Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay. Okay. At 7:00 p.m. I'm going to call the town of Winchester planning zoning commission meeting to order for February 9th, 2026. 7 p.m. Uh, roll call starting the left. Jan, John Coney, Peter Marsh, Willie Pla, Adam Wolley, Christa.

All right. Agenda review. Anybody have anything they want to move around or go to? Seeing nothing. Uh, public comment. Anything not related to the public hearings tonight? Nothing. Okay. So, we'll move on to item number four, public hearings, PZ25-24 23, sorry, PZ25-23. Applicant resolute plow on behalf of Mountaintop Trucking LLC location 179 Corbook River Road propose a special permit for excavation renewal zone PI come up to us for a moment. Hit the uh button on the red button there.

The mic the one that's a microphone right in the middle itself. The little microphone's on the side. Yeah. Yeah. So, what do you guys want to know? All right. So, uh, since your last permit, do you have an idea how much has been removed from other?

We took we're taking about 42,000 yards a year out of the quarry. And that's pretty much the plan going forward as well. that we've had operating the Corey for, you know, a couple decades now. Um there's not really any dramatic change to anything. We're working on the main rock face, vertical face, and we're doing doing some steps the shelves to protect for future, you know, future blasting and stuff like that. But all the operations are this staying the same. There's no difference in times of operation, anything. It's just the standard way we've been running the, you know, the quarry for decades. I know when I go there, I see the rock truck going up the side there.

Yep. That's if you see it go to the left and then I you can't really see but you're doing benching as you're going up the hill. So then when we did then when we do blast the rock face you know you have stages you can't have just a one huge vertical. So right now we're in the process of doing that taking big boulders down the hill on with the rock trucks for crushing and making the benches for future for future glass work.

And this is the current view up there I think aerial view. Yeah, you the commission had asked for aerials from the last couple of years at our last meeting. So, uh just starting in in order here, this is from 2020. And you can see a couple of benches there on the western side of the site. Fast forward to 2024, you know, a few additional benches are starting to move a little bit further to the west. And then this is from March of this year. So, you can kind of see that westerly progression on the site. Sort of southwesterly, I guess. Yeah. Yeah. And the area down at the bottom you've kind of made that the area at the bottom where you're processing all that that's been made bigger or a little bit bigger.

No, the processing area which is the darker gray area in there like right in that area there really hasn't changed much at all in size. You know, it's in we're working in the same same floor footprint because that's where all our crushing and sorting operations take take place. So that that area really I mean as we move into the rock face it'll expand obviously but it again it's not a very dramatic you know occur you know movement of this of the quarry it's a it's a you know a slow operation it's not a it's although it may become you know it may in the next few years it may become more important because we're closing down one of our quaries in Torington and then we're we're applying for another application here for another Corey in town. So, but this quarry right now is every all the operations are staying the same. There's no there's no changes in anything.

I see you improved your entrance up there. Yeah, they repaved this year. Yep. Yep. Put a whole new pavement in there. So, that takes care of the tracking coming out. Yep. It's paved all from the road all the way up to almost to where the processing area is. Okay. Anybody in the board have any Can we just scroll up to 2020 one more? I just want to look at someone. Thank you. So, I requested a renewal permit application. Do we get that filled out? Yeah, we we have integrated into the portal at this point for everything new coming in. I think we do have the form from them though. I'm pretty sure Shane got

Yeah, I I most definitely filled out. Yeah. Oh, yeah. Yeah, there were a couple things that were wrong because they it wasn't populating a couple of things and Shane said she was changing some of the formats on on that, but no, she has that all and then it didn't allow me to enter in some of the attachments, too. So, Shane actually entered them in for me. I didn't see a copy of it. Did we get a copy? Can't be included. Yeah, we can get that, too. I think it was in one of our last All right. I thought Yeah, I remember seeing it in one of our last packets.

Yeah, but it looked like this kind of print out that's that's you know or whatever the application like you know what I'm talking about. Yeah, that's different than the uh the renewal excavation renewal permit has specific questions. Oh, for hours.

