Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to tonight's Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for Monday, June 29th, 2026. My name is Paul Leibowitz. I'm the chair of the Westport Planning and Zoning Commission. And as you may know, pursuant to state law, there is no physical location for this meeting. because this meeting is being held electronically and live streamed on westportct.gov. This meeting is also being shown on Westport's Optimum Government Access Channel 79, subject to availability. And of course, the public may attend and offer testimony during the meeting by using the meeting link published in the agenda prior to the meeting. Meeting agenda is available at westportct.gov on the meeting list and calendar webpage. And, of course, your written comments may also be received prior to the public meeting and should be sent to P&Z, westportct.gov, by 12 p.m. on the day of the meeting if intended to be distributed for consideration by the members of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Written comments received after that time, 12.01 p.m., On the day of the meeting will be entered into the record, but will not be distributed until the next business day. And of course, all of our meeting materials submitted are available at www.westportct.gov on the Planning and Zoning Department webpage under P&Z, pending applications and recent approvals. So let's first take attendance. Hang on one second while I pull this up here. Okay, here we go. Okay, sorry about that, slight delay. So tonight we have Craig Schiavone. Hello, Craig. We have Nicole Laskin. Nicole, who are you sitting in for tonight? I'm not quite sure. Very good. Welcome aboard. Brie Injeski, Commissioner Mike Kammeyer, and Commissioner Mike Calise, as well as myself, Paul Leibowitz. And of course, tonight, sitting in for Michelle is Amanda Trajanovic, our Deputy Director of Westport Planning and Zoning. So Brie, if you don't mind, could you read us into the first item?

Sure. Item number one in the public meeting is municipal improvement at 70 North Avenue, application number PZ2600361. Very good. Thank you. Would you like me to read item number two as well?

Yeah, let's read them all in. Essentially, you can do all four. All four? Okay, great. But you can do the brief version.

Okay. All right. Number two is 70 North Avenue, special permit site plan application number PZ2600275. Item number three is municipal improvement at 170 Riverside Avenue, application number PZ2600360. And item number four is 170 Riverside Avenue, special permit site plan application number PZ2600278.

All right, terrific. Thank you very much for that. And for the applicant, I see we have several people here. Who would like to take the reins tonight?

I will take the reins. Paul Eric Barbieri, Parks and Recreation Director. Carmen Roda is here as well. Carmen is the one. Amanda, if we could get him to be able to share his screen. I believe he has the presentation that we'd like to do tonight.

All right. We will make that happen. Okay.

Can you see it? Yeah. Let's go from beginning.

There you go. You want to go to slide view version. That's awesome. Custom slideshow. There you go. From the beginning. From the beginning.

There you go. Okay. So first of all, I just want to thank everybody. I know we asked for an extension. Over the last couple of meetings on this topic, there was a lot of information that was requested. As everybody knows, Parks and Recreation doesn't run every program that our fields are on. We have a lot of youth sport agencies and groups that do that for us. So it's important to get all the information we possibly could. In addition to trying to line up some of those actual leaders of those groups, to speak on behalf of the benefits of the lights as well. So thank you for the additional time. And we'll kind of, we'll move right along in this presentation. Some of the information that was requested With specific to questions that came through different commissioners from the public, maybe it was information that we felt as though was important to share. So we're hoping that we address at least some of the questions. I'm sure some more will come out after tonight, but that was the idea behind this presentation. So, Karim, go ahead. You can go to the next slide. Obviously, we're just showing pictures of the Subject sites that we're talking about tonight, Wakeman B and the PJ Romano Athletic Complex. Go ahead. I think this is probably one of our most important slides of this presentation. It is a clear depiction of where we are going with the numbers of youth and users period that are using our facilities. and the correlation to the number of hours on our fields. So you can see that steadily every single year, we have been increasing in the participation numbers, the numbers of users, and the field usage itself. And we simply have gotten to the point where we've maxed out our ability to give people fields When they call Carmen Roda, our recreation superintendent who handles the reservations, there are often times where he has to turn them away and tell them that there's nothing available. We've also had Staples High asking for more time on artificial turf in particular because all of their opponents typically have artificial turf, so that's what they want to train on, which makes sense from a competitive standpoint. And many of our user groups have told us verbally, and I said this in meetings in the past, that due to lack of field space, they've had to turn down participants and say no to increasing their numbers. So we've asked a couple of people to speak tonight. So it's not coming from Eric Barbieri, Parks and Recreation Director. It's coming from some of the user groups themselves that are actually dealing with those issues. The first one, Daryl Delia, he's the PAL Athletic Director, to speak a little bit on the sports that they're offering and some of the issues that they've seen with their field usage. Daryl, are you on the line? Yes. Good evening.

Thank you for allowing me to speak. The first thing I would like to discuss is our situation with our football, flag football, co-ed flag, girls flag, tackle and modified tackle that we each year we're right now we're turning way up to 125 children due to lack of field space. The lights on both fields will be able to schedule an additional 10 or 15 extra field times per week, allowing us to expand the program and register those 125 slash 120, 50 children with with lights being installed at PJ Romano and any other field. The second thing I'd like to discuss is just for football, I'd like to discuss our shortage with regards to boys and girls lacrosse. As you may know, boys and girls lacrosse is very big in our town. And in 2026 alone, we had 235 boys registered in K through 4 grade and 144 in our travel program, which serves grades 5 through 8th. Our numbers have grown in single-digit percentage each year for the last three years. This spring, we scheduled 399 different practices, games, and events from March 15th through June 1st, excluding the week of spring break and Easter. That is an incredible narrow nine-week time frame to schedule a season's worth of practices and games for 379 Westport boys. The reality is that we have a tight window of daylight from 5.30 to 7 p.m. in early spring after school starts. has let out. So what we do is we split the field in half with other programs on weekends. Our teams are required to share fields with no team having full field of practice to themselves. As it stands, our third and fourth grade teams are limited to one game per week as we do not have the field space to schedule additional games in that age group. Unless you might know, it's 10 children on a field at one point. per side for lacrosse, and that takes up a lot of space. Our travel teams in the fifth to eighth grade fully utilize the fields on weekends when they're not being occupied by other programs. We do not have the field space to host tournaments like other towns do. We recently completed our end of season survey for all available to play during the day. And what we've decided is nonetheless, the ability of lighted fields would allow us to shift practices later for the older grades and fit more games and scrimmages in for the younger players as other sports do. We do not like having young kids playing under the lights at 8.30, 9 o'clock in any situation when the sun is still just going down. So that's our situation with the boys. And girls, very similar. Girls, we had 280 girls participating this year. Despite the strong number and consistent participation year to year, it's a real struggle to create a competitive and strong program for our athletes due to the limited availability, as we say, field space and daylight. We have a very quick season. It only runs about two months, late March through early May, early June, with limited daylight, often cutting practice short in the season. Installing lights on PJR and Wakeman would significantly improve our ability to offer more practices and programming at both the developmental and travel levels, as we did with Du Bois. Currently, our K-4 developmental program does not have practices on turf, as we have to prioritize our access and field time for our travel program. With the high school girls scheduling program limited hours and no ability to coach and practice into the evening, we can only offer each travel team two practice per week. Most of our neighboring towns at competition offer three practices plus a week and run scrimmages back and pick up games back and forth. On a typical weeknight, two travel teams share a single field of practice. This greatly limits the amount of meaningful instruction, repetition, and play development each team receives. Having lit fields would enable us to offer full field practices to our teams, prioritizing younger grades after school and older grades into the evening. Not to mention we are often left with a very narrow window of host games on the weekends at this time. We would like to just say, lastly, most of the coaching staff are educators working tirelessly to get practices in the afternoon. Many arrive late, halfway through or can't make it due to start times that we are forced to have with no lights. Many of our parent volunteers can't help support our program in a meaningful way, either due to the fact that our practices begin before the workday ends. We have a real need here to maximize our use of our existing facilities and create a meaningful and successful girls lacrosse program. Thank you for your consideration. Great. Appreciate that, Daryl.

Eric, the information.

Eric, for Coach D and for the rest of your presenters, can you make sure that we get a copy of the information they shared in written form so that we can review that? It would be very helpful.

Sure, we can do that.

Thank you.

Great. And then I believe we have a Westward soccer representative. I think Jim Wolfe is away, so couldn't attend. Perhaps is Mickey Kites on the line?

Yes, I'm here, Rob. Okay. Thank you, Mickey. Guys, thank you for having me. So as Rob said, I'm filling in for Jim Wolf, who's the co-president. He couldn't be here today. My name is Mickey Kydes. I've been the soccer education provider for the WSA since 2001. So I've actually seen firsthand over the last 25 years the growth and growth. the use of the fields over the last 25 years. I'm also a resident of Westport Soccer since 2011. I live on 1 Grassy Plains Road, which is on the cross street of Newtown Turnpike. So Jim asked me to read a statement on behalf of the WSA. I mean, what Coach just said is exactly the same kind of situations we have as well. But I'm just basically going to read you the statement from Jim, and then I'm going to submit it Um, as the gentleman said, or, uh, for feedback. So, this is Jim statement, who is the Co, president of the, and I'm reading it, um, planning and zoning commissioners. My name is Jim Wolf and I live at 311 greens farms road and I'm the Co, president of Westport soccer association. I'm very appreciative of the continued assessment of lighting Wakeman B and PJ Romano at saga talk. and all the contributions of Parks and Rec to advance this discussion. In prior meetings on this topic, I've said much about the needs of additional field capacity to meet increasing demands of the community needs and also discuss the WSA's trends in enrollment. Much had also been said regarding the deterioration of the quality of natural grass surfaces due to overuse. For efficiency, I will not further discuss these topics on this note. That said, I do think it would be helpful to address open topics raised in the prior meeting. With respect to the number of kids turned away due to enrollment caps of the WSA, I would estimate that at least 100 kids each year are turned away from participating in travel and rec due to the enrollment limits. Enrollment limitations are due to field availability. This is very unfortunate, dynamic, and disproportionately impacts kids at younger ages, which I may add is our entry years K and first grade, who are looking for exposure to team sports for the first time. To address the situation, we have done our best to optimize field space allocated to us by putting more kids and coaches on fields than ever before. The density has obvious trade-offs for coaching and development, but also further contributes to the natural field deterioration issue mentioned earlier. I'm very sympathetic to the issues raised by the neighbors, and I'm hopeful that we can quickly find a mutually acceptable solution. It is important that we use our existing field resources as efficiently as possible. And given the current circumstances, lighting PJ and Wakeman be expeditiously signed Jim Wolf, co-president of the WSA. And I'm also here to answer any questions on his behalf and on behalf of Westport Soccer. So thank you.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mickey. Appreciate you being here and sharing some of that. I can understand you probably see it firsthand for sure as you handle a lot of their training and things like that. So thanks for being here. I'd also like to, unfortunately, Athletic Director Vijay Surula was not around today either. Carmen does, I believe, have a letter to read that he submitted for the record. Carmen, could you read that into the meeting?

Yes, Carmen wrote a recreation superintendent. BJ Cirillo, I believe, has also sent this already to planning and zoning. To whom it may concern, I'm writing on behalf of Staples High School Athletics to express our strong support for the installation of lights at Wakeman B Field. As an athletic department, we recognize the importance of maximizing community resources while providing meaningful opportunities for students, student athletes, and youth participants throughout Westport. In addition, the addition of lights at Wakeman B would significantly enhance our ability to partner with local organizations, including Westport Parks and Recreation and Westport PAL by expanding access to a highly high quality athletic facility during evening hours. Additionally, field availability would benefit participants of all ages and provide equitable opportunities for both female and male athletes to participate and compete under the lights. As field space continues to be at a premium, the ability to extend playable hours will help meet the growing needs of our community while allowing multiple organizations to utilize the facility more efficiently. This additional field availability would minimize the need for current field sharing, creating an environment that better supports high quality practices across all of our programs. Beyond increasing field access, the installation of lights would further strengthen the collaborative relationship between Staples High School Athletics and our community partners. Together, we share a common goal of providing positive educational and developmental appropriate athletic experiences for young people throughout Westport. Expanding the availability of Wakeman B Field will help us continue serving our student athletes and community in a thoughtful and responsible manner. At the same time, we fully recognize the importance of being respectful neighbors to the residents who live near the facility. staples high school athletics has always taken pride in being a responsible store of our athletic venues and we remain committed to minimizing any impact of this to this on the surrounding neighborhood we all share the desire to ensure that the facility continues to be an asset for both athletic to our athletic community and our neighbors we believe the addition of lights at Wakeman B. Field represents an investment in the future of youth and high school athletes in Westport while reinforcing a strong partnership that exists among our schools, park creation, PAL, and border communities. Thank you for your consideration of this important project and for your continued support of opportunities that benefit the young people in our community. Sincerely, Vijay Cirillo, Athletic Director of Stables High School.

Perfect. Thank you, Carmen. Yeah, I think especially at the high school levels, but certainly across the levels, the putting the large number of athletes on the field at once is just not optimal for proper training. You really have to the amount of topics that these sports go over and the different topics within the training session. To only be able to do it going across a field or a half of a field is just not, it's not how it should be done. I'm sure it's not how we actually have letters from some of the coaches that that's clearly not how they want to be able to train their athletes. So this would obviously help improve that availability and get some of our teams to be able to use a full field when they need it to prepare.

Okay, Carmen, next one.

Okay, so as with several of these slides, they are intended to be representative of the kinds of changes that could potentially happen with the lighting. So I'm fully aware, as everyone is on this call, this meeting, that the sunsets change in the spring and the fall. So this is not an exact science. We're just trying to throw an idea of how this works. Someone was asking in a previous meeting about the latest potential operating hours. You know, without lighting, we're at 3.30 in the spring, depending on the month. It's a lot earlier depending on the month, but, you know, 7.30. And then if we have lighting during the week, we can go to 9. In the fall, it gets dark very quickly on us, 6 o'clock. That allows us to go to 9, increases the amount of time exponentially. And if you add the Fridays and Saturdays with lights and things of that nature, it clearly adds a huge – and you'll see in a block form what I'm talking about when we get there. Carmen, go ahead. This is just – Wanted to throw this in there just so people could understand that I get that it's just a representation, but some of the sunsets that we deal with in some of those shoulder seasons. So March, a lot of the athletic teams would love to get out there on artificial turf fields, but it is extraordinarily early sunset, especially at the beginning. It gets better towards the end. But important to note that whether it's a practice or a game, The sunset is not the time that they stop training. It gets darker a lot earlier than that. And from a safety standpoint with the sports, we need to get them off earlier than that so the light is appropriate for the sport that they're playing. So really, the sunset isn't the number we should be going by. It's at least a half an hour before that probably happens. And depending on the time of the year, maybe more. So March and October, those are just some samples for people to be able to reference and that we wanted to kind of just show and explain how the sunsets do really impact how much time and access to the fields we can provide.

Next one.

This is the operating hours. Again, a slide that someone had requested Monday through Thursday, the last practice. If we had, and again, this is as the application reads that was in the request. Last practice starts 7.30, which gets you to 9.00. So the lights would switch off to low output. So just for walk-off safety until 9.30. A game Monday through Thursday, 7.00, give it a full two hours for the match or the game. So 9 o'clock he'd go off again, low output until 9.30. Fridays and Saturdays, the application is for 10 o'clock. So it would go right till 10 with the walk-off till 10.30 for practices and games as well. So 8.30 and 8 for the weekend times. Go ahead, Karim. Just a sampling representative of who uses these fields. I think one of the questions was who's actually on here, who's doing what, that kind of thing. And again, it's not an exact science depending on the day of the week. Depending on what the coaches are doing at the high school with their athletics, varsity might be taking a day off because they've had a long stretch of games. So that opens up JV or freshmen to go onto or girls to go onto the field. So again, These are some of the, you know, teams that use both Wakeman B and PJ Romano. We had a sampling here tonight from WSA to talk to you and PAL to talk to you about how they would be impacted if the lights were available and the number of kids they could add on to that. So just a sampling. Again, it was requested. So I want to make sure we're clear on who we're trying to help with this request. Go ahead. Okay, so a few just community benefits, a few highlights for this. Supporting working families, you just heard Daryl from, and I'm sure this is a case for all of them, I'm one of them as a dad, but getting to evening practices is extraordinarily difficult when you get to those sunsets, you know, earlier in the evenings. So having some lit fields gives us that opportunity to have later practices, especially for some of the, you know, the middle school or the older kids, you know, be able to get down and volunteer would be highly beneficial. We have been told that multiple times by multiple parents and the youth groups. Help us to get later practices so we can get these volunteers in here. So we're very aware of that need on behalf of the parents and their potential volunteers, and so we're trying to address that with this. The age appropriate scheduling, again, younger athletes being able to be moved earlier, and then we can put some slots in there later in the evening with the lights where we could have the older kids be able to take advantage of those later times. Improve safety, just the quality of our lighting for the athletes, the visibility, both while they're competing, but then in the walk-on and walk-off areas. Again, at Wakeman B, we are looking to potentially add some lighting in there. There's a slide in here on that at the end. But to be able to create a safe environment, safe parking lots for the users at Wakeman B. You just heard from some of those user groups, more children can participate. The expanded hours, not just for additional programming, but we're going to reduce our cancellations and we're going to be providing quality fields. So if we get a rain and it comes down heavy like it does sometimes, from 12 to 3 in the afternoon, well, sometimes we have to close the grass fields because they're just soaking wet and they can't be used safely. The artificial turf fields are high quality. You can get out there during rain, after a large rain. We're not going to be canceling those and it'll be able to get out there. Obviously, we're not talking about lightning safety first, but just being able to have that quality, I think BJ referenced it, THAT QUALITY SURFACE ALL THE TIME, REGARDLESS OF WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH OUR WEATHER. AND WE ARE CURRENTLY HAVE SOME GENERATORS, SO WE'D LOVE TO BE ABLE TO REDUCE USE OF THOSE GENERATORS, DECREASE THE EMISSIONS AND THE NOISE POLLUTION FROM THOSE THAT THEY CREATE SOMETIMES. SO THAT WOULD BE A HELPFUL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT TO BEING ABLE TO HAVE THESE PERMANENT LIGHTS INSTALLED. OKAY, KAREN. Okay, so we can be spring sample schedule. I want to highlight sample on this because I did have some questions. This is what gets put together by Carmen with working with the youth groups and who's using the field when. So obviously when school's in session, the kids are in school, so they're not using it. And you can't even be on those fields anyway if you had other people that wanted to use them because you can't be on school property. If anyone has worked in this kind of arena, trying to help out or volunteer with youth groups, they need blocks of time in order to schedule their practices and their games. So Westport soccer, they have boys and girls, they have rec, they have travel. All those different aspects need blocks of time to be able to put their their groups in. So when is the U12 boys going to practice? And then they have to be able to slot them into two or three practices a week, depending on how much they're getting. So we don't have who's using the field exactly from WSA on this schedule, because that's not how it works. So they're given that block scheduling. They are then told that once they fill in their schedules, Let us know what blocks are available for us to give to other groups. We can't have fields go unused. So please let us know what's available once you're done. And I believe, Carmen, you can correct me if I'm wrong, but that has yet to happen where people are giving back field space because they don't need it. Correct. Right. So that's not happening in how these operations work. The lower section of the grid has the green spaces on there, 730. until 9 Monday through Friday, and then on Friday and Saturday going until 10 o'clock. All those blocks are potential additions to programming for all of our different youth groups, and high school for that matter, depending on who's looking to use it. Okay, go ahead, Carm. These were asked, they were asked for both spring and fall at both facilities. So this is what we're providing here. You can see again, the green availability that's going to be added. We can be in the fall. Go ahead. Both of these facilities are at schools. So PJ Romano as well blocks off that school time, but you can see the change in who's using the field based on the the location and the time in the added space in green below. Go ahead. and PJ Romano in the fall. And again, if there's specific questions, I'm sure there'll be questions after this meeting tonight. We can certainly answer those if more specifics are being looked at.

