000 bond from Dr. Awa on that road. The problem is that because it has not been maintained in 12 years, the amount of work given inflation is $500,000 to complete the road. Um, the property owners were never told any of this. There was supposed to be an association set up that was never set up. Um, at some point, um, I'm going to need to send a very unhappy letter to all the property owners saying, "By the way, this is not a town road. If you would like it to be a town road, each of you needs to kick in $40,000 to make that happen. Um I expect that will also cause

whailing nashing of teeth and lawsuits. Um good. Okay. Um these are the same people who also um bought 125 Shore Road from uh Ron Sweeney. Um they it's in a flood zone. They proceeded to do a bunch of work inside the house without getting permits that are now over the 50% FEMA number. um with the result that someone is buying it off of them on the premise that they're going to knock it all down and start over again with a new house which is in front of ZBA. Um so yeah, every property they have touched in town has ended poorly. Um so they own Button Ball too. No, button Balls Reagan. That's different.

About 250 Shore Road. What about 250 Shore? We lost a lawsuit on that. Lost a lawsuit. So go now. Okay. Well, goes Monday night for an executive session to the zoning commission. We are at this point haggling over conditions of approval, but they will be able to build what they they asked for there. Um, storage units, storage units, there's no We are not going to the appellet court on on that case. Now at this point the the theory is that we

probably the likelihood of success is not great. Um and at this point the thought is if we can get better recognitions of approval that it's just simpler to do that than then fight it out. This is similar to what happened at the gas station. We fought the gas station three different times. On the third appeal, they finally won and we argued over conditions of approval and they built the gas station with the conditions of approval. So I expect that's what's gonna happen. Okay. There's a dump that it was before. So that's what's happening at 250 Shore Road.

Anything else for the internet? All right. Yeah. Our last last item on our agenda. We'll we'll we'll bang it out, I guess. uh reading and approval of the minutes from November 13th regular meeting. I would like to make a motion that we accept the minutes as posted on the town website. Second. Seconded. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? I did read. We'd like to make a motion that we adjourn. Okay. 622. Second. Second. All those in favor? Yeah. I gez. Thanks. It was a long life. My first meeting. It's the longest one ever.