Yeah. And then there was a little narrative she had me write to just just explaining. But I think the the thing that is important is everything is staying the same as original. So you're not proposing any changes. So all the information Yeah. So when when we approve it, it's all just the same as original. Correct. So all of that files and all that previous documentation remains unchanged. So what's the life expectancy here that closed? 100 years. 100 years.

Well, I mean because they you between that Yeah. Yeah. There's quite a lot of there's quite a lot of rock there. And again, you know, if we were a bigger operation, it it could happen a lot quicker, but we have that quarry. We have another one we're going to be setting up in town. We've got one we're working on down in um Thomas as well as a small one in Torington as well. So, it's not it's not a huge um producer for us yet. I mean, who knows down the road what it might become, but right now we're not proposing anything other than just what we've been doing there. There's been no complaints or issues over the years, right? No, we've we've heard nothing.

Up on the screen is the from 2021. And if I uh I orient that orient this way, you can kind of see how they're

just kind of sticking to the plan. I saw in the uh the uh the records for this you have a blasting permit. So is that do you have to get one all the time or is there like a yearly thing? How's that work? I've never applied for a separate blasting every time you're blasting the actual they have to fly through that's through the fire marshall's office every time they blast and that stays with the fire marshal or through the fire marshal. Y. So you have no record of when they blast them. The fire marshall's office. Yeah. Yeah. Every every blast has to be Yes. be permitted by the fire marshals. Got to all be notified.

You got anything, John? Anybody else? All right. So, I move that we approve. We got to close. Got to close the public hearing. I'm sorry. Motion to close. I make a motion to close the public hearing. Second. All any any discussion hearing? None. All in favor? Okay. So, hang around and we'll get to you in a while. Okay. Okay. So, now we're going to open the public hearing for PC25-25 George Name 25 Center Street. Special permit application to convert mixed use building to a multif family zone TC.

How are we? Good. How are you? Good. Hi, George. So, tell us what you want to do. Uh, just there's one office right now and two units and we wanted to just make it all residential. So, how many units are going to be in that building? Three. Three. So, you'll be closing the office. Uh, it's been empty for a long time. Is that street level? Yes. Do you get to it from Main Street or do you get to it from the center street? You get it to it from Center Street. Right. So there's there would be no residential access from Main Street. What do you mean? It's not on Main Street.

It's on Center Street. It's AC parking lot. It's right behind the town hall. I'm thinking directly across the street from firehouse. I know what you're talking about. Sorry. You're thinking of my main street. Oh, down here. I got you. Yeah, center street. Yeah, this one down here. Sorry. So, the purpose is just to close the office and make it strictly residential officially or what's going to happen with the office? Like I said, it's empty. It's empty. It's just going to remain empty. It's not going to become part of the res. The office part not going to you're going to put three units in there. Correct.

It's going to be converted to res. Two downstairs, one upstairs, two upstairs. So the what he's asking is about the office space is going to be is what's being converted to res? Yes. Okay. The whole building is going to be resing for the whole building. That's why I was asking. I didn't get that part. Yeah. Okay. Any residual signage from the business that should be taken down? Yeah, we will be taking down the sign. Um, and refuge. We have enough uh space for garbage cans. Yeah. And or or in the back. There's uh three parkings in the back and enough for No dumpster. No dumpster. No, just a regular

Yeah. And it's still, even though the office is going to be converted to residential, it's still only going to be three units. Any comments from the fire department? Uh we toured the building some months ago with the building official and fire marshall. Uh and so they sort of laid out all the different things that George is going to have to do to convert it properly. And actually we um

All right. So the building is sold. It's under contract right now. and the um the guy who's buying the building asked me to do this process for him. Uh today the uh building inspector approved all the renovation that we have done and closed it. Okay. For the but the third unit the office we haven't touched. It's still sitting. What was that again? The office area we haven't converted to a residential residential. So So you still have to do the alterations in there?

I'm not doing it. It's the new guy. The new guy is doing it. The sales contingent on you getting this special permit. Correct. Exactly. Well, okay. And so I just So it's a special permit because it's first floor in a town Sarzo, right? Yeah. multif family right now is uh special permit in the town center anyway and so in this case yes the whole the whole thing is going to be residential including the first floor.