Eric? Yes. Thank you for bringing up the subject of questions. I do see a couple of hands up by several members of the public. And I do want to remind everybody our protocol here is that the applicant gets to present. the commissioners then get to discuss. And then at that point, we will, of course, go to the public and everyone in the public will get a chance. So raising your hand at that point is more appropriate. You'll get called on. Thank you.

Yeah. Thank you for that. The proposed lighting system. So the beginning part of the presentation, we really were trying to explain You know, look, Eric Barbieri and the Parks and Recreation Department isn't, aren't, you know, we use the field sometimes. It's the youth group. So we wanted to try to explain the need a little bit, show some of the numbers that we're experiencing, the requests. There was also questions about the lighting system itself. So this latter part of the presentation, we'll get into a little bit of that. And we do have our Moscow rep here to answer any specific questions. Mike Mahoney is here when we get into the technology piece itself. But based on our sports that we're requesting these for, they are a four light pole system. There are other options which can be explored. This is what's being recommended for optimal lighting. Nine LED fixtures per pole. The modern shielded LED fixtures, which are, you know, they're really sleek and cool. They take up less space and are really efficient. And again, are specific to sports. So when we told them the sports that were going to be played on these fields, that is where this system came from. Go ahead. So people asked for what are they going to look like? So it is, you can see the number of fixtures on each pole, the nine lights, and on the right is kind of a close-up of what those lights will look like in reality up on top of those poles. Go ahead. So this is kind of over the years slide, and I'll ask Mike Mahoney, Mike, if you're on, to You could give this a little bit better probably than me, but it's pretty clear when you see on the right the today system and the amount of light that's coming off of the poles compared to how it used to be. Mike, are you on there?

Okay. If not, not the end of the world. Eric, can I pause you for a second and ask a quick question here? Sure. So this graphic shows all the way on the right, it looks like, other companies, not Moscow's technology. And on the left section, you've got one, two, three, four iterations of technology and where we are today with the low glare and targeted field of view. Is that what you're seeing this?

Yes, it's showing how the technology has improved greatly over the years, the amount of spillage and glare. You can see that today in kind of the middle of the screen, in Moscow LED system, the amount of light that you see visually off of the thing is amazing. And then there's this comparison to another manufacturer with their LED system, which is not, clearly not the same. And down below, you can also see the glare from a sample field versus what it could be with the Moscow system.

i'm not the musco rep but these are just there are illustrations of what's available for the technology nowadays and how far it has come along to reduce spillage and reduce glare for the neighbors in the area okay thanks eric i just wanted to make sure we understood as commissioners we understood uh what we were looking at with the the the two different today graphics and illustrations it's the one in the middle ish that that is the musco technology that you guys are looking at is that right

Yep. Today, Musco LED system. Right underneath that is the, how it is designed. Okay. Thank you. Okay. And if Mike comes on, Mike can certainly hop on and share. Okay. So pole height comparisons in lighting technology. So there are options out there, obviously. For us, the recommendation was the 70 feet from the Musco rep based on the information that he had. Those higher poles can improve the uniformity of light at the field level while reducing the glare and shadowing when properly utilized. So that is a four pole, 70 foot system. A six pole design with 60 foot poles can meet dark sky guidelines. So that is something that we can consider. I just put some bullets here, obviously, that we should note that it's going to cost more money when you're buying more poles. It costs money to install those poles. And you're going to see more steel in the air compared to a four-pole system. You're going to see you know 360 feet versus 280 and those six poles are there year round for for people to see so it's it is something to consider but we do realize that the 60 foot could be could be used and it's something that we could look into um as we move along in this process um that the the illustrations below that i think are something that needs to be kind of taken in and looked at um i think the The illustration speaks a lot of volumes about what we're looking at here. And if Mike comes on, I'm sure he can address it or if we have questions after this meeting. But it is a depiction of kind of how that glare works at 50, 60 and 70. So we wanted those slides to be in there so that people can understand and look at them. I'm not going to pretend to be the Moscow rep and explain it exactly. when it comes down to the science of it. But we thought it was important to be on there for when he does or in the future. If we have to explain it again, it's here. But it paints a pretty good picture of how we feel the 70-foot will be a little bit less impactful to the area around it. Go ahead, Carl. There was a request for some views and some mock-ups of what things could potentially look like So the Wakeman view, this was, I guess the request was specific to 70 feet. So, you know, this is a drone shot of it going up to 70 feet. So you can see the trees that are kind of in front of you. And so, you know, related houses. And there's a few more here. Go ahead, Carmen. So there is some pretty good tree cover in there. You know, this is the max height of the pole. So it seems like it, you know, there is some pretty good tree cover, at least on that side. We do have other views. And I think we actually have a video that might actually show some of it. Go ahead. Oh, that's the video there, I think, Carm. Is there a play? Yeah, there you go. That will rotate shortly. There you go. Again, this is the top of the 70-foot pole. So you do see quite a few trees there. And, you know, some of the concerns we've heard and, you know, we're aware of is that, you know, In the fall and winter, when we start losing some of that foliage, it's going to drop, so it won't be like that all the time. But we have talked about putting more greenery back into the project as part of it to make sure it fills in as best we can to block any potential fall, winter views and early spring where we don't have that same cover. Go ahead, Carmen. Some renderings that were requested. So you can see the four-pole system here at Wakeman. If you just basically go to the 18-yard box, for those who know that is, you just come straight across from the 18-yard box line off the field, and that's where the poles would be located. You can kind of get an idea of how high they would be up. Again, this is obviously an aerial view, but I think that's kind of what people wanted to see. Go ahead, Carl. Wakeman B from the sideline view. You can see the four poles there again. PJ Romano, end zone view. And the last one, sideline there. Obviously, feel free to take that in and bring any comments that are there, but you can still see the four poles on the PJ Romano field. Go ahead, Carm. Some comparable facilities. So obviously this is ground level, but you can see there, there are 70 foot permanent lighting at Joel Barlow. There is a tree line behind them. It looks like, you know, there the trees are up over the lights themselves. But pretty If you're at the field level, they're pretty thin. I mean, you see them, but they're not tremendously intrusive for the average passer buyer. And certainly we could work again on the greenery for the neighbors to do our best to make sure they're blocked for the neighbor's benefit. Go ahead. some shots of greens farms were requested just because it was semi recent technology, although I it's, it's gotten a lot better. Um, the left photo, you can see that the uniformity of the lights are, are pretty prominent. Um, they are, there's no, there's no darker areas right in the middle of the field. It's consistent lighting, which is good and safer for our athletes to be practicing on. Um, I think even with the better technology that we have now, some of that darkness you see in the outfield could be addressed. But you'll see, most importantly, I think that it just transitions very quickly to a dark area right after you have the area of the field lit that you want to have lit, and then it drops off hard once you get outside of that limit. And again, this is older technology already, so it will be better with the poles that they're using now. Again, and this is, so these are 60 footfalls. The 70, according to Moscow, would be even less spillage and more accurate. Okay, go ahead, Karin. We just threw this in there because people, they were talking about renderings of how the walk-off zones could potentially be from Wakeman. We didn't really want to spend money on a landscape architect to put something together until we got further along in the process and became a little bit more of a reality. But this is what we're kind of intending, a lower-level light. That would be just for safety to be able to get to our parking lots. The parking lots need to be addressed at Wakeman. There's the handicap parking is a major issue. I get those calls on a fairly regular basis. People complaining about that and the lack of them and the lack of parking in and around the field. So that's something that we're hoping to address. But this is just a sample. People are asking about about what it could potentially look like. OK, I think that's it for the presentation. Let me get the screen back to... Just a couple other quick points. There was questions about rentals and birthday parties and things like that. And I'm going to have Carmen address those a little bit just based on the current Parks and Recreation policy that we have and the kinds of rentals that are potentially happening, which is why the request was put in the way that it was put in for those kinds of things. Carmen.

Thank you, Carmen Roda, Westport Parks and Recreation, Recreation Superintendent. So first and foremost, as far as rentals, our primary 95 percent of our rentals of our facilities are done during the summer months and when they're maybe sometimes in the winter, but 95% is really the summertime during the fall and spring season, unless it's very early spring, i.e. in March, there's little to no rentals whatsoever. There's the field, we don't have the openings for the fields to be rented by anybody else other than being used by the user groups. We do have our Westport organizations using the fields, Coach Cave specifically, like for lacrosse, He does camps in early March because our grass fields aren't open until the last week of March, first week of April. He'll rent and do some clinics and camps during the course of March only on the turf fields. But most of the other rentals are in the summertime. They are rented by camps. We have soccer camps. We have baseball camps. We have football camps. We have continuing ed. Within those rentals, there's revenue being generated for the summer when typically the fields aren't in use and they're stagnant. Again, during the fall and spring, we don't have that luxury. It should be noted that even when these groups use the facilities, the fields in the spring and the fall, they are charged $25 per participant as a Westport youth organization to utilize those fields, as well as it helps defer some of our maintenance costs. Rentals. Depending on what the group is, if it's a Westport group like adult soccer, they're charged $100 an hour for their field use. Birthday parties, we have birthday party requests all throughout the season. If there's an open space, we use it. If there's not, we can't accommodate that. Locations, anywhere from Campo Beach, Wakeman, PJ Romano, Green's Farms, There's a multitude of spaces that people want to just go and utilize the amenities that we have. And if we can do it, we will. However, the biggest turndown is, again, in the spring and the fall because of the vast majority of the youth sports groups that are using the fields or wanting to use those fields. And that's all I have on the rentals.

Perfect. Thanks, Carmen. I just want to clarify that. You know, that's something we can certainly discuss with this application, but we wanted to put in the application based on what the current uses of our facilities are now. You know, the adults do rent the fields. If there's lights, it wouldn't surprise me if they wanted to be able to play a game or two at night. And there have been plenty of residents that have wanted to have birthday parties on an athletic site so their kids can play. So that's just a, that's why those were in there and there were some questions about that. So with that, I will turn it back over to you, Paul. Thank you again. Thank you everyone for the opportunity and for giving us a little bit more time to put it together, but hopefully it paints a little bit better picture of the numbers and the athletes who could potentially be turned away. We could really use this additional time to help us serve all these different youth groups, the high school, et cetera. So thank you very much.

Thank you very much. I do appreciate it. Just one bit of housekeeping here. I want to make note of the fact that the slideshow presentation, which is available online, which was posted on Friday, it is meant to incorporate the ideas for both fields. And so although we're doing the 70 north, it is applicable to the Romano field as well. I just want to throw that in so that everybody understands we're not going to go through it again when we get to Romano, etc. All right, so... Now it's our turn, commissioners, and this is our third bite of the apple, I believe. This is the third time we've looked at this, and so I would expect we're getting close on the questions that you might have. I did invite a town attorney, Ira Bloom, here in case there's any legal questions that you have. Say hello to Ira. Hi, Ira. Hi, Ira. Very good. And so let's go around. Commissioners, questions for the applicant? I see Bree, you have your hand up, please.

Yeah, I just had one question about the presentation. I think it was slides 9 and 10 with the sample schedules that you had on there. Okay. Okay. Some of the squares, it's clear it has FHS, so that's Staples, and some of them are blocked out for WAS. There was a few on there that are just like boys lacrosse, girls lacrosse. Is that staple, like who organizes those? That's just my question on that one. Is it Staples, club?

So, for example, it says girls lacrosse at like 6 o'clock, Wakeman B. It says girls lacs.

Mm-hmm.

Yeah, I believe that's PAL. Is that correct, Carmen? Yes. That is PAL.

That is PAL. Okay. All right. So everything that you have on the schedule basically is either Staples, PAL, or WSA?

On this sample for wake-up.

On the sample schedule, yeah.

And there's a little bit of adult soccer on the weekend there.

Okay. I do see that. And then I guess just one other question. Is there a reason that you don't open these fields earlier on the weekend?

Yes. Again, it's the balance of trying to do the best that we can for the most part. I'm not saying there's not exceptions. We try to keep it as reasonable as possible with noise. There's some times that they do go a little earlier. I like this past weekend, but we try not to, to the best that we can.

DIRECTOR RIVERA- Okay. Just to be I guess respectful of the neighbors to keep it. DIRECTOR DEWOLF- Right.

It's also there's a couple of things. There's been requests by neighbors for Wakeman area. We try to keep that as to that area. At P.J. Romano it's neighbors as well. And again trying to be thoughtful for kids to have opportunities for to go to religion school or church or synagogue or whatever other those things. We try to try to balance as much as we can as best we can.

Okay, great. Thank you for the explanation. I appreciate that.

Thank you, Brie. Appreciate it. Other commissioners? Questions for the applicant? Mr. Kammerer, I see your hand up, and then Nicole, I see your hand up. Just...

Carmen, you were talking about camps and rentals. Specifically, you mentioned, you said in March when it's kind of like dead time, Coach K uses it for camps. Just for the record, who's Coach K?

Coach K is a Staples high school boys varsity head coach.

And these clinics that he's running, who are the participants?

Participants are Staples High School students as well as Westport youth lacrosse participants.

And are there other camps and situations like that where it's, you're getting, it's not necessarily, In season, that's the way to say it, but it's a camp that's being put on by someone that has to rent the field, but the user base is residents of Westport.

Yeah, for example, in the spring, early, probably like 9 to 11 on Sundays is the head high school coach for the football team. They run a youth football camp in the morning.

Are there examples of this where they're potentially not Westport residents doing rentals?

Not in the spring or the fall. In the summer, it could be the high school camp, high school coaches running a camp and they could have people from out of town, but there is a policy that has to be the 75% or more has to be from the town. Same thing with the adult softball league we have. Same thing.

At Grades Farms?

Yes.

Okay, that's actually helpful.

I think that's all I have for the minute. Thank you. Michael, if I could add, or if it's okay, I could just add, you know, when you have an artificial turf field, They are being used, and I've done this myself with Premier Soccer. If you have a winter that is acceptable to kids being outside and training in temperatures that are safe, people are going to want to be out there there's absolutely no question about it so you know to to maximize the investment of an artificial turf field to light it and give those extra opportunities you know i know we're asking certain in seasons and all that there i think there was a mention that at times we would be outside of that in the application but um to really to really maximize the use um using them as much as possible it does make sense but that's obviously part of this conversation we want to be mindful of neighbors and and everything else but just for the record you know that's lighting an artificial dirt field it's it's it's designed to be year-round if it's safe to use right no i i okay no thank you um i appreciate that um you know i think that

certain coaches and certain teams have come before the subcommittee when we were first working on this and talked about Westport residents traveling to Fairfield and playing in that time window and other neighboring towns, both near and far, because we can't provide that opportunity for the kids. But it's good to kind of understand the cross-reference and the reasons and whatnot.

Anything else to follow up with, Michael? Not at the moment. Thank you. Appreciate it. Nicole, back to you.

Yeah, I'm having a really hard time wrapping my head around a 10 p.m. end time on a weekday. It's just something I really, I can't get past that. I understand that that's not going to be typical, but I guess my question for you is, What are the implications of, instead of 10 p.m., making the end time, let's say, 8 or 8.30, how many teams or people, I guess, would lose out on the opportunity to practice if we shorten that time period?

Well, I think, first of all, we're asking until 9 o'clock in the weekdays. Right, 9 on the weekdays, 10 o'clock on the weekends. 10 o'clock on the weekends. So let's look at the 10 o'clock number. If you stop at 8, you're losing, on Friday and Saturday, you're losing a two-hour window. So you're losing at least a game a night. Again, the ability for us to be able to go later for seventh and eighth graders opens up more of an opportunity for the younger kids to play earlier. Naturally, that's the essence of it. So the football league that I'm involved in, When there's night games being scheduled, the older kids, the seventh and eighth graders go later, the younger kids go earlier. That's for, at least I can say, for the football league that I'm involved in.

And I think that's pretty typical, Carmen. But yeah, so nine o'clock in the weekdays, you're basically losing... That's if you're going to have an hour and a half block, you're losing that seven 30 to nine block every single day of the week. And if you had a youth sports group that was putting two teams on a field, then you're talking about. you know, a lot of lost field usage during the weekend and on the weekends, if that's kind of how it was working. But, you know, Carmen referenced the games, but practices is even more important as the youth groups are trying to find, add more teams, they need those fields. So to lose them is a significant impact, in my opinion.

Additionally, just to help with that question, You've heard from the youth sports groups the challenge of getting, having the ability to have parents, especially working parents, be part of the volunteer coaching system because of work. Again, the later time helps provide that opportunity where parents could spend some quality time coaching not only their kid, their child, other children in the community. It is extremely challenging. to get youth volunteers and not having that flexibility restricts that challenge even further.

Understood. Just a follow up question to that, because I thought somewhere along the line, we had discussed the fact that it would not be necessary to have such late hours on, let's say, Saturday, for instance.

I'm not aware of that. Again, what I can share with you, so a lot of the leagues have what they call quote-unquote professional referees. For example, football has high school referees that do the games. It's safer. It's people with more knowledge. It is extremely challenging to get those during the weekends when high schools have games because You have to have some other opportunities. It opens up a lot more flexibility, again, to keep the younger kids playing earlier and the older kids playing later, and us to be able to, the sports groups to be able to do some more scheduling.

And, Nicole, there is that opportunity to discuss that. You know, I mean, this is what the application is. Again, trying to maximize the investment for people that are, whether they're donors or it's town money. I mean, it's still, there's a value there. So to be able to maximize that investment, but it's something that could be discussed. Although I will tell you that I just think if you're going to reduce it too much, I wouldn't even bother doing it because you're just, it's a massive investment. If you're not maximizing it and you're cutting it and making it so restrictive, to me, it's not worth it.

No, I understand. It's just that this would be a significant change for that area. And this is, you know, an area that borders on a residential neighborhood. And you're going from, you know, nothing to late night lights, games, traffic, noise, potentially. It's just something we have to really balance in our minds. But thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, Nicole. Do appreciate it. Craig Schiavone or Michael Calise, either of you have any questions for the applicant at this time?

No.

Thank you. I'm good. Okay, two goods. That's fine. Let me dive in here. Sure, I can come up with a few for you. So the first thing I want to ask you is regarding the limited playing time. So the sunlit hours, how would you quantify the summer increase? In other words, how much are you picking up in summer versus how much are you picking up in spring and fall? If you could just give me a rough estimate of how that breaks out.

