Zoning Board of Appeals - Regular Meeting

No, Chief's not here today if someone wants to sit here. Oh, okay. All right. All right, it is 6.30 and we're calling to order the Zoning Board of Appeals regular meeting for Thursday, June 18, 2026 at 6.30 p.m. In attendance, we have Richard Korsmeyer, Kathleen Tracy, Nick Fulton, Nancy Hutchinson, Stephanie Mechel, Michaela Pearson, Eric Knapp, Zoning Officer, And absent is Vice Chair Kip Kotzen, Member Russ Fogg, and ZBA Clerk Amy Hewitt. I think that's everybody, right? Yes, okay. So just to give everybody an update, the first case on the agenda was a continued case from the last month. It was 26-6, 30-hundred-mile creek road. However, yesterday afternoon, also present, gave us a written consent that they would like to continue the case until July. So I think, I don't know if you want to say something, Eric.

I would like to say is they're, they have not even applied a two-page line at this point. Their experts are not talking to each other. They really don't understand what they're doing. I would bet almost anything they will not be ready in July. I would least put out the possibility that you just deny them without prejudice to make them come back when they're ready because i just don't know that you're burning up your clock and they haven't even started the process so i'm concerned that you're not going to have an adequate time to review this because of the amount of time that they are wasting not even having applied to ledge light so and i think the other thing is is that because they originally submitted in march

we can't continue past July. So we need to make a decision in July.

One way or the other.

One way or the other. So I think it's either they have the information and we can review it in July or they don't have the information and then we need to, it's key information we'd have to deny and then it would be with or without prejudice, which means that if it's without prejudice, they could come back as soon as they get another application that's with prejudice, then they'd have to wait At least six months before they submit an application. Can I ask a technical question? Yeah.

Or they can withdraw it. Who's sitting to make this decision? Because there's three of you and three of us. We're alternates, irregulars.

So right now, no one's making a decision today. We're talking about in July. Don't we have to make the decision right now?

We're going to make a motion to continue it. I guess the question is, who is sitting for this meeting to make that motion?

Oh, you didn't get the text I sent you?

No, I have been on the road all day.

So it's Michaela... Stephanie, myself, Nick, and you.

Okay, thank you. I wasn't sure what you were asking.

Who is seated? Okay, I'm sorry, I should have said that.

But, I mean, they signed a paper asking to continue? Yes, they did. And we still have to approve that?

So, I just, Stephanie, not Stephanie. Sylvia's advice is, if they request a continuation, it's considered a consent request. but you pretty much have to grant it. There's really no reason not to grant it. So the point is, but they're using up their clock as Eric said.

So if they just ask, if they, we continue it, they come in July, not ready, then what?

Then we have to make a decision. They can't continue it any longer. So, and we have to make a decision based on the information that's available. And if they're missing key information, then it's likely that we would have to decline. And then the option is we can either decline or they can withdraw. If they withdraw, then there's no issue.

Okay. So they have that option.

They have that option. But if they don't withdraw, then we... They start all over. But if they start all over, then we can decide if it's with or without prejudice. And I think the question that we as a board would say is like, do we want to reward behavior of sending so many applications that are incomplete and dragging on for months and months and have people do lots of work and review everything multiple times or, and do it without prejudice or just deny with prejudice and say, you know, you really shouldn't be coming to us unless you have a complete application. Always the case, really. I don't know how we, do that.

We just make the motion to deny and that unless we say without prejudice, it's... Yeah, you don't need to be... With or without prejudice, you're going to need to make a decision. If they come back within six months, you can just say, I'm sorry. It will be up to you when they resubmit whether you accept it or not. So with or without prejudice really has no meaning for purposes of whether you deny or not.

But that's going to be- No, not whether we deny or not, but it impacts when they can submit the next application.

Even if you say it's without prejudice, if they come back in three months, you still need to then evaluate whether it's sufficiently different that you want to take it or not take it. So as a legal matter, saying whether without prejudice is not going to make a lot of difference. But if you want to- have them come back sooner. If you think that they're coming back sooner will be a benefit, then you can say, we're denying you without prejudice. Please come back as soon as you're ready. Don't wait the six months.

But if we don't stay without prejudice... It's considered with prejudice. Oh, so we don't have to stay with prejudice. We don't stay without prejudice. Okay. So then we would have that decision in July. I won't be here for July. I won't either. Okay. So then it'll be Nick and Richard will be seated.