Yeah. So I generally in the town center zone would not like residential on the first floor but in this case I think it does make sense. It's not contiguous with other commercial areas. There's you know it's kind of set on its own. It kind of looks more like a house. Um, this building was a single family or multif family before it was converted. Before it was converted to use. Yeah. And it was converted to office space downstairs. Correct. Okay. Just going back to the original driveway use. We almost have zapped away on me here. Tried to

This is a couple years old. That's the structure we're talking about. Yeah.

Any other questions? Any more questions? John, anything? Jan, so that sign would be taken down. Yeah, ask about the That's what I understood. Yeah, that was the only question I had, but I thought Yeah, I guess we should ask if anybody the public can any comment on this? No. Mr. You okay? I'm good. All right. So, I move to close the public hearing for PC 25-2. I'll second it. Any discussion? Hearing none. All in favor? I

I Okay. So, we'll vote on this after we do some other time business here with the town. Got two more public hearings. Two more public hearings. So, now item C. I move to open public hearing for PZ 25-20 applicant town of Winchester proposal update zoning regulations section 415-26 415-38 415-40 415-9 415-21 415-55 an appendix A use table

second all in favor opening what are we doing public hearing of occurring. Put a order. Uh, Mr. Chairman, before you do that, uh, if you wanted to, we could change the, uh, agenda a little bit to vote on these guys, and I I think these are going to be some lengthy discussions rather than have them wait all night long. Up to you. Just wanted to bring it up. Sure. Revise the agenda. I make a motion we revise the agenda and uh, go from the public hearings to old business. Second. Who was it? Second. Okay. Okay. All in favor? All right. There we go. Now you can do.

So now we'll go to item five, old business number A, PZ-25-23. Applicant Wesley Pile on behalf of Mountaintop Trucking LLC. Location 179 Colbert River Road proposal special permit for excavation renewal zone PPI. I'll make a motion we approve PZC 25-23. Applicant Wesley Claw on behalf of Mountaintop Trucking or excavation renewal. I'll second.

All in favor. All right. So, that was just a that got confused here. We opened this but we didn't vote on it or we just voted. We just voted on it. Just voted. Okay. So, fine. Exis 2525. All right. Who's got the paper? Sign it. We have a draft motion to sign. Yeah, it's uh we've I don't have them to sign, but I have you move it. You move too quickly. I couldn't even get it open, but uh if you want to look at it, we I can get it open here. Oh, we should read it in the entire Let's read it out. Let's get it up on the screen. There you go.

You're going to have to stand up to read that one.

Okay. A draft motion commission plane and zoning commission date February 9th, 2025 to approve application number 25-23 special permit excavation renewal owner AJK LLC address 179 Crook River Road proposal special permit for excavation re renewal. In evaluating this application, the plan and zoning commission has relied upon information provided by the applicant and if such information and so doing proves to be false, deceptive, incomplete and or inaccurate, this permit shall be modified, suspended or revoked. This application is consistent with the town's town's plan of conservation and development. This application meets or exceeds criteria standards of section 415-24D special permits special exceptions.

I will make the motion. I'll second that, too. And can we do a roll call vote for this since we're doing it this way? John. Okay. Yes. Yes. Adam Corelli. Yes. Rrista. Yes.

Approve. You're good. You're good. Have a good night. Take care. So, pulling up the next one for you.

Okay. Wrong one. No, that's the right one. Excavation renewal. It says on that screen.

Oh, but it says 25 center. So, let's just uh delete that while we're at it. That's why we, you know, that's why we do this stuff. We all set. All right. Okay. So I move to approve PZ25-25 applicant George Name location 25 center street special permanent operation to convert mixeduse building to multif family town center.

You want me to read the rest of it? Oh we need a second. I'll second it. Okay. Now you can read that. In evaluating this application the planning and zoning commission information provided by the applicant. If such information subsequently proves to be false, deceptive, incomplete, and or inaccurate, this permit shall be modified, suspended, or revoked. Two, this application is consistent with the town's plan of conservation development. Three, this application meets the criteria and standards of section 415-24D, special permits, special exceptions. All in favor? You're welcome. You're all set. We're okay. We're good. Yeah, you're good.