Well, I'll let Carmen get into the specifics, but this application is for the spring and fall seasons for the most part. I think it does read in there that there's some winter and summer items that we would potentially want to handle. But it's primarily when we are slammed with both high school athletics and the spring and fall youth groups and all the different sports and the increase in sports that we've talked about, the number of actual sports out there that they're playing. But the quantification, I mean... when you look at the block scheduling and you see in green the additional times that we're we're getting that is you know so if you have 15 kids on a team and there's two kids on that field in that time block you're at those numbers are impactful to what you're adding i don't know if carm if you want to add anything to that yeah yeah the best way to answer that question is um

Again, when we look at where the sun sets, that's the final resting place of the sun. However, specifically if you're looking at the fall and early spring, you're looking as the light starts to diminish and we're trying to replicate that. the sun at its maximum potential, right? Again, Eric said it the best is on those slides in green. That's what we're projecting as the addition, the pickup, the impact of what the lights will give us. Again, going through the sunset chart, late May, early June, the impact may be minimal compared to March and early April. The lights won't be as significant. And again, on the flip side, in the fall, it'll be minimal early September, but mid-late September, early October, as the season progresses, it becomes more impactful to the programs. So those are kind of ballpark. You know, we had to put something on the slides. Those are kind of what we're looking at. We'll pick up at max.

Got it. Okay, so let's get into the actual lights themselves. You mentioned that these are lower output lights. and higher tech, better tech is the way you put it, than what's currently in usage at either of the fields that you use. And I know the guy from the lighting company is not here, but can you quantify that in your words, approximately, how much better are these lights than what we see with our own eyes currently?

How do I best describe that? Very easy for me is the, the light is now more pinpointed to the location. There's less spillage. Um, as you saw in like greens farms, you'll have a wider range of, of field getting lit with the new technology with not having dark spots or shadows, the lower the lighting, the more shadows they are. Um, When we were using the temporary lightings, because they were low, there was much more glare. There was dark spots on the field. They're shadowing. It's safer. And you could just narrow that scope. It's kind of like a comb, right? You're getting pinpointed to the exact spot that you want lit, nothing else.

And increasing the energy efficiency, too, obviously, is impactful. So it's not costing us as much with this newer technology.

And, Paul, just as, you know, it's very important to note also, and Eric said it earlier, where these lights, there's no generators. There's no noise pollution and environmental pollution is drastically taken out of a mix.

Are they similar to the ones that are at Green's Farms now?

No, it's a newer technology. They're closer related. The lights are closer related to probably a little better technology than what's at Staples High School.

Okay.

I think we're asking for 70. I believe those were 60 at Greens Farms, right, Carmen? Yes, correct. So there's a little difference here.

And did you look at different lighting schematics? You know, basically both fields are four poles, one in each corner, you know, of a certain size. Did you look at and evaluate other schematics? And if so, how much of a difference was there?

Well, so the, oh, go ahead, Greg. Go ahead, Eric. No, I mean, I just, I simply want, I mentioned it when we came to the slide on the presentation, that there is the possibility to go to the six pole system at 60 feet. And again, for the athlete experience, the lower those lights go, the potential background lighting you're going to see during the run of play. So the ball's going, it's either punted or the ball's in the air. There's the possibility that it comes across and through those lights. That could be a potential issue the lower the pole gets. So, but again, the 60 foot with the six pole system does meet dark skies requirements as far as we're from the Moscow rep. So that's something that could be looked at. There's positives and negatives to that, but that's something we're happy to entertain it.

Well, that was my next question, the positive and negatives. Are there any positives to a different scheme if you were from a neighbor's point of view, that is worth considering by this commission.

Well, let me just add one other thing to what Eric said. First of all, when we asked Moscow to come up for lighting for those two fields, we gave them the amount of usage of the fields, the specific sports that primarily use those fields, and we asked for the best lighting possible. that we could have not only for the events being used on that field, but for the environment and the neighbors. What would be the best option? And that's what they came up with. More specific, we'd have to ask who them must go, but that's what we asked for those. Again, on the My opinion on the negative on this is that six polls is more steel to look at. I mean, it is in the presentation. It's it's could be people could view it as more of an eyesore up to whatever people's opinions are. But those are really to the primary, as I see it.

Okay, so you're saying you did look at and discuss different lighting schemes, and this one, you landed on this one because you felt it was the best, or is it cheaper?

What's the primary motivation? I mean, Carmen just mentioned, when you have the sport-specific information that Musco takes or any rep, They're going to say, okay, who's being played? How many foot candles do you need? What is the best system that you would install here, you know, for the money, less spillage, neighbors impacted everything. And their recommendation was the four 70 foot poles because they're again, the higher you go, the less spillage there is. So that's what they're recommending. I think some of the neighbors' concerns were we're going to have to look at those poles. The higher they are, we're going to have to see them. So we went back to the rep and asked if we were to consider the six-pole system at 60, what would that look like? Would it meet dark skies? He said it would and came back with some of those other impacts with the other poles. So it's not like there's a there's a ton of options here. You know, you're, you have a certain sport, you have the full candles you need to hit. And so you have these different pole number of pole systems you can install, but it's not, you know, it's not like we have a 50 different options to look at. These are, it's pretty specific. Um, and there's probably a, a, a 50 foot pole system. I would start to have concerns with, with the quality of play, like I said, in the division of the athletes. So the 50 foot have not been considered yet. Um, But we, you know, again, that could end up coming down the road if that's kind of where people want to go.

Okay. And again, how much difference was there between the two fields in terms of your choice? How much? The scheme that you eventually chose.

There was no difference because the sports that were being played at those two locations, the lighting demands and the foot candles were similar.

Okay. Carmen you know I've said this in the past that I do live across the street from an existing sports field now that is lit and there's been some discussion about turning the lights off when, how, who does it, how it's handled. And I will say from my personal experience that I have seen times when the field is still lit and the players are gone. And so what assurances or what systems or devices can you put in a place or have in place that assures that that is not something that's replicated using on the new fields?

Well, the first thing would be when somebody requests the fields, we would add an additional language into the agreement that they would have to, say, for example, they want the fields until 11 o'clock. If the game gets over, there has to be a representative that calls us so we can shut off the fields. That has happened with specifically Westport Little League teams. We're working on getting that universal. That would be one of the things I would recommend. And same for Wakeman, PJ, Staples, any lithium. It should be that it goes on the onus of the user to call, whether it's VJ or myself or whoever, you know, if we're the two that are responsible for it to call us and say we're leaving early, we need to shut the lights. And if that doesn't happen, I would recommend to Eric to recommend to the Parks and Rec Commission that we pull the permit for them using the lights going forward. I mean, there has to be a consequence. It's too important for us.

And what if a game does not go off as scheduled? I'm sorry, it does not go off at all.

If the light regulation is, again, goes till 10, then at 10 o'clock it goes over, it goes off.

We're going to schedule these lighting hours in our system. They're going to go on when they're supposed to. They're going to go off when they're supposed to. If we have organizations that are not holding up their end of the bargain and canceling when they don't need the lights or the game gets done early for whatever reason, they're leaving early, it's going to be on them to request of Parks and Recreation. It will rest with us. There's no There's no one to blame. We have to enforce it with the youth groups. You know, we won't be the ones technically on the fields, obviously, but we're going to have to enforce that with the youth groups. And I think I mentioned in an earlier meeting, I've asked Carmen to send staff around to make sure people using the fields are supposed to be on there when they're supposed to be on there. And if there's a scheduled practice or game and no one's on it, that group is going to be held responsible for that loss of a block that could have been given to somebody else. So we are going to have staffing out there in addition to that, to make sure the right people are using them. But, you know, these things do happen. I mean, there's, there are one-offs, you know, This group, I'm sorry. Yes, the game was canceled. I forgot. I mean, they're human, but we are going to be enforcing it. And especially if it's a repeat occurrence for any particular group, then they're just going to lose the privilege. It's that simple.

Do you sign a contract with people who utilize the fields?

There's no only for rentals. We will.

Are there written rules that you can give them and get them to sign so that they understand what the rules are?

100%.

And you'll get, you know, the thing is, if you're going to ask for new behavior, then we want to make sure that it's clear what you're asking for. You know, what are the guidelines? Who do they call? When can they call? How do they reach you? So that if they're walking off the field at 9 or 8.30 and they're all done, You have an opportunity to change the schedule for the lights that might, let's say, be on by themselves for another hour.

So to answer that question, Paul, I meet with all the user groups at least two times a year, if not more. In the initial part of when we do the scheduling, they all have my number, the scheduler, the president. Some people on this meeting, as I say, have that number where, again, if there is, when they leave the field, to call either myself or they could call Vijay, depending if it's the high school field or his coaches. But the youth groups can call, and I shut it off right by my phone. It's not unusual to do that.

So going forward, if you were to institute that type of a rule, you could demand that of anybody who's using the field, that they understand the rules, recite back to you that they understood it, sign something, and then there's no question as to how they do something. Nobody's walking around in the parking lot wondering whose job it is to call Carmen. Correct. And the same thing goes for the rentals. If you're going to open it up for a rental of any sort, especially somebody that doesn't use it as a team sport, so therefore isn't as familiar with the way things work, I would hope that you have written guidelines specific that are enunciated to the applicant, I'm sorry, to the renter prior to them being able to access it so that they understand exactly what's expected of them as well. Is that something you will do?

We have that now and we will continue to do that with any, whatever the procedures or rules are for lighting fields.

Okay. Does it have, it probably doesn't have a lit field section in it now, does it?

No.

Okay. All right. And then the same thing goes when we talk about access to you or your staff or parks and recs in general, and we think about the neighbors, I want to know how robust is their access when something is going on that they feel needs your attention?

I could say that at least there's two neighbors on this call right now that have called me when Staples High School has been lit or there's been noise issues. And I was as responsive as I could be at that time. I called them back or texted them back and tried to take care of the issue as much as I can.

And moving forward, Paul, I've asked Carmen, especially for the, for example, there was a large event, lacrosse tournament, from here on out to have an actual staff member, the cost of that staff member will be passed on to the renter. But to be that contact person at the facility in case something Number one, to protect the facility, make sure they're using it the right way. But they can also enforce some of the rules and the policies that we have. Some of the things that were, you know, like noise this past weekend. You know, one of the groups was trying to use a grill. That could be nipped in the bud before it happens if it's staffed. So I think it's important that we have a presence as a department at some of those larger events. Again, not every single day of the week. but at some of those larger events where we know there's potential, you know, noise impacts and other things that we can address. So that is, we had that, Carmen and I had that discussion recently, and that's going to be the policy moving forward.

Okay. And, you know, obviously, it's a significant change in the viewscape with the neighbors. And so the question comes up, what happens when somebody lingers? I get it that you want to shut it off a half an hour or power it down. What if they decide that they want to crack open a... you know, a case of beer on the tailgate and stay? And, you know, where does the Parks and Rec's responsibility end and the neighbors' quiet and protection begin?

I think some of the questions that came up with that were in regards to adult athletics and things like that. We shared some of those concerns with the neighbors, with some of the adult leagues in particular. Some of them might be on this call tonight, but I think they're a little upset about being painted with that brush that they all hang out after games and drink beers and are loud and obnoxious because that's not the case for most of them. So they were, you know, that was just their response to me. But so, you know, we don't have... a park police unit. Some towns have a park police unit. Some towns have park rangers that go around in the evenings to enforce things like that. We don't have that. It's something that we can consider. I think with the staff that we're sending around now that I've told Carmen to put around to make sure the field issues would be done appropriately, the staff member now that we're going to use for some of those larger events, we're starting to go down that road to try to help enforce some of our policies and rules. So I think that's going to be a step in the right direction. there's nothing from stopping someone to go into some of these parks that aren't gated at any hour of the night to do things and they shouldn't belong there. So we can ask the police to do, you know, increased patrols in some of these areas, things like that as a favor if they're in that area. But it's something that we will have to deal with and that we will have to address as it occurs. But again, if there are incidents with certain user groups, then they are going to have to deal with the consequences of their behaviors and their ability to get these permits.

So you want to object if we write that into any kind of guidelines that we expect you to follow for this so that you're indicating it to either renters, users, sports group, whoever's out there on the field that they have read and seen that they're expected to vacate the premise in a timely manner. And that's not, For lack of a better word, it's not for hanging out.

Yeah, and I'm very much a policy and procedure guy. That's how I operate. So I believe in that. And I think that, you know, Carmen and the staff will get those rules and regulations passed down. And again, we will deal with them if there is noncompliance. There will be ramifications. And to answer your question, yes, we'd be happy to put in certain verbiage if the commission feels as though it's appropriate. Absolutely.

All right, great. So you've gone through most of my questions. I don't have anything else to add, but I reserve my time for later. Any other commissioners before we take a quick break and then go to the public?

Yes.

Go ahead.

Me?

Who said yes? Craig. Thanks, Craig.

Go ahead. You know, I understand the rules and regulations you can put in place. And I'm going off of what Paul was talking about on lights staying on later than they should be. My concern is that lights, I've spent a lot of time walking those fields at night just to understand the impact on the neighbors and the neighborhood. And I'm a little surprised that the Staples Field, until the other night, the Staples Field is always lit. The baseball field is always lit. And I am... thinking that you need to go further because what about, I mean, it seems there must be a clock that they're all on. So what about when there's just nobody playing and overseeing that clock? I can't imagine what the energy usage is, but there I would think needs to be a more intrinsic organizational approach to those lights. overall? And maybe could you explain how that could happen?

I'm not sure I understand the question.

Okay, the question is, you're leaving it to the organizations that are playing on the fields to tell you when the lights are needed and when the lights are going off. But when there are no sporting groups or activities on these two fields that I've walked many times they're just on so I don't know you know they're just on on a Friday night at Staples even though there is no activity there has been no activity um so so I would you know I understand how you want to put the um the guard rails in place for when they're playing, but institutionally and mechanically, how are you dealing with just they're always on?

So that is the case of somebody not in, I'd have to have Carmen look into, you know, when it's happening, why, you know, the Was it the high school had requested them to be on, and then the coach canceled practice, you know, that kind of thing? It was Sunday night.

I walk around on a Sunday night, and, you know.

Okay. Yeah, I mean, so the system allows you to turn them on at a certain time and turn them off at a certain time, and there's just schedule. No one's popping them on and off every day. It's based on the schedule that the teams have requested. So, you know, that... I would highly encourage everyone. We want to know when that happens, whether it's Carmen or myself or anybody, Vijay at the high school. If there's lights on and nobody's there, then we want to know because someone has requested it and it's easy to find out who. So Sunday night from, you know, whatever the time was that you saw them, somebody had requested that facility to use at that time. So they would be held responsible for not telling us that they didn't use it.

A hundred percent. I'd have to check with Vijay, but he's the primary, he's the one responsible for turning on the lights at Staple stadium. It would be us for parks and rec for Wakeman B and PJ. Again, whether we look at having somebody go and check, there is a, I do think that there is when you have a policy that, The policy has to be reasonable, but more importantly, enforceable. I'm not one I'm not shy of enforcing a rule. I'm not shy of pulling somebody's permit. I'm not shy of relieving them of the privilege to be able to use lights just because I think it's that important for not only for the youth groups, but more importantly, the neighbors. So, there has to be a consequence. And people aren't going to lose that primary—that prime spot just because they want to be lax. We will have the policy and procedure. We will enforce it. And it's not going to be—it's going to be very swift and quick. The one thing I can say is I am responsive. And there's people on this call. I'm hoping that they could share that information, whether it's the weekends or the nights. Emma, I don't know if she's on the call. She would call me and tell me that the Staples lights were on and nobody's there. I would call Vijay and say, you got to pop them off. But that, I mean, Vijay is the one that's primarily responsible for Staples. But for the other ones, we could take care of very easily. I'm more than confident of that.

Okay, one more thing. I just want to thank you for addressing my major concern, which was the lighting and the bollards down on Wakeman. When I heard this whole proposal, it was the first thing that came to mind. My children had played soccer there, and I was always afraid of running someone over. But I appreciate your responsiveness to that.

Yeah, it's our pleasure. That needs a thorough examination in and of itself. I mean, we could use more parking there. If there's no handicap parking, there's a lot going on there.

Okay. Other commissioners before we turn to the... Yes, Michael Kammler.

So just quickly, just to... some of that last set of dialogue here, I guess, is that even though under this application set of applications, whatnot, we're not talking about Staples Stadium, we're not talking about Greens Farms, but we are talking about that. Many people have seen the lights stay on when there's nothing going on, and I'm glad that someone like Emma will pick up the phone and call Carmen and tell them to shut them down. We would like more residential vigilantes, but... You know, I guess as part of the new application, we just want better, call it guardrails, better compliance, right? And, you know, at least have... Build that huge opportunity. There he was.

Go ahead, Michael, continue your thought process.

Sorry, that was a little distracting. Point being here is that win, lose, or draw with these applications with the existing lights. If you guys can do a better job at that, that'd be amazing.

One thing I'd like to add to that is what I would love to see eventually, and I know the high school is requesting this just so they can live stream their events, but having cameras at all of our facilities to be able to both monitor what's happening at these facilities, but in this particular case, If we had cameras at every location, we could be actively monitoring and making sure that people are using them when they're supposed to be using them and not have to have a physical body down there. That would be helpful. For example, we're about to redo the tennis courts at Staples. And as part of that project, the Board of Ed has asked that we work with them to see if we can get the conduit run for the tennis courts and the cameras installed. So something like that as we move forward at all of the facilities would be a tremendous event.

Okay. So on that topic, Eric, can I request internet? That's part of that. You know, you're going to need it. But yes, Internet's kind of weak at our this is not a Parks and Rec request. Internet's kind of weak at our school systems in the in the internet, Wi-Fi and cell signals are kind of weak in the areas. So if we're going to use cameras to monitor remote monitor, I think it would be great to enhance that. So you can remote monitor.

Yeah, our Wi-Fi, I know our IT department is currently working on getting Starlink options because our Wi-Fi, even at Compo and Longshore, is horrifyingly bad. It just doesn't work. And that affects business, by the way. It does affect a lot of things. So the Starlink option is something we're looking into that could help solve that, but that's something that's available out there. There's newer technologies out there, so we'll see how that all plays out. But the Board of Ed is aware of their own Wi-Fi issues, and we are going to work with them on Staples Tennis and certainly any facility moving forward. That'd be great.

Anything else, Michael? Shall we move on? I think we can move on for now.

All right, very good. Amanda, anything to add before we go to the public?

I have nothing to add. Just to mention that during the previous public hearings, we heard public testimony three times. And I think Parks and Rec, they provided answers to questions that were raised during the last few hearings. There was a field trip that took place on May 28th, where members of the public, commission members, and also the town attorney and representative attorneys were all present for, where we were all able to do a site walkthrough and get the orientation of where these polls would be located. And that's all I have to add and I'm available for any specific questions or statutory timelines.

Yes, thank you for the discussion. We definitely want to talk about statutory timelines because as commissioners, we must be We must adhere to the timelines allotted. If you don't mind, this might, before we go to the public and hear, there are many questions, I'm sure. Can you give us a brief discussion about what timelines we are facing?

Sure. So talking about the 824 municipal improvements, that application has been withdrawn and resubmitted. It was resubmitted on May 26th. The commission has 35 days to issue a report to the first selectmen. That brings us to tomorrow. So if you do not feel that you have all the information you need to issue that report tonight, I will be asking the Parks and Rec Department to withdraw their application, their 824 application, and resubmit. As far as the special permit site plan application, that's, being that this is a public hearing item, they are subject to additional time. So they have until, well, the commission has until August 21st to close the hearing.