Okay.

Okay.

I thought we didn't have a schedule.

August. August. So, yes, it's really, so, because it, oh, so I won't be here. Will you be here in July?

Sure.

Might not. Are you here in July? Kip said he would be here in July. Russ should be here in July because he said he was missing this. So then we would still need, if I'm gone, we need at least Kathleen. I won't be here. So Nick will be here. And if Michaela is not here, then we need Richard. I'll let you know as soon as I can. Okay.

So if we deny, and that implies with prejudice, do they have to wait the six months? Is there a legal thing about that?

Okay. They can apply sooner, but you do not need to accept it within six months. They can apply whenever they want.

Ah, but we don't need to receive it.

You say, I'm sorry, you're within six months, we're not going to accept it.

Okay. The key is, be ready. You know, six months doesn't matter. It's like, if you're ready, okay. But if you're not ready... Go away, get ready.

Yeah, it's already been since March and they haven't gotten any closer to being ready than they were in March. Oh, that's, yeah.

All right, send me.

Nancy, I actually won't be here.

Okay, so definitely Richard, you're on.

Okay.

So hopefully, Kip will definitely be here and I'll make sure Russ is here. So we have one, two, three. No, not one, just one. Oh, one, two, three, four, five. And then the two who aren't here, yeah. Okay. Okay. so all right so thank you for worth that all right so then so but i we're still having the meeting because there's other things on the agenda we'll try to get through it really quick and just also remember that um oops let me change this oh so i need to make a motion whenever i'd like to make a motion to continue the public hearing for case 26-6 300 mile creek road to the july 16 2026 regular meeting meeting hall memorial memorial town hall 52 lime street old lime connecticut

So moved.

That was Kathleen. Anyone want to second that?

I will.

Nick? All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? None. Abstaining? None. The motion passed unanimously, 5-0-0. All right. And just to remind people that there was another case that was originally scheduled for this, that we had scheduled for this date, but that was 54... So lame. So lame. However, before the public notice was published, the applicant requested to delay until July. So that is also in July. We were able to take it off the agenda because it didn't go into public notice. So now we have two cases already for July. But that one hasn't been heard. That's brand new. Brand new. Brand new. Okay. All right. So now old business, none. New business, none. Receipt and setting of public hearings for new applications. So as I mentioned, there's already two cases on for July. Let's see, what else? And we can't continue the 300 case anymore. So we have to make a decision in July. So the new cases so far are 87 Hillcrest Road proposal to replace existing non-conforming dwelling with a new non-conforming dwelling on a non-conforming R10 lot. A coastal site plan review application is also submitted. Whew. Since we have no meeting in August, we pretty much, we have to receive today, but we can't schedule for September because that's beyond 65 days. So we're scheduling everything for July. So this will also be for July. Then there's a ZEO appeal for 50 Shore Road.

Before we go on. So they're scheduled for July, but have they actually finished the application? I mean, we had a process where if they're not done, they can't get scheduled.

No, no, they can't get scheduled immediately, but they have to still schedule within 65 days. So if we don't have a meeting and... Is this his property or just a... No, it's not his property.

Okay. So the law... The application is complete. I'm not worried about that.

So I'm not worried about that, but just to clarify... The process that we've been going through is that if it's a complete application, we receive it and schedule it for the next meeting. If it's an incomplete application, we schedule it for the subsequent meeting, giving them more time to make a complete application. However, this is June. July is the next meeting. There's no meeting in August. So we can't push it back to September without the consent of the applicant.

And why is there no meeting in September? I mean August. Why is there no meeting?

December. We just never have meetings. We could schedule a special meeting.

Oh, so August and December.

August and December.

We don't have a regularly scheduled meeting.

That works for me. We've been doing that way since before I was on board, which is 12 years.

That's fine. I just thought there were no cases. So that's why it's not a meeting.

No, no, no. So the point is, we as Stephanie's, not Stephanie's. I keep saying Stephanie's. Sylvia has referred. We are the ones that are held to a clock. So when they submit something, our clock starts. So unless we have to stick with that clock, unless they consent to an extension.

Right.

Which will all extend or. But as you mentioned, as Kurt mentioned, that is a complete application. So we would schedule it for July. Perfect.

May I ask, was the lane complete? Hillcrest is.

Can we just get through the, so Sill Lane is also complete. Okay. Anyway, so that, so the ones, so we have one incomplete application on our schedule right now. That's 300. The Sill Lane is complete. 87 Hillcrest is complete. Then we have a ZEO appeal for 50 Shore Road. That's a new application. And I don't think most of us have done a ZEO appeal before. It should be a new one for you guys. Okay. But again, It's the same clock. So we're receiving it. I don't have much more information about it other than we got a letter from the lawyer saying they're having an appeal. And so that will also be scheduled for July. Now, there's one more case. So that's one, two, three, four already on the agenda for July. Now, there's 72 Columbus Avenue, which my understanding is an incomplete application. So it's a proposal to replace an existing dwelling with a new FEMA-compliant dwelling on R10 lot adjacent to the coastal resources and inland wetlands and located in the VE13 coastal high hazard flood zone. A coastal site plan review application is also submitted. So I'm going to turn it over to Eric and the applicant. Okay. We're not talking about the merits of cases. No.

It requires a wetlands application, wetlands approval. Okay. Wetlands will be receiving it at their next meeting, which is next week. However, they are not able to act on it. They will schedule a site walk. Their next scheduled meeting is the 8th, I believe, of July, which is after your next meeting in July. So they will not have a decision in time for your next meeting. So you will not be able to act on your application until Wetlands has acted. Therefore, you're going to have to continue it with the applicant's consent at some point to September at this point. We're scheduled special.

And is there also, let's say, health district approval yet or not?

I don't have the approval. We have to do a test hole. OK, but you're thinking existing system that's going to remain.

OK, OK. So I guess our question is, you know, we have four things on the agenda already. You know, you're not going to be complete in July. Would you consent? Would you? consent to a continuation until September?

I'd rather not, but I didn't know that I was going to have the wetlands issue brought back. I doubt very much that, I mean, we haven't had a meeting yet. I haven't, quite frankly, been in front of the board, the wetlands board, in 10 years. It's the fourth house on the street that are neighbors that I, you know, in Columbus have. And all of the other ones said, we don't want anything to do with it. Every one of them is closer than me. So I don't imagine it being an issue.

Okay. But I guess we won't have a decision in time for your next meeting and they cannot act until.

And I did check with the ZVA attorney and she's also concurred that we can't take action on it until you have the wetlands approval. Since we already have four things on the agenda, would you consent?

I guess I'll give you an extension.

I know it's not what you're planning, but if that's the case, we have a little form.

But the four applications are actually complete.

Except for the one where they haven't yet applied for the Ledglight Health District, which we've got to make a decision one way or the other.

It's not even relevant whether they're complete or incomplete. The point is the ZBA will be unable to act on the application next month because the Weapons Commission will not have that.

And therefore mine, but also on 300.

Well, Weapons doesn't have to act on 300. Ledglight has to act on 300. They don't even have an application yet. So you're not... 300... Mile Creek is independent from you, but your application cannot be dealt with next month, irrespective of 300 Mile Creek, because you will not have your wetlands approval in time for next month's meeting. And without wetlands approval, the ZBA is unable to act on your application. So this commission, this board rather meets again, I believe it's the 16th of next month. Yeah. The Wetlands Commission does not meet until the 28th of next month. I do not see them holding a special meeting for the purpose of allowing you to come here. So again, you will be ineligible to get a decision next month from this board.

I just have a little six to one half dozen at the end. Yeah.

Yeah. No, I just and it just.

Yeah, I know it's frustrating.

it only becomes an issue because I have to do drawings after whatever happens. And we have to review the drawings. And then, no, no, no, I mean construction drawings, which the building guard and zoning does. And then I have to, then they have to apply for a building permit and all that, and it pushes that back if they're trying to get it in the next year. That's all. That's the only reason I care.

If they had gone to Legilite in

I know it's my fault.

It could have been different.

Okay, well, we appreciate your flexibility here. I'm just about to get you your piece of paper that you can sign. I just want to figure out what the date of September is.

September 17th. So can you please?

It says you don't have a case number, so I just put 72 Columbia. Yeah. Going from, and you would say who you are, the applicant is.

I'll just put my name. Yeah. And then he has sign and date.

What's today's date?

Today is the 18th, June 18th, 6-18. I think you just had to print your name again down there because you signed. Thank you so much. Okay. Okay. Thank you, Jeff. No problem.

All right. We'll see you in September. Yep.

I don't have any kids to go back to school, so I don't have to just be mom like Helen.

Thanks very much. All right.