Okay, and that's important. So, Commissioners, obviously, these two pieces are together, but they're apart because they have different timeframes. And so... You know, voting tonight on the 824 does not seem in our best interest to try and rush half the pieces. So we're going to come back to this discussion. But I want you to be put your thinking caps on as to where we're going to go here, because obviously the 824s are going to need more time. And I'm pretty sure that the applicants can convince, well, convince themselves that to apply again. Mr. Bloom, I see you're here. Do you concur with that?

Yes, I concur 100%. You want to try to coordinate the decisions on the 824 and the special permit site plan for each application. So It's useful and a good idea, as Amanda said, to withdraw the 824, resubmit it, so you're kind of in sync in terms of the timing. So I agree with that. One last point, if I can just make, Mr. Chairman. I saw late today that Attorney Green had submitted some material. I have not personally had a chance to review it very carefully. I'm not sure anyone has. But in any event, I don't know if he's here tonight or if there's anybody that wants to present for the neighbors regarding this information, but obviously you should review it all carefully and see what questions you have with regard to that information also.

Thank you for that, Mr. Bloom. I am aware that Mr. Green did miss the deadline that's published of 12 noon. And so if he is here and has things to present to us, we're, of course, welcome to review that, et cetera, and look forward to that. Okay. I think we have a couple of hands up. Why don't we try some of those first before we do anything like a break? And I believe, Shelly, you and Gary were vying for who had their hand up first. And why don't we say that Shelby won the draw, and you're first.

Oh, if you knew Gary and my relationship, you would know how happy that makes me. OK. So thank you for your patience. I do have prepared comments. They are unique from the letter that I submitted. It's my understanding that we are supposed to submit public testimony that is different than the letters that we post. So keep that in mind. First, I'm going to play a short clip from my backyard this weekend during the lacrosse tournament. Before you protest, I listened to over 1,200 minutes of it this weekend instead of spending quality time with my kids in the backyard. So I think we can listen to it for just 30 seconds, please.

Amanda, does she have the ability to share that with us?

Can you hear it with the microphone?

Technologically, it would probably be better if you shared it, but I guess you could try what you're proposing. I'm not sure it'll come through, but give it a try.

I'd be more than happy to if I'm given what's called share settings on the Zoom meeting. So someone would need to give me that power. Shelby you should be all set okay fantastic give me one second to pull it up now Shelby I know you did send around a letter that had a link in it yeah and is that what you're talking about using that link yeah but I can just pull it up if you have watched the letter if you've watched the video great if you haven't we're going to listen to it here for one second and you're going to limit it to 30 seconds 30 seconds very good

And if need be, we can have Amanda bring it up off of the PNZ website through your letter if you want to do it that way, if you're having difficulty. And you sent that letter when?

Hold on, I'm still sharing screen and I don't want to be. How do I stop share? Okay, let's come back to the video. I have a thing to say and then I'll be done. And if you want to listen to the video, you can.

Yeah, the video is available. It is embedded. For the other commissioners who want to view it, Shelby sent a letter to us. It's a three-page or four-page piece that has embedded in it a link where she invites you to view a video that she took through her backyard. So please proceed.

Okay, so you've heard a bit about the, now, of course, my children walk in and are screaming, so my apologies for background noise. The lacrosse tournament this weekend, like, blew up our family and what we wanted to do this weekend. Some of you all have Never thrown a party in an apartment building, and it shows. What do you do when you have a party? You go talk to your neighbors. I'm having a party from this time to this time. It's going to be loud. It's just one night per year. Here's my cell phone number. And then what do your neighbors do? Do they go to the management and kill your party? No, they go to the movies. And if you don't do what you say you're going to do, they report you. But this weekend, Parks and Rec didn't even try to get ahead of the tournament. If I was making a case to the town on Monday to give me more resources and I was throwing an event that was sure to upset the very people who the lights would affect, you better bet I would have been all over that event, but no one was there. The only explanations are that parks leadership believes they can do whatever they want with no consequences or they are too overwhelmed to effectively manage their existing commitments. I will say Carmen is unbelievably kind and he cares deeply about our kids in our community. He's the only person who walked up to every neighbor at that community walkthrough, shook his, took our hands and introduced himself. And he did what he could this weekend when I was able to get in touch. But unfortunately that was four hours of amplified music on Sunday morning, starting at 7 30 AM. And at 10 30 AM, I was still listening to Nirvana live. right on my fence line. So all signs point to the fact that right now parks doesn't have the skills and resources to do this type of development responsibly. I have five points on this. One, enforcement isn't happening. I appreciate the commissioners talking about that. The coaches, the refs, and the participants did what they wanted all weekend. The testimony we heard was that Furman has no problem pulling permits, but there's no world in which he's going to pull the permit for the gauntlet. because it's run by the staples lacrosse coaches for profit company. Point two, Moscow is walking all over them with what we need. Parks doesn't have a procurement department to help them negotiate or a lighting consultant to make sure they're not being upsold. Even in this conversation, they said designs are the same, yet football is not currently played on Wakeman and it is played on Romano. Football, foot candles for those sports are different. Point three, parks is completely overwhelmed by field scheduling, calling it impossible without lights. But managing usage is more feasible than ever with the democratization of AI and I'd be more than happy to donate my time and sit down and help set it up for free not through PE-backed software. And I don't want to hear another word about how we can't use fields because they are the wrong size or they have to be relined. The lacrosse tournament, which probably charged hundreds if not thousands for every participant, had no problem playing full games on the outfield of the baseball field. Point four, according to tons of public letters, they seem unable to achieve gender balance with existing resources, which is a legal requirement. But the truth is this town has intentionally prioritized boys' football for years, and they're currently even prioritizing it for an 11-year-old son and his volunteer coaches who start practice at 5.45 instead of 4 when school lets out. Wouldn't it be amazing if I didn't have to pay for after school childcare and football? That's a decision. It's not a scheduling problem. I'll also note regarding field shortage, football went from two teams to one because so many kids quit last year. So all of this unmet need in football, I don't see happening. Five, finally, and most importantly, existing fields like Loeffler go unused and unrehabilitated. One here seems to be able to answer that question. or the field between the tennis courts and the baseball field at PJ Romano. These unused fields create a false requirement for lights. And as Commissioner Calise very thoughtfully called out earlier in this process, lighting Wakeman adds just one field. And through this process, we have found two. If the only tool you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail. And the lights are the hammer that this town is using to cure all every issue. So despite all this, imagine this gets approved. What's next? This is a part no one wants to answer clearly because it's never just about the four light poles. First it's lights, then it's later hours, then it's tournaments like what we experienced this weekend, then it's parking, we saw that this weekend. There's spectator seating because families need somewhere to sit, there's bathrooms, there's road lighting for safety, then crossings and traffic controls because the volume requires it. And every time we'll be told the same thing. This is reasonable. This is necessary. This is just one more small change. But taken together, those small changes are how a neighborhood park becomes a regional athletic complex. Park's own master plan calls Wakeman a major athletic pub that once upgraded with lights, seating and parking will support heavy use. They're telling us exactly where this is going. And once the lights go in, our leverage is gone because nobody spends money and stalls private parks. permanent infrastructure and then says, actually, let's use this less. So here's my conclusion. I've summarized every diverse argument I've heard over these past two years. And now I want the commissioners to acknowledge and respond to them. To be fair, I heard you. reference a lot of my points and I really appreciate that this evening. I have a strong understanding of this issue simply because I've done the work and that's why Barbieri calls me behind my back, the leader of the resistance. At first I was offended by this, but I suppose there are worse things to be. I'm truly, I truly rather just be enjoying my home, my kids, my neighbors in the spare time between the hours on Metro North and and flying cross country to work so we can afford to live here and so that I can pay for all of my kids' youth sports. So what are we asking for? A hard cut off at 8 p.m., light poles below the tree line, significant evergreen planting. It's furious to see those renderings. Every single one of those leaves is off when these lights would actually be used. Limits on tournaments, Security cameras. Took us a long time to get there. I mean, that was the obvious answer. A time limit on further development and a publicly auditable calendar, because if you're asking us to trust you, trust requires boundaries. And finally, I do not want to be a park ranger. I do not want to run neighborhood watch. Please, please, please listen to the concerns of the neighbors. I know I'm at my time. Thank you, everyone.

Thank you very much. I do appreciate your input. Next, I see Gary's iPhone. Gary, would you give us both a picture of yourself there and tell us your name and address?

Hi, my name is Gary Treve, 2A Whippoorwill Lane. So I have quick comments and then I have some questions that hopefully the town attorney and the applicant could answer on this call because it's now the third time I'll be asking them. Following up on Shelby's comments, the event this weekend, to me, it was an unmitigated disaster. I bring it up just because Parks is asking for, and sorry, and Staples, and the AD is asking for more stuff to oversee. And just like to point out what I saw, I blocked my dog there for about an hour. There was food being thrown over the fence onto Ripperville Lane. I saw that twice. There was a full barbecue set up. It wasn't as the previous speaker, I'm sorry, I I can't remember his name, said that they were trying to sell barbecue. There was a barbecue out on Wakeman Drive for more than an hour and a half serving meals on the street. So I think they admitted there was no oversight of this event. It was probably about 2,000 people, I think. So I'm just keeping that in mind for an organization that's asking for more things to oversee. Obviously, there's an issue there. My questions for the town attorney and for the applicant are just on the application itself. Okay, so I'm gonna pull up the application. It says, describe proposed project, installation of athletic field lighting, blah, blah, for community athletic events, see attached narrative. Okay, if I pull up the narrative, The narrative section I says, use of lighted fields shall be limited to Westport Public School, league required interscholastic contests, and permitted community youth athletic events. Okay, that is in contrast to the actual statute that it cites, which says community athletic events, this is section K of statute 32-19-5, It says lighted fields should be used only for Westport school athletic practices and games and community athletic events having a valid permit from Parks and Rec or Staples AD and will not have any adverse effects on the surrounding residential properties. So we've gotten there. It's conflicting. My questions are, number one, is it limited to community youth sports or is it community events? That's number one. That's a very simple question. Number two, Are for-profit events permitted? Okay, that's unclear, I would say, on the way it's written. Number three, for example, would an event like the Gauntlet be allowed to be held under the lights? That's a regional sporting event that had teams from Massachusetts, Maryland, I think Florida. This is not a community athletic event. So would that be permitted under the rules? And this seems to me that it specifically precludes like a private coaching situation at 9 p.m. under the lights. So could the applicant answer the basic questions of what we're actually discussing on this application? It's very unclear the way the application reads. Thank you so much.

Thank you very much. I do appreciate it, Gary. And we'll try and get some answers for you. Next, I see Emma Casato. Emma, you're next. And again, name and picture, if you can, and your address.

Hi, I'm Emma Casado. I'm 17 Wedgwood Road in Westport. I have two quick points. The first one the previous speaker touched on. I heard the Parks and Rec's representative, it sounded to me like they were describing their existing rental policy, which might work really well currently in daylight hours. But I did just want to remind people about the lighting regulations. You know, the lighting regulations may cause them to limit their ordinary rental policy as it relates to lighted fields, because as the previous speaker said, it's much more restrictive. The lighted fields can only be used for. Westport School team athletic practices and games and the community athletic event. So I hate to keep bringing it up, but the birthday party, I just don't see how that fits within. You know, that's not according to the regulations. The second point I wanted to cover real quick because my name was brought up earlier and I and just to agree with Carmen, like, absolutely, like I can agree. attested the fact that Carmen is super responsive and user friendly. And I truly appreciate that. But just to set the record straight, I have never, I do not want to act as a vigilante and be responsible for patrolling the fields and calling Carmen on a daily basis to report that the lights are on and no one's there. I've not actually ever done that. What happened was I sat through the subcommittees to create these lighting regulations and I was aware at that time that the fields were lighted while not in use, but I was told that that was impossible. So once those regulations went into effect, I'm only over at the fields like maybe like two or three times a week. I'm walking my dog over there. And on a regular basis, almost all the time, I see the lights on and the fields are not in use. So I started to just snap a picture every time that happened. And then when this application came before the PNZ to light the fields, that's when I called Carmen and I said, hey, Carmen, just to let you know, because I don't want to bother Carmen on a daily basis, but I just sent him a screenshot and I had 40 pictures at that point of the lights on and absolutely no one there. And Carmen was super responsive. What I think needs to happen is... I can tell that the lights are scheduled to correspond to the maximum times allowed by the regulations. And it's not just a case of people leaving early or canceling an occasional practice or having an away game. It was clearly the case this spring that there were chunks of time, usually 7 p.m. onwards, where there was just nothing scheduled. So I think maybe the lighting schedule has to be more tailored because we've heard, you know, this wonderful technology, you can automate it to come on and automate it to come off. So rather than automating it to the maximums, I think you have to spend a little more time once you have the final schedule to sort of really match it to what's on the schedule. And then the problems with having individuals responsible for calling on their phone when they leave. I mean, how would they know that another group is not supposed to come in after them? Because sometimes these lights are on at seven and maybe they would think someone's going to come in at eight. or nine if they're on until 10, but no one is. So I'm still not convinced that there's a workable system to turn the lights off when the fields are not in use. But of course, the regulation does require that. Per the regulations, it's mandated that they must be turned off immediately. So I definitely think that still needs to work. But thank you to Carmen for all that he's done and continues to do because he is absolutely fantastic. So thank you all.

Thank you, Emma. I do appreciate your comments here. Paul, can I just jump in quickly? I'm trying to move along, but go ahead.

Emma, I want to apologize. But I will say, Emma, you're great during the subcommittee, and the feedback was great.

All right.

And everything you said.

Thank you, Commissioner Kammar. Next is Valerie Sealing-Jacobs, who we haven't seen in a while. Hello, Valerie.

Hi. Thank you. My name is Valerie Sealing Jacobs. I live at 11 Campo Parkway. I'm here in two capacities both as co-chair of Save Westport Now and as a resident individual resident of Westport. We've previously previously submitted a letter and I would urge you to go look at it. In fact in that letter we predicted and recounted how people had videos over the last two decades of horrible situations involving noise and light and events on these fields. And we pretty much predicted what happened this weekend. So I would urge you to go back and look at it. But I have four points I want to make tonight. The first one has to do with the data that Parks and Rec presents, the so-called data. We have not really seen, you know, first we heard, oh, at the last meeting I was at, hundreds of children are being turned away. Now we're hearing, oh, at least 100, okay? We don't know who those children are. We don't know if that's true. This was in a letter that was read into the record tonight. I appreciate that. I'm assuming this person believes it to be true, but we don't know it to be true. Trust but verify. We also don't know how many of the children of those thousands that were on one of those slides are playing more than one sport. I understand that you want to use the fields more and you want to get more children involved, but maybe we just have to say you can play one sport and not two. We don't have good data on this, and I don't think the Planning and Zoning Commission should make a decision until you have good data. The next point I want to make has to do with environmental matters. You know, the idea that we're going to get rid of a generator, great. We shouldn't be using a generator anyway. But the fact is that putting in these light stanchions is an environmental nightmare. I have two dates I would like you to pay attention to. One is June 9th. I'd like you to go back, everyone on the commission, go back and look at the testimony that was presented at an RTM committee meeting regarding artificial turf when they brought in experts who explained how our grass fields could be better cared for to dramatically increase the amount of playtime. I don't believe Mr. Barbieri was at that meeting. I think he had to leave early. I do believe Mr. Floyd was there for that presentation. This expert offered to come and show members of the Westport community what can be done to improve these fields organically. The other date I want to tell you about, which already passed, is June 25, when Ridgefield had an entire presentation on the danger of outdoor night lighting. Now, other towns are moving in the direction of understanding the environmental nightmare this is, while Westport seems to be oblivious, particularly Parks and Rec, to the environmental damage. In my letter, or in the Westport Now letter, We gave you the statistic. We've lost 30 percent of the birds in North America, and the most dangerous time to use night lighting is in the spring and the fall. So, you know, the idea that, oh, it's just the spring and the fall, it doesn't cut it with anybody who's concerned about the environment. The third point I want to make is noise. This is not—okay, maybe these are the best lights around. I don't know. But they're not going to solve the noise problem. And once the neighbors are disrupted, their blood pressure—this is a medical fact that people are upset by noise. Physically, it's a physical reaction. It's a health issue. And now the fourth point has to do with this enforcement issue. Asking the residents to stop what they're doing, hunt down somebody's phone number, call them on a Saturday night or call them on a Thursday night is just unreasonable. I don't care how many regulations you put in place. We don't want to be, somebody used the word park rangers, we don't want to be that. I know that I'm viewed as that person when it comes to leaf blowers because we have such poor enforcement. And I don't want to see the same thing happen with these lights. And lastly, this is not one of the four points, but I just want to remind you that there are a lot of mothers out there who have been calling me, who have been saying, I can't say this, I mentioned this at another meeting, I can't say this because the coach will bench my kid or he'll take it out on my kid and I know Oh, we heard, you know, oh, that's never going to happen. But there are a fair number of families in this town who would rather have dinner with their children than be running them around at 6, 7, 8 o'clock at night for these practices. This is not good sportsmanship to override neighbors. What are we teaching our children by doing this? I would urge you to deny this application or at the very least postpone it until you've had more information. Thank you very much.

Thank you indeed. Appreciate your comments, of course. Ms. Bateau, you're next.

Hi, Wendy Bateau. Six Arlen Road, and I'm a representative from District 8, and I'm chair of the Health and Human Services Committee of the RTM. I'm responding mainly to the Parks and Rec's informational report. I don't think we're going to get another opportunity to, and I think it presents the premises for for all of this. We were told that we were going to get good hard information. And as Valerie pointed out, there was no information. There was information about the lights and that's great. But what we got when we asked for information about who played sports here, what was this great need for additional fields and additional field time? We got the same people who have been saying the same exact things for the entire time. Their reports were written down and somebody read them. We heard no statistics. We also received no information about who plays on the fields. We got something that the people who have been saying we need more field time, we got something that they made up that said, well, this would be a sample of what we might see if everything else... excuse me, if everything else was true. If in fact, we do not have computerized records for the record of who's been playing on our fields at what time, say from this past April or the previous fall from say maybe September or October, then there's the RTM better do better due diligence and I better lead it in spending these millions of dollars that we've been spending on information technology. I just find it hard to believe that we don't have any records about who used the fields. In addition, we heard that, well, nobody that isn't affiliated with Fairfield, sorry, with Westport Youth uses the fields, but the adults pay $100 and the other youth pay $25. It's just very puzzling. And the reason that I bring this up is not that it's necessarily relevant to your deliberations, but The implication has been that turf fields, which are in fact plastic fields made of petrochemical products and chemicals, are intimately linked to the lights. At the end of his presentation, uh mr barbieri said the fields the the lights and the turf fields are designed to be used year round if it's safe to use it's not safe to use we presented experts speaking about a couple of years ago and then a couple of weeks ago uh some points from the thousands of reports from universities, from independent researchers, from hospitals, from a variety of other organizations, including the EPA, the European Union, and so on. And these were all published, all peer-reviewed studies published in indisputably expert journals like the New England Journal of Medicine, Lancet, Nature, Science, saying that the um the nanoplastics and the microplastics shed from turf fields are somebody's calling me are um are extremely unhealthy to individuals to public health and to environmental health so if by linking the approval of um of the lighting to turf fields, this is a de facto way of lobbying for and trying to make turf fields a reality, then in that case, I can't approve this. One of the points where I can't recommend this and I will actively act against it. One of the issues that came up at our meeting a couple of years ago was the people who were pushing the plastic fields said, well, you're presenting us only bad news. Give us some good news. Tell us some people who think that turf fields are good and healthy. There are none. We asked the people who were supporting the turf fields, plastic fields, to come up with some studies. There are none. There may be one study supported by the PFAS group that says, oh, PFAS isn't a problem. That's it. In addition to the information that Parks and Rec was going to supplying us but didn't, I would like once again to ask them, tell us something that says this is healthy because you keep emphasizing that this is healthy. It's safe and it's healthy. And I'm telling you. Thank you. Thank you.