I want to put this in the bowl there. Did an email come from you about this?

No, I haven't seen it. Craig told me that they got it in writing. It's probably in the file.

You said something about an email. Who's being seated for this meeting? A text. Oh, a text. I asked you to please confirm that you can be seated for today's meeting. A text? I didn't get a text from you.

Okay. And I didn't send a text back?

I did.

I sent one to Nick, and he sent it back. Okay, never mind. Well, you're seated.

I am seated, but I'm just saying, I was looking for, you know, you said you sent something. I'm like, I'm not getting communication. This is always just worrisome for me because... Can I just check?

May I ask a question? Anyway, so what is the difference between the continuation with 300 miles, well... Yeah, 300 Mile Creek versus 72 Columbus. They both requested an extension and one had to have a motion and one does not. What am I seeing? What is different about the two?

One was already scheduled. Public notice went out.

Oh, okay. The scheduled. It was scheduled. That's the difference.

Yeah. Okay.

I got it.

These cases that we're talking about now are not even on the agenda yet. We're just receiving them today. That one was already received and scheduled and opened and continued. Got it.

Okay.

Okay. This is my text to you, but anyway, I don't know what happened. We'll talk about it afterwards.

Yeah, because I don't think you have the right number. Maybe you're blocking.

Yeah. All right. So anyway, so now that means we have four cases for the July 16th, unless anything else changes.

It's going to be a good one.

Okay. Now there's a proposal to increase CBA variance application fees, and Craig and Eric put together a very nice presentation. And here's copies of it. If you could just take it, pass it. I'll take a couple to pass down.

Oh, this is the wrong one. Here it is. Yeah, yeah. Here. Pass it down this way. Pass it down this way. Pass it down this way.

Okay.

So anyway, just one more. Okay. Thank you. All right.

So basically, the proposal, the fees that we charge for our applications, by law, we can charge the amount that helps offset the cost of those reviews. The application fee for the ZBA has not changed since at least 2012. And it may even be before that, but that's the earliest I could find paperwork on. So the staff has recommended that the Zones and Board of Appeals increase the application fee paid by applicants for variance and ZVA appeal applications for the current amount of $260, which has not changed since 2012, to $560. And this would help ensure that the basic cost of processing ZVA variance and ZVA appeal applications is covered primarily by the applicants. rather than general taxpayer, creating a more balanced and sustainable fee structure for the town. And I just think it's important to note that of the proposed $560 application fee, $60 is required by the state, of which $58 goes directly to Connecticut DEP. So the town doesn't even get that. We have a $2 administration fee. So that leaves $500 to help offset the processing costs incurred by the town, which is allowed by state law, And that includes the staff reviews and the publishing of the legally required public notices. The staff reviews include the time needed to assess whether the initial proposals comply with town regulations, as well as follow-up reviews when the applicants make required corrections. Connecticut law also requires the town publish multiple legal notices in the local newspaper for every variance and ZO appeal application. This includes two notices for the public hearing and one for the notice after a decision is made. The cost of publication in the New London Day, which is the paper of record for Old Line, have increased dramatically over time and now significantly exceed the amount the town collects in application fees. A review of the publication costs for the first five months of this year is below. It just shows you that before we're getting $200 and we're spending, you know, $700 on just, you know, publication fees. That doesn't even count the time of the people reviewing the applications. So I think it's a very reasonable request. And I think that Craig and Eric did a very good job of justifying it. And the fact that it hasn't changed in over 14 years says that it's about time probably. And I think that there's also other fees that are still could be charged. Like for example, recording fee still has to be paid, but that's reimbursed if they don't get the variance. And that's set by state statute as well. So can't do anything about that. We will probably talk in September about making sure that we get reimbursed. Like when we send things out to the engineer for review, we get charged for that more streamlined process by which we can get those funds repaid. But I thought what today would just stick with the application fee and see if we can get our agree on this and propose

and see if we can all make a motion to either discuss or... Yeah, I mean, it seems like crazy that, you know, taking two, well, forget the 60. We don't get it. We get the 60, but we're taking in two and spending seven. I mean... Eric, have any towns switched to digital rather than print?

We don't have a choice. It has to. That's what I was asking.

It's come up in discussion at the state level, but it hasn't passed yet. Understood. So we have no choice.

And I mean, honestly, the newspapers know this, and that's why- Take an advantage.

I deal with them daily, yes.

Yeah, ultimately, every year, the legislature takes up a bill to address this. And every year, the newspaper lobby pretty much steps in and says, if you don't let us collect this, we'll go out of business. And as a result, it hasn't passed, I think, the last six years in a row. But the New London Day is horribly expensive. And there's just no other paper for us to put it in. If you were across the river, we could put it in the Middletown Press, which is cheaper, but we'd only get the Middletown Press here. So the only sort of paper of record we have here is the New London Day, and then they know it, so they can charge whatever it is.

What about, you know, isn't the limelight? Digital. It's digital. Oh, it's all digital. So it has to be print. I see. Okay.

And if you look on the next page, this is the earliest... I could find of the fee schedule that I had. It's from 2012, so I don't know how long. And it says it was usually $260, which included the $60 that goes to the state. And it might be that amount even longer, but I just couldn't find anything earlier than that.

What page do you want?

You don't have it.

Page two.

Oh, you know what? Oh, this is mine. I said, what? I don't find it. I have this... I was able to find a fee schedule for the land use boards and commissions, and the earliest one I could find was amended in 2012. So we know it's been $260, at least since 2012. So now it's 2026, and the cost has gone up.

The second page is what legal ed looks like, and the third page is how much they charge us for that legal ed. And you see it's a lot of money for not many words.

Yeah.

And then the following pages are the legal notice of decision and then how much we got charged for that. And again, you can see not a very big legal notice and a very expensive bill for it. So we're stuck. We have to pay it. And again, we're not keeping up. So as much as I sort of cringed at the thought of asking people for $550 to apply, We're going broke this way. We need to be able to cover more of our costs to be able to do this.

To me, it's either taxpayer pays or the user pays. Yeah. I say user pays. I want to make a motion to...

Wait a minute.

Wait, wait, wait. I can make a motion any time, and then we can still discuss it. In other words, we're not really supposed to discuss it unless there's a motion on the table.

Robert Wills does not apply to the ZVA. They don't? Not for public hearings, et cetera. But we can put it your way. But I was going to suggest a motion, but if you want to make a motion. I have a question first. Yeah.

Why in January is it one case for 718 versus April, say, two cases, 741?

It really depends on what they're asking for for variances and how much we need to put in the legal notice. So if it's a lengthy legal notice for one reason or another, they charge us more for it. It's by the word. Is it by the word or by the letter or something? It's a little bit about the letter. They charge about a column inch.

But also, and just to let you know, because this is very important because we've discussed this with Sylvia, the legal notice has to be adequate enough that it avoids people saying, appealing our decisions because they said that they didn't get an adequate notice. And there's no timeline on when that notice is. Like right now, if we make a decision and we publish a good public notice and we publish a decision, people have 15 days to appeal and then it's done. But if you had an inadequate public notice, they could come back a year from now and say, oh, we didn't know. And now we appeal it. So it's very, very important to have an adequate public notice. Yeah, I understand. Yeah. So that's why sometimes you need to add more, and then sometimes they have coastal site plan review applications, and some of them don't. So it's very dependent on the application.

I mean, I don't want to hurt the applicants, but is 500 enough if it's costing us 780? Well, it's 560.

Well, 560 would stay. Why don't we move it to this, and we'll do the same evaluation a year from now, and we'll give you new numbers. I expect by this time next year, the legal notice cost is going to keep going up. So maybe by this time next year, we're going to come back and say, create another couple hundred dollars. But we haven't moved it since 2012. So let's move it. Enough. Let's move it 300. We're more than doubling the price.

And people who are going to apply are going to be screaming. So we want it to be a soft scream, and then they can scream again in a year or two and leave.

I think that this is the draw just by that we're not overcharging. We're making the majority of it, at least cost, but we're not digging down to the dollar. Taxpayers are still subsidizing them. But not as much. Not as much. Right.

So can I go ahead? If anybody, I'm sure you did look at other towns and see where this fits in. it's actually consistent with other towns. In fact, it's lower than many other towns. That's what I was actually thinking. Do you know off the top of your head what the highest one was? It also depends on what paper they publish in. It would be comparables that would have to do the New London Day.

I don't know if Old Saybrook would do the New London Day. No, Old Saybrook does have a town press.

Actually, Clinton, there's a local paper in Clinton that goes in everybody's mailbox once a week. And so that's cheaper, but we don't have that here. They're probably closer to the $750 range.