Appreciate it, Ado. Next, I see Julie and Eric Lowenthal. Mr. and Mrs. Lowenthal, the time is yours.

Thanks so much, Eric Lowenthal. I'm at 9 Mellon Patch. I'm one of the neighboring properties directly abutting Wakeman B on the other side. And our property would be the one square, kind of squarely opposite where the proposed two lights are on that side of the field. I want to just hit on a few points that I think are unique and from some of the other presenters here tonight. So first and foremost, we heard a lot about the lights, what type of lights, light spillage, which that is not a concern of ours whatsoever. The biggest concern which we have, which we heard nothing about, is noise levels and quality of life. We saw a good example of that this past weekend. But with the proposed times, which we heard from the applicant tonight, in order for the private donors to get an appropriate return, it has to be worth it. and the burden that would place on us as neighbors might just be too great to make it worth it for these donors. So for example, we heard also tonight, which I think came clear to me for the first time, the true intention here is I'm all in favor of getting more practice time, things of that nature. I think what we also heard is we really want to play games under the lights and that affords the same opportunity and we need to play games under the lights. And the noise that comes along from games compared to practices, you can't even compare. So for example, a typical, let's say, junior varsity or varsity game, exciting plays, you're probably going to be up around 95 to 100 decibels of noise, which are pretty consistent throughout the game, till 9, 9.30 at night. That's the equivalent of running a power saw. Would anybody want their neighbor power sawing in their backyard till nine, 10 o'clock at night, six days a week? I don't think so. Furthermore, we also saw from the applicant tonight that girls and boys lacrosse would be one of the main beneficiaries of this. And again, if we were talking about practices, I would be fully supportive of that. But we're talking about games and we're talking not only in the addition of the crowd cheering, air horns are kind of part of the culture and really signaling substitutions, ends of quarters. Are we really willing to consider approving air horns in our neighborhood? three, four, five nights a week till nine, 10 o'clock at night. I mean, just trying to use common sense here. I don't think anybody on this call would invite me to their house to blow an air horn at eight 30, nine o'clock at night. And I'm pretty sure if I did that, that the cops would be called on me. So to me, this is a non-negotiable. If we were talking about, Hey, we need a little more practice time. We need a little bit more field time. That's one thing. But the noise burden on the neighbors to make it worthwhile to get a return on the private capital being invested in this, it sounds like the burden is just too much for the neighbors. And as one of the direct ones, I would strongly oppose that if there was an amended proposal where the focus was not on games and more practice time. Also, I think what we heard in terms of the kids missing out, Yeah, every kid may not make a travel team, but there's plenty of recreational opportunities available to those kids. It's not like they're not playing soccer because they got cut from the travel team. They can very well join rec soccer as well. So we heard an estimate of hundreds of kids for travel and or rec. I think most of that is travel opportunity. And we even saw in the presentation, we want to create more travel teams. Again, at what expense of the burden on our neighborhood here? Last point that I want to hit on is, and I'll wrap up my comments for this evening, is just around the lack of governance. Clearly there is no ability to govern this properly. We heard a lot of manual solutions of calling cell phones, neighborhood policing, and also a lack of any kind of technological solution that would be ability to turn this off. And I think mostly what we heard is promises of doing this better with no history of actually executing on this, which is exactly the types of things that are said when people are trying to close a deal. Thanks so much.

Thank you very much. Appreciate your comments. Next, we have Diana. Diana, how do you pronounce your last name?

Diana Masha. Thank you. 18 Whippoorwill Lane. Good evening. So over the past month, many of us have spent an extraordinary amount of time trying to engage constructively with this process. We have attended hearings, reviewed technical reports, studied land use regulations, and studied how comparable Fairfield County towns approach light athletic fields. And most importantly, we've tried to understand the long-term vision for Wakeman B. So tonight, I'm going to speak not as just an abutting homeowner, but as someone who has lived beside these fields in the same house for 16 years. When my husband Chris and I bought our home, we understood what we were buying at the time. We knew that there were grass athletic fields behind us adjacent to a middle school. We accepted children playing at the school. We accepted weekend games. We accepted whistles, cheering, and all of the wonderful things that come with youth sports. And that was a part of living in Westport, and that was a part of what we found joyful when we bought our home. What we did not anticipate was the possibility of these fields that they could gradually evolve into a intensive sports complex for the community operating well into the evening with permanent 70 foot tall, that's seven feet, seven stories of a building, which could extend more than 20 feet over a tree canopy along my street. Those are two very different things and different realities over 16 years. This application has often been described as just four light poles, but I respectfully submit that the application for lighting Wakeman B is much more than that. The desire to have lighting is enabling infrastructure. Lighting changes how a field can be used. It changes who can use it. It changes how often it can be used. It changes traffic patterns, parking demand, noise, scheduling, and ultimately the intensity of the entire site. Once lighting is installed, every future discussion begins from that baseline and not just for this application for Wakeman B, but for all future applications for any other field lighting and development in this town. That's why this decision is so important. Throughout this process, many of us have tried to propose reasonable limitations, not because we oppose recreation, but because we recognize that every neighborhood has a carrying capacity. We have asked for reasonable parameters around light pole heights. around light temperature and intensity, around hours of use, around future intensification, around parking, around expanded use, around preserving the residential nature of this neighborhood. Unfortunately, many of those requests were declined and some not addressed until tonight, where presumably a decision might be made. That leaves us wondering not what the project is today, but what Wakeman is intended to become in the future or over the next 10 or 20 years. And that uncertainty matters. It matters to residents close to Wakeman. It matters to residents who come to Westport and all other similar properties that may one day see a similar application for lighting or intensification. Because while we are evaluating this application one field at a time, we also know that the town has commissioned a parks master plan looking at recreation all over Westport. I understand that the parks master plan is evolving and not shared in a final format to the public, but as neighbors, we are being asked to evaluate one piece of a much larger puzzle without seeing the very big picture on the box. It is difficult to assess the cumulative impacts of this proposal when we don't understand the long term vision. That uncertainty is compounded by the fact that we have not seen the field utilization needs and analysis. And we saw a glimpse tonight, but not the entire picture. If this application is fundamentally about meeting demonstrated demand, in Wakeman's case, Staples sports teams, then that demand should be clear in the application. How much is for Staples athletics and how much is for other youth recreation? How much is for adult programming? And there was no mention of adult programming tonight, so I'm relieved to know that we're not looking at much illuminated use for adult beer leagues. I also asked the commission to think carefully about compatibility. Planning is not simply about whether it can be engineered. It is about whether it is appropriate for a particular place. And while Parks and Rec presentation tonight was commingled with PJ Romano, the decisions should be site specific. Wakeman is unique. It sits in one of Westport's most residential settings. The proposed poles would rise 20 feet above the surrounding tree canopy. The lights will be on primarily when there are no leaves on the trees, not like in pictures tonight. The drones shot tonight did not give you a mock-up of what the lighting poles would actually look like because there were no poles in those videos. The applicant tonight seemed to convey that the technology is attractive. I can tell you that for an abutting property, the lights are not so sleek and cool in a previously quiet residential setting. The topography of Wakeman and the reduced tree density of trees on Whippoorwill and Woody Lane side will allow sound to travel. The relationship between the field and the neighboring homes is fundamentally different from other athletic facilities in town. Green's Farms is influenced by a commercial corridor, the Post Road. PJ Romano occupies a different zoning context, and every site deserves to be evaluated on its own characteristics. And that's exactly what thoughtful planning requires. We also recently had a glimpse this past weekend of what increased activity looks like during the lacrosse tournament. There were air horns, cheering crowds, parents celebrating and sometimes arguing, traffic, temporary facilities, even grills. And those things are not criticisms of youth sports. They are simply realities of heavily programmed athletic facilities. The residents of abutting properties withstood the noise and usage. We felt compelled to record the activities and communicate to parks what was happening because they didn't have someone on site. We do not want to become neighborhood vigilantes. I have other hobbies. Carmen is very responsive, but he is also just one person and he can only be reactive after there have been infractions or disturbances. Parks and Rec works hard, but no department can control every horn, every shout, every crowd, or every moment. When those impacts occur, they are experienced most acutely by the people who live closest to the fields. And that burden does not fall evenly across Westport. It falls on the residents closest to the field. And so finally, I want to speak about Westport itself. We are fortunate to live in one of Connecticut's premier communities. We are so proud of our schools. We are proud. That's why we live here. We are proud of our athletic programs who seem to win consistently despite not having Wakeman lit. We are proud of our parks. But I also believe what most distinguishes premier communities is not simply their willingness to build more. More is not always better, and I believe that Westport is at an inflection point. Our kids are overscheduled. I cannot drive anymore, and we already seem to be winning with what we have. What differentiates premier communities is a willingness to plan more thoughtfully and to build long-term vision that values health and peace and wellness of its residents. Communities like Greenwich have recognized that outdoor lighting deserves careful standards that consider neighborhood...

I'm sorry, Diana.

I'm almost done. I'm almost done.

A little over your time, so please wrap it up. Okay.

But Greenwich has recognized that there are negative aspects of light and noise pollution. They have recognized that standards have to consider neighborhood impact and serious environmental effects. So I hope Westport aspires to that level of thoughtful planning. I understand that this commission's responsibility is not simply to determine whether lights can be installed. It is to determine whether the application represents appropriate planning for this site. Scale matters, intensity matters, community health and wellness matters. So good planning requires both. So I respectfully ask that you weigh all the benefits and the repercussions that this proposal may provide and recognize that the permanent impacts will have on its people and the people who call this home. So once a neighborhood changes, it does not change. Thank you.

And Diana's home is the home that is in the drone shots. Her home is the one. Somebody needs to mute that. Thank you very much.

I'm the neighbor. Yeah, I'm the home in the drone shots.

So she can have the time. Thank you. Let's not have a neighbor on neighbor back and forth. I do appreciate both of you.

Next, Mr. Davis, you're next. Thank you, Paul. Carl Davis, Six Wooker Wool Lane. I realize that I've spoken on a number of these calls, so I'll be brief tonight, but I'm relatively new to Westport, having only lived here for two years. So many of you might not know me or that my professional background is in digital forensics, supporting regulatory and criminal investigations. Put another way, if you're trying to do something shady with money near a phone or computer, having my attention is generally unwelcome. With that in mind, and after the debacle that unfolded at Wakeman this weekend, I really can't engage with this application on its merits anymore. If you reviewed my letter submitted earlier today, you'll understand that the premise of the application is flawed and perhaps even fraudulent. Please read and understand my submission if you're under the mistaken belief that this is about what's best for our kids, because if you still think that it's about what's best for our kids, the best I can say is that you're uninformed. Once you understand who's making the decisions about who gets field permits and who's making money off those permits, you can either choose to ignore blatant corruption because it doesn't affect you directly, or you can oppose this proposal wholeheartedly. In this town, we have individuals in positions of power with direct monetary interest in the decisions they and their colleagues are making. They are not disclosing their conflicts of interest to this Commission when they speak and write in support of this proposal, and they are making choices that line their own pockets through the blatant exploitation of public resources. This is not about children, and I'm embarrassed for anyone who can read the entire record and still claim that it is. Thank you.

I do appreciate that. Just a side note, it does not look like your letter came in by 12 noon.

It's on the site. I can see it. It was received and acknowledged.

All right, thank you. Ms. Volker, I see you're next. Do you have your hand up? I'm sorry, could you smash the audio button? There you go.

Oh, it's smashed twice, sorry. I don't... I can't believe that nobody read Carl's letter. The neighbors are putting so much time into this, so it would be nice if we felt like we were actually being heard the way that we're supposed to be. The noise is incredible, and I really wish the public that was on this could have heard Shelby's recording. And maybe you can still play it because I don't think it's enough that just the commission gets to hear it. I think the public should know what we're dealing with here. 8 p.m. is late enough for that kind of noise. I would like the proposal to say 8 o'clock. We got no notice for that tournament that was here. People were parking all over the sidewalks and the lawns. What if I was having a baby shower in my backyard? Why would you not tell the neighbors that you're having a tournament of that size? That complex is not equipped for the size of that tournament, the gauntlet. Not when there have to be 50 porter potties brought in and there is no parking lot for such a thing. The proposal as it is, it's incomplete. Carmen does the best that he can, but the consequences need to be written. What are the consequences when there is 7 a.m. amplified noise? That is actually against the law, but it's after the fact. And so what will the consequences be? That needs to be written. How are the lights being scheduled? It's not figured out. The trees are We don't see a plan for the trees that you're gonna put in. The trees that are there now are bare in the winter. So how could you propose this to the neighbors that live right on top of it and not say, these are the trees that we're gonna put up. We already had a tree warden come over here and tell us that all of the trees that are existing right there are diseased and need to be cut down. So then what? We'll have nothing. I feel that the neighbors are putting a ton of time into this. We do not want to be policing, calling the police. We're not park rangers. And why are Diana and Shelby and Carl more informed than it seems the PNZ is? And why wasn't Carl's letter read when it was submitted before 12 o'clock and it's online? That's all I have to say. Thank you. I know you appreciate it.

Absolutely. Thank you. Who is AJS16Pro? One more time, AJS 16 Bro. Well, let's try Heather, Ms. Talbot.

Hi, Heather Talbot, 17 Broad Street. I just wanted to kind of recenter the conversation on the basics of what this request is. I think there's a lot of points brought up by the neighbors, which I've been listening to. And the tournament that happened for lacrosse, that's very one-off event. It sounds like there's a lot that can be done. if that's held again to make sure that the neighborhood is taken care of. So I just kind of wanted to set that aside. I'm not pretending that that's not out there. I think that there is an ask and there's a need here. There are comments from the neighborhood that have been considered. It sounds like there needs to be another kind of sit down with that community and going through detail and getting you the information you need. So kind of recognizing all that and just kind of putting that out there that what we have here, I think Wendy said this and someone else like there is a need for some more field time that lights can solve. These numbers are not made up. The sample schedule that Carmen and Eric put up is the spring schedule. I have spent years working on that for PAL Girls Lacrosse and among other organizations on the sports side that I've worked with. So folks are trying to do the right thing and give you the right information. Information is categorized in different ways over time. Municipalities are... late to having updated technology to do that. So if you need more information, let's sit down and see if that can get gotten to you, but these numbers are not made up. So I just wanted to say that from an experience standpoint, they are doing their best, it sounds like, from how I've been involved with everything and put that forward. I think there's an inflection point that's being hit here that folks at Parks and Rec and the neighbors need to talk about, but I just wanted to bring back some of the basic stuff like during the week, especially with Staples. And I'll just use Staples soccer as an example because we barely have any light, you know, and this includes field hockey, who's on Ginny, which lights aren't even being discussed about right now. Like they're, they're can't practice. There's their games are, are very early. They're splitting a field right now with the girls and boys varsity. Like it's, Basic stuff like that, I think we need to work to find some common ground. It sounds like the neighbors are okay with decent hours and certain things like that, and I'd like to encourage parties to come together and... just talk about maybe the foundation a little bit and let's not spend as much time talking about the things on the fringes. Although I understand that those grievances and those things that haven't been answered need to be addressed. So I'm not dismissing them on that standpoint, but there is good and a need that can really change staples sports to a certain extent. And then that falls to the youth sports where the cutoff time is and those kinds of things, you know, to be discussed, you know, and hearing a lot of back and forth and proposals put on the table, but I just feel very disheartened, um, that there's accusing of reaping profits and stuff like that. If that stuff needs to get solved, if that's even out there, let's do that. But let's not forget that we are here for a reason that is beneficial to us. a little bit more lighted time and understand that there is a flip side there about visuals and lights and very sensitive to that and appreciate those comments. But I really, really would love to see a little bit more productive conversation between all parties to kind of get to what may work in the middle if we get there. on that side. And maybe those comments are more on paper and everyone's not able to sit on these calls and do that. And I know there's a lot of conversations going on among all parties, but I just encourage for us to come back in a civil way and talk about things to see if we can get someplace at some point. So I encourage Parks and Rec to really sit down and maybe have another conversation with a lot more detail that's needed. And hopefully we can focus on getting to an agreement if there's one to be had here, kind of pushing aside the more extreme conversations. And some of those are on events that I don't think are what the majority of the focus is what's being asked here. So thank you.

Thank you, I do appreciate it. Paul, this is, I'm sorry, I didn't have my, I couldn't get my phone off of mute and I put my name in appropriately, not just the name of my phone is AJS Pro. I would like to speak when the time's appropriate. Thank you. Your time is now, sir. All right, thank you very much, Paul. My name is John Sabino. I live at 8 Mellon Patch Lane, right next to Eric and Julie. And I just wanted to respond to some of the things I hear from some of my neighbors. I would stand by the park and rec's efforts to create extra field space and playing time for our children. Wendy gave a nice description of her concern about children playing on turf fields and what it means for the environment. my children for almost two decades now have been playing on turf fields. And quite honestly, I think the benefits of having field space available and time for your children to play and socialize with others in the community far outweigh what are some of the points of concern that have been brought up about fields. So I would ask the committee here today to please dismiss that and put that into another conversation for a time that is appropriate when discussing the health factors of our community. Today, what we're talking about are lights to increase the amount of playing time and field availability for the children of this community. I have been a coach in this community for over a decade, And I can personally attest to the need for additional time and space. As somebody who is the second closest and directly behind what would be considered poll, I believe, number two or three on the southern side of the field, I sat out in my backyard all weekend and happily listened to the children play. The air horns were not intrusive or ruining my day. If anything, deafening silence on those backfields and them not being used and kids at home on their computers or texting back and forth all day versus engaging in...

I believe we may have lost... We may have lost him. Hopefully you can reconnect. Welcome to come back. Chris, your wife spoke. Do you have something different to say?