That's kind of what I was thinking. So, I mean, I think we need to keep that in mind that I think I mean, I think that this is enough of an increase to not freak people out too much. But I think we need to make it clear that we should revisit it to be at market value, essentially.

I think that's why this is written, is to help offset the cost, not to completely offset the cost. But I agree with you, Catherine, that if you went from $200,000 to like $800,000, Yeah.

It's a gradual thing.

$200 to $500 is very well justified. Yes.

Considering it's been since 2012.

At least. That's the earliest I could find.

I'll be back next year with another ask for you. Let's take this for now and we'll come back and try again next June with another couple hundred dollars and go from there.

I was going to suggest that we can Approve an increase in the variance and CEO appeal application fees to $500 per application to offset the cost the town encouraged for processing applications, including the cost of publishing legal requirements. Legal notice is effective. And I was going to suggest July 1st because that's a new fiscal year. 26. Yeah. So 7-1. Yeah, 7-1 sounds good.

New fiscal year.

Okay, that was Kathleen. Anyone like to second that? I will stephanie. Okay, so just read it one more time, the motion was made by Kathleen Tracy and second Mike stephanie nickel to approve an increase in the variance and CEO appeal application fees to $500 per application. To offset the cost of town occurs for processing the applications, including the cost of publishing required legal notices effective July 1 2026. All right, all those in favor aye opposed none. Staying on the motion passed by Ashley 5-0-0. Thank you for that. I think the land use department also thanks you very much. Well, the taxpayer thanks you very much. Yeah. Okay. So now we're going to information items. So did everybody get my email from July, from June 5th with submitted consolidated ZBA comments to zoning regulations that were sent to the zoning commission? Yes.

June 5th.

Let me just check that out. It's an email from the O-Line ZBA. O-Line ZBA. Let me just check that. Yes. I want to make sure because we tried to test last time that everyone got it. I did my best to consolidate everyone's feedback, but I did notice the chair ZBA O-Line. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

And it was June 16th? No, June 5th. June 5th. I have one for June 5th. Yes. All right. Good. I want to make sure. Right. That's why I'm checking too, because I've had problems with that.

Yeah. I've been getting emails. Okay. So anyway, so then I did notice as I was going through the 250 pages of experience, not variances, regulations that I, there's a couple of little tweaks that I forgot to mention during the meeting, but I just included them anyway. I figured everyone agreed to most of everything. So. But just to let you know, if you see a couple little tweaks that are different, that was just because we missed it at the last meeting. That's from our special meeting? Yes. We trust you. Okay. I do. Okay. All right. And I also want to let you know that on June 24th, the Zoning Commission has scheduled a workshop for other boards and commissions to discuss environmental regulations. I volunteer to participate, but if there was anyone else burning me, they want to participate in that discussion as well. What time is that? It'll be...

6.30 to 8.30.

What day, though?

June 24th.

Day of the week, that is?

Wednesday. Yeah, no, I can't do it. Okay.

Probably me. I just have to look. Okay.

So you go in front of the zoning board.

No, we don't go. It's just a sit-down workshop.

With the zoning board. They had a public hearing, public gathering of information, rather, to discuss environmental issues. They're now going to meet with members of sort of board slides or to go through the information and try and translate some of it into what could be regulations in the future. So we're going to try and sort of weed through everything that came in and say, if we want regulations, we'll tell the consultant, these are the things we want you to translate into regulations for us. So that's really the purpose of the meeting.

So is it to go through the ZBA's suggestions or only just what came in on the committee?

Anything we have related to environmental. So if you guys submitted environmental stuff too, then it will be heard at that meeting and you can go through it and decide what is going to get passed on. Okay. So if we have stuff that is related to environmental, it will be reviewed at the 24th and again. Hopefully, we will be able to pass back to IMIG. These are things we think should be in the regulation. Can you please draft regulations consistent with these ideas?

Okay, well, that's good because we said our feedback wasn't verbatim anyway. It's just, you know, the great suggestions.

Can I ask you if lighting, like lighting standards and things like that count? Okay, that's what I thought.

Okay, we're having that one probably in September at this point in time. Okay. Yeah, there's going to be other workshops on other topics in July and August.

I just wanted to make sure that we shouldn't, that Gateway shouldn't submit the lighting stuff that we have.