Hey, Paul, how are you? I do. I do have a statement. All right, great. So I'd like to start out and just call out the two points from Westport PNZ Department's mission from their website. The first one's maintain the quality of the residential neighborhoods and business districts. The second is enforce regulations that protect the town from overdevelopment. I believe if PNZ passes this, they are ignoring a massive impact to numerous households and are overdeveloping Westport in direct conflict with their mission. I moved to Westport 16 years ago at the age of 31. Diana was just 28 years old. I'm the fourth generation from my family to live in Westport, following my great grandparents who came from Italy in the early 1900s. My dad grew up in a multi-generational household on Hillandale Road just a few miles from my home today. When Diane and I began looking for houses in 2010, Westport was our first choice in part because of my family connection as well as very close family friends that lived in town. We looked at a few other towns that were closer to the city where we worked at the time, including one house that was near a water tower. That wasn't for us. We looked at a few new houses that were near commercial areas as well and decided that wasn't for us. The house in Whippoorwill that we eventually purchased wasn't new. It was partially renovated, had a beautiful fenced-in bedroom, backyard and was on a quiet cul-de-sac. I remember pulling myself up to peek over the fence to see what was behind it and wondering if we would ever be bothered by the noise of a grass playing field and decided confidently that that was happy noise. The field proved to be a great benefit. We walked our dogs there, went for walks and runs. Later, when our kids were born, we played there with them. They rode their bikes and their scooters. And 15 years later, our firstborn Vivian has been able to walk to and from Bedford. Over the years, we made a lot of updates to our home. We renovated our kitchen. We modernized our deck. We finished our floors. We did our basement. We put in drainage, a fence for dogs, repaved our driveway, added a basketball hoop. We did a lot of things to our home over the years, hosted family barbecues, celebrated holidays and birthdays with family.

I'm sorry, Chris? Yeah. Your life story is absolutely engaging, but I really want to... I'm moving on. I'd like to focus in on the lights and how they affect you, please.

I'm moving on. My point here is that we did a lot to make this our home. We've been here for 16 years. There's others on the street, including John and Dorothy Francis, that have been here for over 50 years. We were, when we came to this street, we were the youngest family that was here. And now we've added three new families with school age kids. Those people have done a lot to their homes. They've added pools and renovated their homes. And we've added brand new homes in Woody Lane. And none of the people that moved here stadium lights when we decided to move into these homes again the importance of how much effort people put into their homes and the mission of the pnz commission to protect neighborhoods so some of you think it's selfish for us to stand in the way of any perceived needs for a kids sports team no matter how extreme i argue that we have a larger responsibility as a community to be protective of people's homes i also don't believe that this is a neighborhood one neighborhood or an isolated incident. Last year, the PNZ Commission scheduled a hearing to amend the in-place zoning restriction regarding temporary and permanent lights. No serious efforts were made to notify those most affected. The amendment struck down the previous limit of two lighted town fields in Westport. It reduced setbacks. It eliminated minimum parking requirements. This was done for virtually every property in Westport, all fields in Staples Bedford, football, baseball, lacrosse, soccer, softball. The amendment included all fields on Coleytown Elementary and Coleytown Middle, all fields on Greens Farms Elementary, all fields on Saugatuck, all fields on Kings Highway. As far as I know, no one knocked on any of those neighbor doors, emailed them, or phoned them. Now, with the longstanding neighborhood protections guide, the town can apply for lighted fields one field at a time, arguing that each field is unique. This sets up a classic divide and conquer strategy. Athletic associations and sports programs can be mobilized and pitted against individual neighborhoods that have been caught off guard. However, most people in town are not aware that the plan for lighted fields is not just for soccer and for football. I wonder which neighborhood will be next and if it will be baseball or softball or field hockey or if those neighborhoods will be made to feel like they are selfish for simply asking for some protections that used to exist and were slashed well before the field lighting application began and before they were aware what was happening. When you look at this holistically, I seriously doubt that this would be a popular plan to change the vista and night sky for so many households and neighborhoods in Westport. We have a beautiful town and in many other areas we're so thoughtful about protecting the beauty and serenity of our town. We have artists, architects, designers leading the charge to make sound aesthetic choices. Yet quietly, we're allowing our athletic directors to meaningfully change the landscape of our town, impacting hundreds of homes and permanently impairing our landscapes and night skies.

Chris, Chris, I'm sorry. I know you're very passionate about this, but you're getting a little far afield. I would absolutely like to discuss how the lights impact you personally and you as a neighbor. So please, let's wrap it up.

So I would like to offer a solution that I think is less impactful. Loeffler Field, built in 1958, was the home of many soccer championships. I suggest, as others have mentioned, that we return Loffler Field to its former glory. Rather than investing in stadium lighting, I believe a new premium field may better serve the community's needs. In fact, I'm confident that there are many of us in the surrounding 70 North that would be happy to help the town raise money to accomplish this as an alternative to stadium lighting. I believe this is better than just a disruptive solution that offers gender equity and increases premier practice game fields and avoids keeping our kids and neighborhoods up to late at night. We're not saying no to sports. We're saying no to overdevelopment. We're asking you to protect residential neighborhoods. We're asking PNZ to fulfill its stated mission. Thank you very much.

Thank you, sir. I do appreciate it. Next, we have Mr. Epstein.

Hi, this is Jared. I live at 3 Blue Coat Lane. I'm also on the board of the WSA. And having listened to this, I want to echo some of the comments by Heather earlier and just want to What I'm hearing on this call is so many things that have nothing to do with lights, have stuff to do with 7 a.m. games, have the lacrosse noise this weekend, and don't want to discount those. Those are real issues. WSA runs a soccer tournament every March. on Saturday and Sunday, and the noise complaints, something that WSA needs to think about. But the lights are what we're talking about here, and our compromise is necessary for the community. From hearing this, where this started, probably, yes, probably where this started, in my opinion, went too far. But as a member of the WSA, we do turn kids away. Those numbers aren't made up. And when we don't turn kids away, they're getting suboptimal experiences, as Miki Kai just talked about in terms of shared fields and the like. We do need more field space. And this is one way to get it. Are there other ways? Absolutely. But speaking for the WSA, we're just a bunch of parents on the board. trying to serve the community. And this option has come about, and this is a good option. There might be better options. This is a good option. And I just want to urge people to talk about lights, not about 7 a.m., not about noise at noons. Those are issues. Those should be dealt with. And Carmen, who I think we all love, him and his team should be held accountable when there's problems. But I would like to keep this conversation about the lights.

Thanks, everyone. Thank you, sir. I do appreciate it. I do want to remind three people who have their hands raised that there's a limit to how much we can go back and forth, unless you're producing or presenting new information. So I ask you, if you have spoken already, put your hand down and let others speak this evening. That being said, somebody who has not spoken this evening is Ms. McKenzie. Ms. McKenzie, it's your turn.

Hi there. My name is McKenzie Pretty, and I live at 6 Henhock Lane here in Westport. I'm also the assistant varsity girls soccer coach for the last 12 years. So I'm coming to this conversation as a resident, but also as a coach within the town for the high school girls soccer. um i want to be clear um just from the beginning i'm so grateful for all the work that everyone's doing on on both sides of this and again especially as a resident i have friends that live on melon patch um i have an understanding of kind of the controversy from both perspectives but i want to just give you my take as a high school coach that what i see directly um first from girls soccer I want to be clear that this is not about wanting unlimited night games. It's truly just about coming up with a solution with these lights to find a reasonable, controlled use so that our high school student athletes can actually stay in school throughout the entire school day. The number one issue that we have not having lights to play under is Especially when we get to state playoffs, everyone knows with the light that we are literally chasing the daylight. Our students have to get dismissed during playoffs around noon or 1230 multiple times during the week as we head into October and November for playoffs. It's very disruptive, especially for our student athletes, obviously, and they are students, and that comes first. So not having lights is a big strain academically for them. Secondly, the other big issue with not having lights is that we have one turf field in Westport and that's lined for soccer for high school athletes. So we share it with the boys. And so when the boys have a game, our only other option is to go play at PJ Romano at Socrates Elementary School. So when school is being dismissed, our girls have to go across town. And then it's very difficult because Sockatuck Elementary is actually in school during that time, and there's no place for them to park. So our students then either park up at Kings Highway, which is also challenging because it hasn't been dismissed as well, or at Assumption Church. And what happens in that situation is that they actually have to walk across the busy road. And I'm not sure if anyone has kind of gone during like school pickup or the end of the day along Riverside Ave, how busy that is just from a safety and then walking across with all those cars. But secondly, because they're parking, you know, in a lot that they're not supposed to be, we multiple instances where our athletes get parking tickets. In addition to having a park to train over at PJ Romano, it is not a soccer field. It's not even close to a soccer field. It's not lined and it actually doesn't have the capabilities for it to be lined because of the width of it. It's not a regulation. We can't work on spacing, set pieces, game shake, attacking. I don't want to get into all of it, but it really makes it difficult for our girls and the boys when they have to train their two to prepare for actual competitions. I just want to see. There's one point that was made today, and I just want to make sure I'm very clear about this. lights will help the quality of our student athletes, specifically for girls and boys soccer. Like it's, it truly is a necessity for them as athletes and for them as students and the culture of soccer. And I, I promised you, it's not like air horns. It's not, whistles. All we want to do is play the game. All these girls want to do is compete at an incredibly high level that is comparable to the other FCAC teams that surround us. By having lights, we can have a game at 4.30. We can play the game at 4.30 and then the boys can train after us or the boys can have their 4.30 p.m. game and then we would have the ability to practice afterwards. So I just want to, again, reiterate that it's just trying to come up with a reasonable solution, but lights will definitely have to be a part of that solution. And then I also have a letter from my coach, Barry Beattie, if it's okay for me to read that now. He had submitted it before noon today, and it wasn't read. Am I able to do that right now?

Well, we have his letter. It is on the website. I've read it. So I don't, unless there's something within it that you need to put in the record, but he does.

I would like to, if you don't mind. I mean, it's a four page letter.

I would actually rather you didn't. It's, you know, it's an 830 letter from this morning. I'm pretty sure we've all read it.

Okay, I'm just going to read the last paragraph there, if you don't mind then. That's fine. Yeah, on behalf of Barry Beattie, it's very similar points to what I have brought up, but he said, thank you for your time and your thoughtful consideration and your continued service to the town. I respectfully ask that you consider approving field lighting at Wakeman Athletic Fields under whatever reasonable restrictions you believe appropriate. I truly believe this is an investment that would have a lasting and meaningful impact on our students, our schools, and our community.

Thank you. Appreciate that. Okay. So, commissioners, I'm going to come back to us and ask whether or not you have, those of you who have already spoken, if you don't mind, put your hand down. With one exception, I do see Mr. Green has put his hand up as a first-time speaker. Hey, Paul. Mr. Green.

Paul, quickly, after Mr. Green speaks, just the person that got cut off, should we let them finish because of the internet issue?

Thanks, Michael. I only have 30 seconds.

You can go. I think, yeah, just let Mr. Green go, and then you can, you know, at the end.

Mr. Green.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission staff. My name is Joel Green. I practice law in Bridgeport with the Law Offices of Green and Gross. It's my pleasure to appear before you this evening on behalf of an informal association that's been formed called Lights Need Limits. It is comprised of over 100 households in the Westport community. and its members are deeply concerned with the impacts of the proposed lighting at 70 North Street. You know, I've listened to a lot of comments and I am gonna try to really be brief tonight. I think that Most of the speakers tonight have spoken, including the applicant, frankly, have spoken to the motivation for the application. And frankly, I cannot blame so many members of the public who are so frightened by the potential impacts of this application on the quality of life, on the value of their properties, and other impacts that will arise from this proposal. And I say that they speak to their motivation because I come to this in a different way, and I come to this looking at it from a zoning perspective, and I look at it in terms of your regulations. Now, there's no question that this commission in enacting 3219 recognized, and it's obvious, that field lighting has impacts. Field lighting has impacts in terms of the lighting and the direct or indirect impacts from the lighting. It has impacts from sound associated with the use of athletic fields. It has impacts in terms of traffic. It has impacts on safety. And so you passed this regulation, you adopted this regulation 3219, and you recognized all these consequences and you set a standard and a series of standards in your regulation where you basically said, look, we recognize that there are significant and serious impacts to the point where we had to especially adopt a regulation on field lighting. And in order to have field lighting, you must meet these standards. And I say this because it's not a balancing test. Your regulation doesn't speak to, well, how badly do we need fields? How badly, when do we need fields? For what purpose do we need fields? No. Your regulations properly reflected your exercise of the zoning power, and you regulated a use. You don't regulate users. You regulate a specific use, and you set standards. And this application has to be denied because the applicant who appears before you is the Parks and Rec Department with really a study done by a dealer in outdoor lights. It's not a consultant. It's truly not a consultant that is fairly weighing the impacts of the proposed use. But just to kind of make it simpler for this commission, This commission said that in order to get through the door and in order to even have us consider your application, you have to submit certain things because we have to be able to make findings. So I'll refer you to 3219.2, which are application requirements. 32.19, 19.2A. And actually, if you'd like, I can actually, I think I can share that if the commission is so inclined and if it helps you follow along, or you can do it yourself, whatever you like. I'll leave that to you, Mr. Chairman.

I have brought it up on my screen. You're welcome to speak about it now.

Okay. So 3219.2a says that the applicant has to submit a photometric plan for the entire area to be lighted and measurements should be taken at 30 foot intervals. So there's been kind of a confusing series of comments. On the one hand, the applicant says this will only illuminate the field. And it won't illuminate any other areas. So that, of course, leads to the question, well, if it's only illuminating the field, which I don't believe, and we've all seen the other fields in Westport that are lit, and we've all seen, I've seen fields in many towns that are illuminated, there is a larger area. There's no photometric plan that shows the area off the field itself and on the surrounding area. And so it's difficult to truly understand the lighting impact. And you can look at that regulation in the way it's written. Exhibit 32.19.2b says, a landscape plan showing the placement of lights, general location and layout of plantings within all landscaped areas, as well as any fencing walls and other screening proposed. Plant selection shall be made per the approved tree list at the end of 35. Well, there is no landscape plan here. There's no landscape plan at all. So there's an aerial photograph that's contained in the Moscow plan that shows some trees. And it appears to maybe show a boundary line. But other than that, there is no way that this commission can find what the impacts are on neighboring properties because the landscaping has not been identified. There is apparently no new landscaping proposed. Landscaping is measured at property lines. As you know from past applications you've had, you don't get credit for offsite landscaping. you get credit for landscaping on your site only. And in this case, there has been no landscaping plan at all submitted, nor, for example, did the applicant submit a survey that showed the nature and extent of existing landscape. You saw that with Long Lot School. where you had detailed landscaping plans that showed the diameter and nature of trees on the site that were relied on in that application. There was reliance by the applicant on existing trees on the site to establish a lack of impact on neighboring properties. This applicant didn't even do that. So there is no landscaping plan at all here. And to quote your regulation, and attorney Bloom can counsel you on plain language, but it says, An application for site plan and special permit shall be submitted as required under section 43 and 44 of the regulations. In addition, the applicant must submit the following. So must is obviously mandatory. That didn't happen. You've heard so many neighbors speak tonight about the impact and in previous hearings about sound impacts. We all know there's going to be sound impacts. The applicant recognizes there's going to be sound impacts. They propose that there can only be amplified music, I guess, during varsity games and through halftime. And the reason they're stopping at halftime is because they know it can be heard off site. They can only have PA during high school games, public announcers, public announcements. And the reason they're doing that is because everyone knows there's an impact on neighboring properties. And yet, D under 3219.2 says, a design plan for the sound system and sound mitigation that minimizes the impacts on adjacent properties. There is no design plan here at all. That's a must. There is no sound design that's been shown. So you can't possibly make findings on the impacts on neighboring properties. A design plan depicting the proposed spectator areas and how they will be positioned in relation to residential properties, nothing. And these are musts. And the reason they are in there is obviously because you recognize in 32-19.3 all these findings you must make. And essentially, based on the special permit standards that you've also incorporated, you must, the applicant who has the burden here, must show no impact. And it's not Hey, we need fields badly so there can be impact. That's not the way you wrote your regulations. So I don't think we should kill a lot of time here because this is an easy one. If this were to be, you can't make those findings because your must was not complied with. And in terms of the special permit standards and, uh, You incorporated all of them, and it's easy that this will adversely impact the value of neighboring properties. There's a property 52 feet away from the edge of this field. There is no question, and I don't need a consultant to say that there's going to be noise and light impacts on this property. And again, without having that landscaping plan, And that's at the boundary of that property. So you heard Mr. and Mrs. Masha tonight. Well, I'd be trying to use as much time as possible as well if I were they, because they are at ground zero. And there's no way, based on the application that is before you, that you can make those findings. And you know what? I don't mean to. I understand the motivation of the applicant and I understand that they are assigned to create athletic opportunities. And I'm not, and I don't mean to, I appreciate their motivation. I appreciate youth sports. My kids participated in it. I think it's terrific. I think there is a definite need in all of our communities for these kinds of opportunities. But I look at this from a zoning perspective. And this commission, based on your regulation, you must look at it from a zoning perspective. Now, in terms of the lighting impacts, I did submit materials today. And I understand that they were received after the deadline for submissions. But frankly, we are a we have been engaged in discussions with the town, which, you know, to date have not been productive. And we did not receive a response. And we have all agreed we're not going to get into the nature of those discussions. But I think it is fair to say that we didn't receive a response to the latest proposal until Friday. And also the applicant didn't update its plan till I think Friday, Thursday or Friday. So we certainly can't be expected to react that quickly. And unfortunately with all of these applications as this commission is aware, these things are rather fluid. But we did retain a lighting consultant. He does have a brief presentation And it's Leo Smith. He is in the room right now and he has a brief presentation and a deck to display for the commission. And I understand that this was filed at three o'clock today and you haven't had a chance to review the slides. I suppose if the chair determines we can do this at a later meeting or we can do it now as the chair pleases, but I think obviously there's a lot of work to be done here. I leave it to the chair, but I'm I'd be happy to present Mr. Smith now. I'll do as the chair directs.

Thank you. I do appreciate your time this evening. So first of all, let me correct you. The photometric plan is on line. It's it is in The application for municipal improvement, just so you know. The landscaping plan is in the narrative. So actually, my staff, our staff, the staff here who works here are very conscientious about making sure that any applicant who comes before this commission has done exactly what they're supposed to do. And they have fulfilled their needs. Now, that's... And that's not opinion, sir. It's in there. You can look at it from the bottom, 170 Riverside Avenue. That being said... Not for 70 North. Sir, it's a photometric plan, and it is by Musco. It has all the statistics for both lightings. So it's not that hard to look at. We are involved here with... Two fields, but I'm not going to debate that with you. What I'm actually going to do is give you the leeway to have your expert speak. However, the next time you come in front of this commission, if you are in fact representing neighbors and have an expert and would like to advance your information to us, I'd appreciate it if you do it first. so that this commission does not sit through an hour of discussions about what happened during the day, what happened when somebody set up a grill. Your information, sir, as you well know, is important, and yet you let it go to the very last second. As an attorney, I will tell you that's bad form. And I'm going to call you out and ask you the next time you come in front of this commission, put your hand up first and let us know, because I'd be glad to call on you while we're all fresh and ready to go. So now you may present your expert and do his presentation. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would point out, however, On the landscape plan, there are standards in your regulations and there is no landscape plan.

Again, we're not going to go back and forth. We are going to listen to your expert. Fair enough.

Mr. Smith?

Actually, one moment. Before you jump in with Mr. Smith, I'd like you to give me an approximate time amount that he needs. I'd say 10 minutes. All right. Given that, I'd like to take a five minute break. And so what we're going to do is it is nine o'clock sharp. We've been at it for three hours. And so we will come back at nine oh six and we will be rejoined by Mr. Green and his expert. Fair enough. That's fine. Thank you. Thank you, sir. I'm going to look across the landscape and see whether or not Mr. Green is ready to advance his person. Love to know who that person is and what are their credentials.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Smith, if you can unmute and In the materials I submitted this afternoon, I submitted a CV for Mr. Smith, but Mr. Smith, for the benefit of the Commission and the public, if you can just briefly describe your experience and training and your area of expertise, that would be appreciated by all.

Good evening. My name is Leo Smith. I have been for 15 years a member of the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America. I was appointed as one of seven people nationally to represent a joint committee between the Illuminating Engineering Society, and Dark Sky International to develop the model outdoor lighting ordinance that both organizations endorsed back in 2007. 12 years on the roadway lighting committee as a voting member, chaired the committee on when not to light, have received the 2006 IES Presidential Award and a number of other awards in terms of controlling light pollution.

Thank you. And Mr. Smith, can you just, can I, if I can share, then I can present Mr. Smith's deck while he makes his presentation to the commission, if that's permissible.

Amanda, can you extend the courtesy to Mr. Green?

You should be all set.

If you'll just bear with me for one moment.

Okay. Mr. Smith, are you ready to go?

Ready. Okay. Basically the issue is that

I'm addressing had to do with light pollution and noise pollution that are created in a nighttime environment with sports field lighting, while recognizing that sports field lighting is sometimes necessary. The question is, we've been talking all night about the need for lighting, but we haven't really talked about what those lighting properties are. Next slide. So the three issues that I would like to talk about tonight deal with reasonable conditions that could be considered for permitting. One is lowering the mounting height of the pole. 40 feet is used in some places for recreational fields. 50 feet is definitely doable. 60 feet is still dark sky compliant. 70 feet is really unnecessary. One thing we'll talk about in another slide is the requirement for 20-foot candle average horizontal illumination, where right now the narrative calls for a 50.7-foot candle average of illumination, and I'll get into the details on that. And the last one has to do with the specification of the correlated color temperature not to exceed 3000 Kelvin, where the current plan calls for 5700 K. Next slide. So on page two of the application narrative, it talks about having a 50.7 foot candle average. And when you go and check out NCAA requirements, you find that there are, in fact, 50 foot candle recommendations for NCAA field of play for streaming broadcasts next year. So class of play four, what is class of play? In the Illuminating Engineering Society, sports field lighting, sports field lighting is divided into four different categories. Class of play one, two, three, and four. Class of Play 4 is the least amount of light, and it does provide all of the light that is necessary to safely play the game, no matter who you are. You could be a major league team, and if you have Class of Play 4 light, the light on the field will be sufficient for you to safely play the game. All other applications of the light have to do with things other than the field of play. Next. So the reason that other higher lighting levels are included for classes one, two, and three field of play has to do with the fact that you need more light for distant spectators to see the field of play. You need to be able to provide spectators with higher light levels in order for them to discern color. Is that light blue or light gray? Then you have broadcast and streaming needs where you have to have higher light levels and for better still shots from cameras, all of which have nothing to do with what's actually happening on the field in terms of players being able to play the game properly. Next. In the Illuminating Engineering Society, this is probably very difficult to see, but basically for soccer, it shows in that big red box, class one, two, three and four, where it calls for 20 foot candle level of illumination for class of play four and 30 foot candle for class of play three. But here they're talking about 50.7 foot candle average horizontal illumination, two and a half times more than the Illuminating Engineering Society's recommended practices, next. The next topic has to do with correlated color temperature were according to the photometric chart that was provided by Moscow they're providing their proposed 5700 K and we are suggesting that 3000 K should be specified as a condition of approval next. And for some background, 2200K, which is a lot more yellow, was used in sports field lighting in the 70s and 80s when high pressure sodium was used to light fields. 2700K is incandescent lamps, the ones we use in our houses. Those were used for sports field lighting in the 50s and through the 70s. And then 2200 and 2700 K back then provided full safety for players. So if we're looking at it from the point of view that the players can safely play the game, they can at 2700 K or 3000. They don't need 5700 K next. The American Medical Association in 2016 came out with a paper recommending that outdoor LED lighting be limited to 3000K because of the adverse consequences to human health and to the environment that happen when you have blue rich light, which is what 5700K is. The Mass Medical Society last year came out with a paper saying that it now should be 2700K, which is what incandescent is equal to. So there's an actual medical background in why 5700K is inappropriate. Next. Some of the things that happen with blue wavelength light is it reduces your melatonin. It actually adversely affects human health. Next. And some studies have been done that show that light pollution actually increases the rate of heart disease. And when you have lower Kelvin temperatures, it has less adverse effect. Next. So there are five principles for outdoor lighting that have been endorsed by the Illuminating Engineering Society and by Dark Sky. One is that it's useful, and is sports field lighting useful? Yes. Then we deal with targeted lighting to make sure that the light stays on the field but doesn't go into abutting properties. Low limits for the light. Do we really need to have the high level of light where they're talking about 50.7 foot candle on the field. The field being artificial grass has a reflectance value of between 10 and 15%, which means that someone is looking at that field as equal to five to seven and a half foot candle level of illumination for 150 feet by 250 feet. coming right back at them, not just the lights that are coming out of the fixture itself, but the lights that are coming off the field. So you don't really need to have that amount of light when the Illuminating Engineering Society says that 20-foot candle is sufficient for lighting a lacrosse field or a soccer field. So taking the recommended... 50.7 foot candle average illumination that Moscow proposed. They sell more lights that way, but do you really need them? No, you don't. And then the controls, one of the things that was talked about was the fact that the lights stay on during games when there are no games. No one's there. How about motion sensor controls that would basically say that at the end of 15 minutes, if no action is there on the field, the lights are automatically turned off by the motion sensor? And finally, the color. The color is extremely important in terms of reducing light pollution and reducing the amount of adverse effects on health and nature. So next. This is just some information on me. If you need to contact me, I'd be happy to send additional information. But the bottom line is there are ways to do the lighting, but not the way that Moscow is proposing.

Mr. Smith, can you just once again comment on the, again, the levels of play? And this again is a level four. Can you just go through the four levels for the commission?

When you get to level four, that's municipal. It would be appropriate for the middle school. Everything outside of level four, when you get to three, two, and one, all have to do with things like distance spectator viewing when you're dealing with an arena. Everything is based on how many spectators you have. It has nothing to do with the safety of play on the field. So if we're really looking at kids playing on the field safely, Class of Play 4 fits fine. There is absolutely no need for more than that. If we're dealing with a major stadium where you have people sitting in the upper deck when the 30th throw up, then yes, you need more light. But you don't need it for television purposes, and you don't need it to have color renditions that help you tell the difference between that light blue and light gray. You don't need that, not for a recreational field, not for kids that are playing.

Okay. And if I can just, I'm going to share one more diagram. Bear with me. Mr. Smith, do you recognize this drawing? Yes. And this is the photometric plan that shows the field, is that correct? Yes. Is it your opinion that there would be areas outside of the boundaries of the field that would be illuminated by the lights? Yes. So, and I'm showing you, I'm going the wrong way here. Just bear with me.

Please pull that back up. It actually showed off the .

Yeah. And do you recognize this drawing, Mr. Smith,

I do, but I'm not exactly sure what it all represents.

Well, I guess my point is that, is it your testimony that this lighting plan would illuminate areas outside the boundaries of the actual field itself?

Yes, it would.

And that would be direct light and indirect light?

Yes. Imagine yourself standing at the property line of an abutter. And you look at the field, all of the light that you see from that field is reflected light off the field and onto your property. So you not only have to deal with the direct light that might be coming from the luminaire, but all the light that's coming at 10 or 15% off of artificial turf being reflected off of that surface onto your property.

And can you explain that?

All surfaces have different reflectance values for asphalt, for natural grass, artificial grass, concrete, all have different reflective value variables. And for artificial turf, It's going to have a reflectance value of between 10% and 15%. So if you have your lighting lit to 50.7 foot candle, that means that somewhere between five and seven and a half foot candle level of illumination will be coming off of that field as if it was a direct light. It's coming reflected, but it's coming right onto your property from that field.

And does that, when you see a field at night and there's any moisture in the air or any sort of humidity or fog, that's the sort of that large glow that you get over a field?

Sometimes the water vapor will act as a diffractor where light will hit the water vapor in the atmosphere and come back down. And that's what you see in that glow.

And so in your opinion, for example, at the property line, putting aside these trees, and I'm rolling my cursor over these trees that are just to the north of the field, do you have any question that at the boundary line and beyond the proposed field lighting will illuminate, for example, this property that's 52 feet away?

There'll be no doubt about it, especially during like March, most of April when the trees still haven't developed foliage yet. For what we saw from the drone pictures, there were still holes, but if you take that foliage down, there's going to be a lot of light coming through.

All right, I've taken 12 minutes with this, Mr. Chair. I don't know if the commission has questions for Mr. Smith at this juncture. So, hang on one second.

Okay, thank you. And so is Mr. Smith through? I think he's through on his initial presentation, yes. All right, very good. So thank you for that information, Mr. Smith. And we absolutely will be going through that with a fine-tooth comb. And obviously, we're going to give the applicant as well a chance to have his experts look at the information, et cetera. And so that is why we will be continuing this for another meeting. And, you know, there's plenty to digest here. And obviously, as I said in the very beginning of this, that the applicant already knows that they're going to have to extend the time on this. And if that means reapplying, they're obviously willing to do that. So, commissioners, Mr. Green, I'm sorry, are you through?

No, I had a couple of other comments. You want me to do that? I can do that now.

Commissioner, does anybody have any questions for Mr. Smith? A couple.

But maybe we should wait until Tony Green's done.

Sure, absolutely. Mr. Green, the floor is still yours. Thank you. So other aspects of the plan that this commission would require under your regulations, and you've heard some of the residents speak to traffic and parking issues, I think that this commission should have an understanding of sort of ancillary and other lighting and facilities that will be required for safe egress and ingress from the fields after dark. That's not something that's been provided with any detail. I once again would suggest that the landscaping plan does not meet the regulation and doesn't meet Section 35 of your regulations as you required it must, including specifying the size and location of trees and that the trees meet the required list. And I guess I'm not sure Is it the intention of the commission in continuing this that the applicant will have other materials to submit, or is the record going to stay as it is? Or just so that we can all sort of gauge where we go from here.

Well, naturally, there's been a lot of questions raised and the commission has asked questions. So, yes, the applicant will absolutely have a chance to come back in again and we'll discuss some of these issues, some that you've raised, some that the neighbors raised and some that the commission has raised.

Well, I think what I'm going to do is. Once again, remind the Commission that the applicant has the burden to meet your regulation. I stand on my comments that the applicant hasn't. I stand on my comments that the applicant doesn't get credit for offsite features, offsite landscaping, or other ways in which the applicant seems to be relying on neighboring property owners to shield or buffer this property visually or from noise. And I think Once again, you know, I look forward to continuing to work with the commission on this and working with the neighbors and working with Attorney Bloom, frankly, on having a productive discussion. And I want to thank the chair for your patience this evening. And I'll wrap up right now.

Okay. Thank you very much. Duly noted, Mr. Green. Commissioners. Actually, there is actually one last hand still up. Robbie, do you have something important you want to add?

Paul, we also didn't get to... It's okay.

I see one hand. Is John still on? Please, just one hand. I'm still on.

Robbie? Looks like Robbie and John.

Go ahead, Mr. Kamari. You want to make the call? Go right ahead.

Is Ravi here? No, he's not. John, you finish up.

Thank you so much. I'm sorry my phone died on the last one. I'll be very quick because I know everyone's had a long night. Just want to say I'm in support as a person who abuts second closest to the other property that's been discussed in full support of the plan as it is now. I just listened to the testimony of Mr. Smith, or excuse me, the expert opinion of Mr. Smith. Just about everything that he brought up, at least in the presentation I saw for over half an hour in the last meeting I was in, was met and met the dark sky standards. Also, my understanding of the photovoltaic map also shows the impact on the adjoining properties as well. So I see the need for doing further. If there's a further expense to our town and our taxpayers in doing this, I would ask that the board does not incur those costs to do this. And also. You know, if we're going to bring attorneys onto this call, I think we should have a very good understanding of who they're representing by name. Additionally, the expense at which those people are going through to ask us to sit through this. But I do just want to say for the board, and I'll wrap up on this. I've been a member of this community since before 2010, a substantial period of time. The community grows and it changes. I can attest, as many others have on this call, that these are needed facilities. The lights will help. As somebody who abuts to this and is impacted by this, I do not see my own property value per se. or if that is even a concern um or an expectation that things do not grow and change is a reason not to support the broader community and i think i you know i can't speak for everybody else but i will say those of us that have kids in young sports uh there's a hundred supposedly on this call that are against it there's probably thousands that are in support of it so i just asked the board to again think for the broader needs of the community um if there is a way of doing this where it could be 50 foot and again i heard in the last call and then half an hour presentation that 50 foot does not meet safe sky dark sky regulation and would incur additional expense for this town and the private folks that want to invest in this project You know, that's it's the complete opposite. So I do think there needs to probably be a good confirmation of whose data is more accurate here. So thank you for letting me be heard as a person who is the second closest to the lights who supports us along with other neighbors that I have in the area. I'm sorry that the rest of Not sorry, but I'm sorry that for my neighbors, I respectfully disagree with you. And I did sit in my backyard this weekend and was part of the lacrosse tournament, and it was not 100 decibels, guys. And supporting Mackenzie Priddy's comments, music is played at the beginning. There's not sound speakers being put in, so I don't know why we need a sound study. This is about the lights. And so with that, as a person who's lived here well over a decade, someone who supports our children, our community, and the needs that these children have to be in a healthy environment, I beg you, do not let the nimby few who are worried about property values, which is quite frankly yet to be determined, if at all impacting, harm our broader community and our children. We need this. And it's been well, I think it was 2011 the last time we addressed this. So thank you very much. I know it's been a long night for everybody, but rest assured there are those of us that are close to these lights, supposedly are impacted by them and the noise. And we recognize that the town needs this. Our children need this. So I ask that you look at the broader view for the town versus what you just heard today. So thank you very much, Paul. And I'm sorry for any confusion that I caused my phone dying on me this evening. Thank you.

That's quite all right. Things happen. That's fine. Thank you, sir. Robbie, you get the last word.

Thanks, Paul. I appreciate that. I shortened it up. I'll make it quick. This is about location and whether this is an appropriate area to do it. An example would be I moved here and there was no rowing club. I come to my house at 2 o'clock in the afternoon and you hear the kids crushing it out there, urging each other to row faster. It's the appropriate spot for it. That's where it's supposed to happen. Same thing with the VFW on Thursday night for the jazz. It's the appropriate spot for it. Is it loud?

Yeah.

It brings quality and character to our life. Same thing with the bar that's on the river that has the DJ on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday night thumping. It brings quality and character, some would say. This is a school use area. Of course, it was going to expand. These are the locations for these activities. Maximizing access is reasonable. We're about to get, what, 500 rentals in town? Where are those kids going to go and play? So I urge you to approve this. And if you don't, I urge you to protect every field we have in town from anything other than play for the kids, because the kids are coming. There's not enough room for them. There's no more land. We have to maximize it. And this is the appropriate location for it. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. All right. Before we go back to the commission, I'm going to ask Mr. Bloom if there are any final comments that he wants to make after what he's heard this evening.

Yeah, thank you, Paul. Just a few comments. There has been a lot presented to the Commission tonight, both from the applicant and from the neighbors and their attorney, Attorney Green. I do wish Attorney Green had appeared two meetings ago and given us this information and the consultant that he hired. Also, we would have had a little additional time to absorb it, and perhaps the applicant could have responded. But we still have time and we'll do that. I do understand that we have been engaged in some discussions about resolution of the whole problem and that has not yet been successful. In any event, there's a lot here to absorb and I'm sure the Commission needs to digest this. I think the applicant also has to review what has been submitted. and see whether and decide what kind of response is appropriate. So we do need to continue it, obviously. I'll just say this. Ultimately, it is a matter of compliance with the regulations. The commission will have to make that determination. They have to look at the underlying regulation, which was passed over a year ago, I think. It was not appealed. It was not opposed. Legally, it was not opposed. And so it's on the books. So we've got to go through that carefully. So that's what I will leave you. I'm not sure. Maybe I'll ask Amanda at this point. I think the next available date is July 20. Amanda, you can help me on that. But I think this has to be kept open so that the applicant in particular can review what was submitted tonight and the commission can consider everything that came in tonight also.

The next public hearing date is scheduled for next Monday. I do not foresee that being enough time for them to withdraw their 824 resubmit and then provide additional comments pertaining to all the information the Commission has received tonight with Mr. Smith testimony as well. So it would be the I do recommend July 20th as being the next hearing date.

Yeah, I think that makes sense. I don't think this can all be digested and by everybody within the next week, particularly with the holiday coming up. So I would suggest we continue this for the 20th. We'll take care of the, or perhaps you've taken care of the 824 issue, timing issue already. And then we'll come back on the 20th. The commission will presumably have questions. The applicant will perhaps perhaps have some additional comments, and we'll go from there. Okay.

Amanda, that sounds like an action plan, correct? Correct. All right. Commissioners, are you satisfied with the progress we've made this evening? I have a question, Paul. Who does? Oh, Michael, please.

So... I did have some questions for the expert. Can I just send them into Amanda and then she'll forward them on? Well, he's also still here. If there's something you want to do this evening, let us know. It just wasn't clear to me on some of the items that were in the study. And I just wanted to kind of clarify a few things, but I can send it. It doesn't matter one way or another as long as they get answered. And I also, obviously, we need to digest this and think this through. But I appreciate it. Maybe I can just touch on a few questions here. And then if I have others, I'll send them in to Amanda and she can forward them on. Mr. Green, are you okay with that?

Mr. Green.

Mr. Chairman, we can answer questions now. We can appear at the opening of your July 20th. It's up to you.

One of the commissioners has indicated that he'd like to ask some questions. You know what?

Maybe what we'll do, let me think about this. Maybe we'll send it in so he can appear. Maybe it'd be nice to have the expert appear.

All right, Michael, we'll have to make an executive decision. You're going to write those up. And we're going to bring those out, and we're going to also give our applicant a chance to digest. Unless there's something specific you want to ask of him now, I assume from Mr. Green's demeanor that he'll be back with Mr. Smith.

That is correct. Yeah, one question, and then the rest I can email. I read the 18-page document that you guys sent over, so thank you for that. I read the CV and some great work on the lighting and highway lighting. Have you designed and worked with sports lighting? Like, as it pertains to looking at your CV, you didn't mention any of that?

I'm not a lighting designer.

Have you consulted, though, with sports fields so you could help out and whatnot?

I've attended sports field committee meetings where the committee that makes the recommended practices meets once a year.

I've done that, but I've not... And then recommended suggestions to them? Yes. Okay, great. Thank you. The spectator... I was thinking about some of the things that you said. And for safe play, how do referees play into being able to see across the field to keep a game safe? If we're not, we're talking about like, we don't want spectators, like you don't want spectators, you just want to have safe play. But how do referees play into that? Because they need to see across the field to keep it safe, right? What's the, like, is there a recommendation for that?

No, the 20-foot candle level of illumination that's recommended is horizontal. So that's your average field illumination. And that is sufficient for both players and referees to be able to see the action and make sure that, let's say, they don't trip and fall when they shouldn't or whatever.