No, again, we're working into three pieces. The first one is environmental stuff. The next one is residential stuff. I'm guessing Gateway might want to participate in that one. Absolutely. And then the third one is commercial industrial and signage, lighting, noise, anything else that goes along with those sorts of activities. But lighting with residential? If you want to, it'll be, There's a residential component to that as well. But again, we're trying to handle sort of the residential. We're more trying to keep to issues like accessory apartments and zone density and setbacks and things that come in front of you for ZBA purposes. Lighting can be residential, but we're sort of trying to keep those sorts of regs in the sort of commercial industrial side, again, a lot of this stuff overlaps. A lot of it's in multiple buckets there. So if you want to sort of raise it as part of the residential stuff, feel free to do so.

There's probably going to be a workshop on that too, right? Yes.

The public meeting piece of that is July 29th.

That would be a good place to bring it up.

So if you want to show up on July 29th, and raise that as an issue, that would be a good time to do so. So that was the residential? That's the residential one.

Same time, pretty much?

Yes, same time, 6.30, this room. July 29th? July 29th.

I didn't know that yet either. It had just been scheduled. 6 o'clock? 6.30. Okay. All right. And the commercial, you said, may go back to September, but it's not been set yet.

We do not have a firm date for that. It's going to depend on people's availability and whatever else. I am probably going to try and grab some vacation time in August. So that's another reason why we're probably not going to have it there. As you probably are aware, my wife's got cancer. She's not able to go anywhere. She'll finally be able to go someplace in August. So she's looking to get out of the house. Okay. You deserve it. Okay.

Oh, I mentioned this before that in September, we'll probably talk about the process for getting reimbursement for expert costs, but not until September. And I just want to also let you know that I will be away in July, but Kip, I spoke with him and he has agreed to be the acting chair for July. And then we talked about the attendance and we need both Nick and Richard to cover for that meeting. All right. And I just also want to mention correspondence. Everyone should have gotten an email from Craig about the zoning commission referral and from meeting in July to talk about, maybe give an update on this. You should have gotten an update from Eric, not Eric, Craig, about some middle housing.

Okay, let's go back a little bit. Last year, the legislature passed what was called Public Act 25-1, It had many, many requirements, but two that applied to local zoning that are effective July 1st. One of which is towns would no longer be able to regulate for parking in their residential zones. However, they would allow the town to create two districts, overlay zones of up to 4% of the town's geographic area each. overlay zones the town would still be able to regulate for parking on the residential side. We've created two overlay zones that do that. The public hearing for that is July 1st. Also, as part of this, your commercial zones, all of your commercial zones would have to allow two to nine residential units as of right by site plan approval However, you can either have it for all your residential zones, just residential, or you can tie it to mixed-use residential with commercial, or you can do both together. By working with our consultant, we have agreed, because we don't want to lose our commercial zones entirely, that people who want to put in two to nine residential units have to do it as part of a mixed-use development. They can't just convert the land entirely to residential. The public hearing on those two proposals is July 1st. And again, these were not things that were the zoning commission's idea. These were issues that the state pretty much said, you will do this. And again, the effective date is July 1st, and we're not going to make it, but we're going to have the public hearing July 1st and put the legal notice in July 3rd.

What do you mean we're not going to make it?

Okay, there will be a gap between when the law kicks in and when we have the regulations in effect. The regulations, the first possible day I can get the regulations in effect, assuming we close the hearing and vote July 1st, is July 18th. Because the legal notice will be the third, I have to give 15 days until the 18th, it'll kick in the 18th. There will be a gap of 18 days we'll have no regulation that if someone wants to come in during those 18 days, they get to essentially use the Public Act without our regulations in place, which means they can ask for any of our commercial zones, any of the properties, individual sites, to be used residentially for two to nine units, and there's not much we can do about it.

Is that a possibility, Billy? Is that a strong enough possibility for us to worry about? I'm not that worried about it.

I know across the river in Old Saybrook, because they have a much bigger commercial zone, Chris Costa is terrified of that. And she rushed through her rig so they would be in effect on July 1st, so that wouldn't happen. We have, as I said before, a relatively small amount of commercial land. And I have heard from nobody who's planning to rush in. But again, the goal is to make that gap as short as possible to just not leave ourselves exposed for any longer than we actually have to.

Yeah. And so I think it was very helpful that Craig sent this out to everyone, but it's not really a job for the ZGA to comment on it. If you want to individually comment on it, then that's go to the meeting.