And is there, at the 20-foot candles, if a ball's coming at you from, say, like 100 feet away, can you see that?

Oh, yeah. Not only do you see that, even if it's an aerial shot, think of it this way. Not only do you have your direct light coming from your tower, but you also have all the reflected light that's coming off the field back up again. So it's actually lighting the underside of the ball.

So if a white ball the size of a tennis ball is coming at me, then the reflective light will hit it?

Oh, absolutely.

Okay. No, I can just remember playing as a kid indoors in warmer lighting, as you're suggesting, and not being able to see the ball in the head. Luckily, I had a helmet on. But that was indoors, not outdoors. I'm just trying to think it through. If we have any other questions for you, I want to get the clarity so we get this right. And class four versus class three versus class two, forget one, right? Class four is just recreational play. Class three is varsity sports play. And then class two gets the collegiate level.

And smaller colleges for class three, a class of play three would be like a small college. It all has to do with the size of the audience. If you have your seating capacity. Okay. All right. So if you had a high school that was huge and you had a huge arena with lots of permanent seating, your lighting needs would be different than if you were at a small high school that just had room for, say, 500 spectators. Everything has to do with what lighting is needed for those distant spectators.

The lighting that's needed for streaming, though, is what?

That's when you get into the thing about television and what correlated color temperature you need for optimum camera views and things like that.

And what is that?

Well, NCAA has 4,200. No, no, no. The... The foot candle?

Yeah. Thank you.

The there is the there is no foot candle level for just the television. It's also the color, the color temperature in terms of picking up. Okay.

The color temperature helps the streaming. It's not necessarily the foot candles that help the streaming. That's right. The streaming will be able to see with the foot candles no matter what level it is.

And you may need some more lighting if you want to have color television as opposed to black and white.

Oh, so should we stream in black and white? Is that better?

Well, you don't need as much light. Oh, okay. I'm done, Paul.

Mr. Chairman, if I may, I know that the documents were submitted this afternoon, but I did submit an AI query which addresses, which may help the commission and addresses some of these points.

Was that the five pages after the presentation?

Yes. Was that the document from, was that the, is there an updated document that that referenced? Oh, I totally agree. It was actually, I did have that question. I forgot to ask it. I'm sorry. I couldn't hear you. That document was from 2001, right? That it was like querying. It was like a massive document that you kind of streamed it down for us from 2001. No, no. There's a reference to 2001 in it. And I didn't think that that was, I thought there was a more recent, like 2024 document.

I had just made that query today. So

We'll look into it and I'll send you an email. Great. Thank you.

We have a moment to reflect. Anybody else have anything to ask of the attorney and his expert or anything you want to know from the applicant who hopefully is still here or Mr. Bloom who is also still with us? Craig, I see your hand is tentatively up.

It's tentatively up. As a commissioner, we've had two proposals. One for lighting four 70-foot posts with X amount of foot candles. And we've been told that that is what is required for lighting these fields. And now we have Mr. Smith saying, giving us another argument and another proposal. How as a commission are we to resolve this on what is appropriate?

Well, the first thing we're going to do, obviously, is ask the applicant to address the details and information provided by Mr. Green's expert, and we'll look forward to their answers. And then you're going to have to sit with one hand and the other at the other hand and make a determination.

Second question is when Mr. Smith comes back, if he could give us a photometric, I guess, diagram that is outside the boundaries, that goes outside the boundaries of the field in itself.

Actually, I don't think that would be Mr. Smith. I believe that would be the applicant.

Okay.

Because that's their report that he's referencing.

Okay.

Anything else?

For me, that's it.

Okay. All right. Any other commissioners? Mr. Calise? I'm okay. Thank you. All right, my last comment is to the applicant, and given what we've heard in depth from Mr. Green, I too would be interested in your answers to some of what he's proposed this evening, and specifically the planting plan, what you intend to do at the perimeter of these fields and what your answers will be to screening. And if you could add that to your list of, your long list of things that we would like to discuss. Absolutely. Okay. And Amanda, what's the date again?

The application will be continued to July 20th.

I'm going to make a motion at this point to continue this to the 20th of July. Do I have a second?

Second. I will second that. Do we need to do each of them separately?

Yes. I heard a yes. Who said that? Me and Michael.

Do both separately. That's what we've done in the past.

Amanda? The 824s are going to be withdrawn. I'm not sure if Mr. Barbary wants to put it on record now that he will withdraw both 824 applications for 70 North Ave and 170 Riverside tonight. We could send it by email and then therefore you should make a motion on both special permits to continue them individually to July 20th.

Before we do that, Amanda, we did talk about Riverside Avenue. We should do that one separately, right?

Yes, you should make a motion to continue.

So you made a motion call to continue.

I haven't yet. You haven't given me a chance. All right, so the first motion that I made was for 70 North, and I believe Ms. Zangieski seconded it. So I'd like to vote. What we're voting on here is to continue 70 North until the aforementioned date. All those in favor, starting with Mr. Kammeyer. Ms. Laskin. Ms. Schiavone.

Aye.

Mister police. We're continuing the 70 North to the 22nd how do you vote yes to continue.

We know.

We know but thank you Sir isn't just key.

Yes.

And Mr. Leibowitz is a yes as well. I make a second motion now. Second motion is for 170. Riverside?

No, no, Paul, we haven't even discussed that in like three weeks. Isn't there more to, like, don't we need to discuss it first?

You probably should. Was it opened before? Yeah, we just, we opened both.

We're focused, we're solely focused on. Okay.

Yeah, well, you can discuss it or not.

That was my point is like, just let's,

70 north avenue 100 very good all right so 70 uh is now um continued and so if uh mrs ingeski would read the next item we'll jump into that the last item on the agenda item number five no no uh 170. just to refresh us

Oh, 170 is a municipal improvement at 170 Riverside Avenue, application PZ2600360. And then item number 4, 170 Riverside Avenue, special permit, site plan application PZ2600278.

All right. In all fairness, sir, you both have given us a lot of information this evening, but is there something specific that you'd like to discuss and give us information on the 170 property?

Well, can I just suggest that you officially and formally incorporate the PowerPoint presentation into the record for 170?

Thank you very much. That is exactly what we need to do first off the top. Do the commissioners understand that? We are taking the entirety. of the discussion that we just had.

The PowerPoint, right?

Everything, PowerPoint and all the letters, all the discussions, everything is going to be appended to the 170 Riverside. Is... That's a good question.

It's not a question. It's not a question. I'm telling you that's what we're doing. But if there were site-specific comments about 70, how do they get? Does it matter? Does it not matter?

Well, those would be ignored. But anything that would be relevant and whether Mr. Green wants to incorporate some of his points into that application is up to him, too, I guess.

Michael, the idea is to not have to repeat ourselves. I see. Okay. So we've already said a lot, and we're adding that to this discussion, and now let's decide whether or not there's new stuff. So the first person that gets a chance to tell us is Parks and Rec's department, and that would be Eric and Carmen. If you'd like to just weigh in briefly on this address.

For Riverside? Yes. Okay. Yeah, no, I mean, we intended to have the PowerPoint address both locations. The need is dire for both locations. We can mix and match. We can send people wherever there's availability. We can move those athletic requests to that facility. And we did talk about the lack of the width of the field at Riverside for soccer. So that is something that we have to, you know, coordinate and deal with as far as sending people over if this were to move forward versus Wakeman. But no, there's nothing else. And certainly Carmen has the opportunity if you still want to speak, but the PowerPoint was intended for both properties.

Okay, very good. Mr. Rhoda, do you have something specific on this particular property that's germane for us to hear?

Yes. We, over the last several years, when we had the ordinance in place, we used temporary lighting to help enhance our practices. Although that was a help, it wasn't a significant enough help for the need of that property. To my knowledge, as a parks and rec official in my capacity here over the last six years, when the lights, the temporary lights were being used at that location, we received zero complaints. We recognized the neighbor's concern on that property regarding the traffic. We discussed moving forward if permanent lights are approved there to have a traffic agent or police officer help with that to address the needs of the neighbors. And that's been one of the concerns since we started this process 20 years ago. But other than that, no, no other addition. I just want to say that we have been using it, the temporaries. It's helped, but not helped in the need that we can have it be more efficient for the utilization of that property. Thank you.

All right, very good. Thank you very much. Commissioners, specific questions for 170? Michael, anything?

Thanks. No, I think the focus has not been on 170. I just wanted to make sure if there are any questions from the public that they come out. Questions have come out in prior meetings, and I think that, you know, Parks and Rec addressed some of it with regards to saying if there was going to be some sort of sport that needed a traffic monitor, guard, crossing guard, whatnot, that that sport would provide that upon exiting the field. Otherwise, I think that, you know, the whole purpose of the regulations were that every field's a little different. And if there were questions about this field... specific to this field, that'd be great. If there aren't, there aren't. And the application is what it is.

Well, I should say that, I mean, I just, I'm sure people understand that, but just to make sure that we, in that property, we are not asking for any music, sound, narration, none of that. Different from Wakeman B.

Other commissioners, questions? So let me just ask, you utilize the same height, style and design for the lights. Are you taking into consideration the individual aspects and are they that similar that they both apply?

You mean about the size of the lights, Paul? I just want to make sure I understand your question.

Yeah, you have the same height of the lights. You have the same style of the lights, same intensity of the lights, in the same position, roughly. So both fields almost are mirror images of each other in terms of the lighting design. And I just want to make sure that you've thought of the individual fields as separate entities.

Yes, obviously, maybe not so obvious, but yes, we looked at them as two totally different fields because specifically when you look at P.J. Romano, that will be used in addition to lacrosse and some youth soccer. It's going to be used for football. where we have live punts, PATs, kickoffs, that type of things where we'll have natural, much more height needed for sight then. It's specifically for, because we looked at it for football as the primary sport for the fall using it and not, Wakeman will not have that football, tackle football at that location.

And is there any difference in the specific Kelvin of the lights or the intensity of the lights, et cetera? No difference in what we've asked for for both properties. Is there any difference in the parking facilities in terms of lighting, traffic mitigation, et cetera?

The parking situation, there's a lit parking lot, the large parking lot of Saugatuck Elementary School. There's enough lighting. from even currently the building that's there for exiting the field to get into the lit parking lot to the lit street as people leave that area. There'll be one primary exit would be Saugatuck Elementary School parking lot.

And will you have to provide any kind of screening in any direction from the field?

We would look to see if we had to. That's still up in the air if we would have to. If we would need to, we would obviously look at it to put it in for the screening for where the fence line ends at the property towards the houses. That would be the only area.

Other commissioners, anybody have anything they want to ask while we're here? Okay, seeing none. This is a chance for the public to weigh in. The public has an opportunity. First public I see is Mr. Sabino. John, is that a residual hand from before, or is that a new hand?

Residual. A lot of IT problems here tonight. I'm so sorry. It's lips lowered.

All right. Ms. Shelby, you have a second bite of the apple this evening, so please have at it.

Thank you. Two years ago, we sat down and had this conversation, spent a lot of time in these meetings. And I guess I'm just a selfish NIMBY, as Mr. Savino would say. But here I am talking about Riverside, where I don't live anywhere near. And unfortunately, they don't seem to have the community that has someone text and say, hey, we're talking about 170 right now, get on. Like I'm lucky to have at Whippoorwill. But I guess there's just like a couple quick things I'd have to say here. One is that it does seem like y'all are looking at these as almost identical. And the light poles and the foot candles are, you're recommending football levels of height and foot candles and temperature. at Wakeman that you are at 170 Riverside. So it doesn't feel like you're looking at them separately, but I appreciate this attempt to do that. There are letters on the website. It just peaked my ear when I said, oh, there's no complaints. And I was like, but I read a letter about this. Someone said, people turn on the lights. Obviously that won't be possible in the future if they're permanent. It says the original agreement was for lights up until about eight. I hope this will continue. I understand there's a huge volume of letters that are on these websites, but people do take a lot of time. You know, I'm spending lots of my personal time trying to shed light onto some of these issues and being told that they don't apply or how Parks manages something in the day is not relevant to how they would do it at the night. So I'm not going to talk for very long here except to speak on behalf of the people who live near Riverside Avenue, the ones who testified a few weeks ago and said, hey, the traffic is really a problem and no one ever pulls over parents for making that left turn. I make that left turn all the time and I shouldn't and it's dangerous. And all I would say is like, Pretty, Miss Pretty, the coach from earlier just talked about the safety of that road. So these are the things we're asking you to pay attention to. These are the things we're asking you to build into the application. This is not NIMBY crap. Like I sat in my You know we care about our kids and care about the communities. I care about the kids who I see in the street because they're parking on the sidewalk and we're here because we care and we think both things can be true. We think there can be lights and we can be respectful of neighbors. And if we saw the applicant doing more to recognize the needs of the community we would. And that's all. And I will say I just want to for the record say again Carmen, I texted him at 7.30 on Sunday. He responded right away. He was wonderful, but he's one person. And there are ways to make this just easier and more automated in this day and age. And I will stop talking now.

Thank you very much. Rest assured you've been heard. Next, I see Robbie has his hand up. Is that residual Robbie or is that new Robbie?

No, I live on Riverside Avenue. I was just chatting with Denise in France. She dialed in because she lives on Riverside Avenue as well. These are our only fields. We have to maximize them. Carmen's on it. He's adjusting it for Riverside Avenue. He has a team behind him who's capable of making this application even better. The goal is to make our quality of life better. There are compromises involved. We are a family school-oriented town. You're worried about traffic? Okay. We could talk about ways to get traffic through Saugatuck, maybe other roads, wink, wink. But that's Riverside Avenue. That's what we have to deal with. So, you know, I get it. But these are the only options, and we have more people moving into town, more affordable housing, kids that need places to go and be kids. So, you know, Carmen, make it better. PNZ, make them make it better, and let's get it done. You know, there's more work to do. You can do it. We have faith in you.

Thank you. Thank you very much. Do appreciate the faith. Mr. Green.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Once again, Joel Green. I would just submit that this application does not meet the requirements of 32-19.2, the application requirements set by this Commission. And accordingly, the Commission cannot make the findings it needs to make pursuant to Section 32-19.3. And I want to thank the commission for your patience and attention. That's it.

Thank you very much for your brevity this evening, Ms. Simonetti.

Thank you. And I apologize, I came into the meeting late. So my comment will be brief. I just want to commend, I think her name was Shelby, the speaker before Ms. Shelby. What great salient comments she made. I agree with what she said. I agree that Ms. Shelby you can appreciate athletic fields and programs for kids and still want the town to do better. And I really appreciate her comments. I just wanted to say that. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Ms. Simonetti. Anybody else from the public wanna weigh in on this particular application? Seeing none, I'm gonna, again, propose that we continue this application. Do I have a second?

I will second that.

Thank you very much. Let's go around the room and talk about the vote. Mr. Kanmeier, how do you vote on continuing? I'm sorry, could you speak into the microphone? I vote to continue. Thank you very much. Ms. Laskin?

I vote to continue.

Mrs. Schiavone?

Continue.

Thank you. Mr. Calise?

I vote to continue.

Thank you very much. Ms. Injeski? Yes. As am I. Thank you very much. Amanda, the same date?

Yes, continue to July 20th.

All right. And Mr. Bloom, we'll have the pleasure of your company at that time.

Certainly. Is it clear that the A24 is being withdrawn by Mr. Barbieri? Amanda, I know you asked that before. I wasn't sure I heard the answer.

Let's try it from the top. Mr. Barbieri. Would you address the two 824s that we have in front of us? Tell us what the nature is of going forward.

Yes, we will be withdrawing them and resubmitting them. I've spoken with Amanda. We have the dates that we need to submit them by to make sure we match up with the intended continuances. And so I think we're in pretty good shape. I can talk to her again if there's something else. But yes, that is the plan to resubmit. That's great.

Very good. Everybody seems to be on the same pages. 10 o'clock. We've reached an inflection point here. How about another three-minute break? Who wants to do that?

What's left on the agenda that we want to discuss?

Well, let's ask the secretary if she has...

The last item on our agenda is a 218 Hills Point Road, which was previously opened and continued until tonight. It must be decided by July 10th.

July what?

July 10th.

July 10th. Thank you. Does this commission have... the wherewithal to do another one this evening, or are we exhausted and want to continue to the next meeting? Your call, but I'm willing to ask you what your feeling is. It just so happens that Mr. Green is here, who's also representing the folks on that application as well. Let's go around the room. We'll start with you, Mr. Kammeyer. Are you able Up to the task, or would you prefer a continuance?

I'll take your lead on this. I'm fine.

Thank you. Mr. Calise, how do you feel?

I think we should stop now.

Ms. Laskin, what's your second?

I think we should stop now, too.

Very good. Ms. Schiavone?

Continue.

And Ms. Injeski?

I'm fine continuing this.

So, Mr. Kammeier, back to you.

Whatever you want to do, Paul. I need your vote. I'll go with my fellow commissioners and we can continue this.

Okay.

Well, the majority of the vote... No, no, that's not how we do it here.

Everybody gets an individual vote. I said I was fine to keep going, but it doesn't...

I'm flexible. That can be your vote. I'm fine to keep going, sure.

All right, and I would like a continuance as well. Before we make it so... I do want to remind the Commission about applications that are in the CAM and about timelines, but instead of me doing it, I'll have our resident expert do it. Amanda, can you address a CAM line decision?

Coastal Site Plan applications, the Commission has 65 days to make a decision. It's not like special permits. This is a little bit more of an administrative approval. Typically, if it meets the zoning regulations, it's compliant with the coastal site plan regulations, and there are no, you know, it meets all those regulations, then the commission is tasked to approve the application unless they see fault in somewhere along the line. So 65 days to make a decision brings us to July 10th. There is one more meeting before July 10th. We have July 6th. If you'd like to continue the application, it's well within your purview to do so.

All right, it looks like we voted five to one. In faith, one, two, three, four, five. Yes, five to one. And so let's pick a date. Want to do it in the very next one, which is the 6th?

Yes, Mr. Chairman, you have to make a decision by July 6th. Typically, if a decision is not rendered by the 65-day timeframe, and I'd like to put it in the record, the applicant also did provide a 65-day extension on top of that original 65 days. That's how we got to the July 10th. Typically, if a decision is not rendered by then, the application is deemed approved.

All right, very good. So the vote has been cast. We will see you on the sixth to the, I'm speaking now to the applicant, and we'll get that thing put to bed.

I think we do need an official vote on that, Paul, though. Oh, I'm sorry. I thought we had... I thought there was more of a straw poll. All right, let's try it. Why don't you make a vote? Motion to continue.

And I will second that. We'll start with you, Mr. Kammeyer. I agree. Ms. Schiavone.

I agree as well.

Mr. Kalise. I say yeah. Thank you. Ms. Laskin.

I agree.

And Ms. Injeski. Yes, I agree. And I too agree. So now it is unanimous, Mr. Kammeyer. All right, well, we'll see that one again on the 6th along with anything else that comes up between now and then. Keep your calendars clear. We got a lot of work this summer. Anybody else have any more business in favor of this commission?

I'd like to make a motion to adjourn. Couldn't come from a better, at a better time.

Thank you. I second. Very good. And so we are adjourned. Thank you, commissioners. And thank you to the applicants who came before us. And we'll come again.

Good night, folks. Good night, everyone.