But that was sent out. We went through that. We looked at it. It was like, I appreciate your comments because now I understand it a little bit better and I understand the gap piece a little bit better. I appreciate that. But, you know, zoning regs are not, are complex, and that's why those surveys that went out, a lot of people were like, I took it, but I didn't understand half of it. You know what I mean? What good is a survey people are taking that don't understand what they're doing? How valid is that information?

Well, it's better than nothing, I think. All right. But I would just get back to the meeting. So anyway, so I think that's all I had for information. Correspondents announced it. Unless anybody else had anything else? I'm going to go on to approval of the minutes. The ZBA regular meeting for May 21st, 2026. Does anyone want to propose any amendments to those minutes? No? Would anybody like to make a motion to approve the May 21st, 2026 ZBA regular meeting minutes? So moved.

Okay. Michaela?

Seconded by?

Nick.

Nick. Okay. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? None. Abstaining? None.

Oh, bugs.

Okay.

Now for the Z-based special meeting on June 2nd. Oh, sorry. I made a mistake.

Uh-oh. Okay.

Eric and I did have suggested amendments to the May 21st, 2024 May 21st, 2026 meeting. Most of them were typos, but there was one significant, I have the application minutes here. One significant change is that the motion for 302 Ferry Road was missing one variance in the motion.

So do we need to make a motion to revisit the minutes?

How this is dealt with, the minutes themselves don't change. Your motion today will just reflect amendments and then the minutes for next month, we'll have the fact that you approved the previous motion, previous minutes with amendments. It's so confusing that way.

I mean, it's like... Can I just have... Go ahead. Can I just revise that motion?

Yeah. No, you... You can strike the motion. The minutes are the minutes. We're not going back. No, no, no, not the minutes. I'm saying the motion to approve the minutes. You can go back and revise the motion. That's worth talking about. So since I made the motion, I can say I would like to amend my motion. There we go.

Right, right, right. Because I put on the wrong thing. This yellow part? Sorry. So the motion I was going to suggest is would anybody like to make a motion? to approve the May 21st, 2026 DBA regular meeting minutes with the amendments proposed by the CEO and ZBA chair, including the addition of a variance to section 9.3.1 to list the variances granted in the motion for case 20-1, 302 Ferry Road. And can I say the improved edited version to be submitted to the town clerk's office and be posted on the town website or no?

You don't have to. I mean, you can.

Again, what's going to happen is these minutes, tonight's minutes, will be approved. Okay?

The minutes with the amendments.

Yes, but you're not physically amending previous minutes. Those are recorded. The thing will never change. But this month's minutes will reflect the corrections of the previous months. The previous month's minutes are recorded. They will forever read exactly as they are. However, this month's meeting minutes, in approving the last month's meeting minutes, will reflect the changes that you're offering.

Okay, because I didn't specifically say every typo and every change. I just summarized, because I thought, because I have, what Amy sent to me was, she sent to me an updated version of the minutes that include, incorporated your changes and my changes. So what do I, but the most important one was the missing variance.

Why don't you recite the missing variance? The rest of the typos and such, I'm not going to believe that worked.

It's not important to me.

So let's just go and work on the one that is crucial to... Yeah. Yes, you read that already.

Yeah. So we'll just leave it with the amendments proposed by the CEO and ZBA chair, including the addition of the variance to Section 9.3.1 to the list of variances granted for the motion for Case 20-1, Fair 2, Ferry Road.

And that's your motion as amended. So moved.

Okay, so that was Michaela. I'll second. And that was Kathleen. Does it have to be the same second? No, it's a new motion. So we struck the last motion and then we're making this new motion. Okay. So everyone in favor of that? Aye. Opposed? None. Abstaining? None. The motion passed unanimously. Now we go to the ZVA special meetings for June 2nd, 2026. Does anybody have any opposed amendments to those minutes? No. Okay. So if that's the case, would I like to make a motion to approve the minutes for the June 2nd CBA special meeting minutes? So moved. Michaela again. And Tracy, Kathleen again. Okay. That makes it easier. So I won't get confused about who made which motion. Because I'm doing the minutes, too, because Amy's not here. All right. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? None. Abstaining none. Motion passed in S.A. 5-0-0. Thank you. Sorry, I made a mix-up there. Okay. If there's nothing else, would anybody like to make a motion to adjourn the meeting? So moved. Michaela? Anyone like to second? Well, go ahead.

Yes.

All in favor? Aye. Opposed? None. Abstaining? None. Motion passed. And the time is 721.