All right. Okay. Now, get back to regular regularly scheduled business. Back to public hearings. I'll make a motion to return to public hearings. Second. All in favor. Okay. So, now you're up, Jeremy. Thank you. Have a good night. Good luck. Bye, George.

Make sure I got the right thing in front. So, the last time we talked about this was um I guess about a month ago. Um so, we'll just kind of go through this. Not a lot of changes have been made. We did make changes to the um I think we called it the homesteading part. So, when we get to that point, we'll get there. Um I had made notes at the last discussion that we had on this back in early January. Uh accessory apartments, we discussed um simply making this a zoning permit as oppo as opposed to a special exception by the CVA. Um uh it's a it's a detached accessory structure or as part of the existing residential structure. That's some new language there. Um newly constructed accessory apartments must comply with all setbacks and coverage requirements of the underlying zone. No variances shall be issued for the purpose of constructing or creating a new accessory apartment. Uh the other language is is already there. Um made a small change there. No no greater than 900 ft or 50% of the gross floor area of the existing residential structure attached less

accessory apartment may not contain more than two bedrooms. So we put a cap on that. Uh we had we've always had the 900 square foot cap, but this caps in number of bedrooms. Um again, I think you know the idea is that these generally are not units intended for families. So we'll try to focus. Uh if approved, if the property is approved by private septic system, approval of the Toritan area health district must be represented to the CEO at the time of the application. Just giving us a little bit more data to work with as we go along. and we had removed uh language about a notorized letter that had to be submitted with regard to home to owner occupancy of the lot.

That's it for accessory apartments. Anything else that comes to mind while we're talking about accessory apartments? Would you provide consideration for a shed on the accessory department? Let's say it's detached standalone structure. So an like an accessory shed itself. Yeah. Which you could you could have that because it's a residential property anyway. So there's nothing stopping that. And then the other thought was uh are they still allowed the same amount of deck square footage? So 400 400 square feet of deck on the separate structure as well. Yeah, I guess they would be.

So you're think you're thinking it is a lot of you're thinking about a lake zone specifically. Yeah. Um yeah, I suppose um I suppose it would be allowed. Um you know, you have to look at coverage and and decks. Of course, if they're uncovered and it's not concrete underneath, it doesn't count surface requirements and all that, right? So all of that stuff has to be factored in.

We're not really changing what can be done now. We're just saying that instead of coming to us for a special permit that it can be approved by the zoning officer. We're not really changing what what is allowable in our regulations already. Right. Sure. So this doesn't require anything from if the if the property is sold for the new owner to come in or anything like that. Correct. Okay. Beautiful.

Yeah. I think, you know, that's just kind of a um and we talked about this already, but you know, it's just sort of it's an enforcement nightmare, right? Because it just it's you're you're sort of chasing your tail trying to find these places if somebody doesn't come in and uh and file that that piece of paper with the office. And I wonder if it was ever challenged in court how much that would even hold up. I agree with you. I mean, I wonder the owner occupancy requirement that's in there at all is sort of difficult to enforce anyway, right?

We all good with this? There's the next one. Earth Excavations. The only thing we've done here is to clean up the language with regard to what we've been doing recently in requiring a public hearing and a and a new special permit essentially. So, uh application, you can see it there in red, application of the commission for an excavation renewal special permit. Um and then we added some language. Updated contour maps may be required by the commission prior to the renewal of a permit, which you always have the right to request those anyway. Um, this just puts the applicants on notice that you might be required. So,

if they came in and applied and then we required a updated contour map, then that takes some time to do. Don't we run into time restraints that way for us? You could, you know, because you're doing it as a special permit, you've got the 35 days that the hearing is open and they can request up to another 65 in order to keep that hearing open. So that gives them three months. Hopefully they can get those contour that contour map updated within a three-month time span.

But also, these these sites don't change that drastically in that short period of time. So if we're renewing the permit, they're going to get the survey done probably before they submit the application in that three months. It's not likely. So like the last the last survey was done in Germany. When was the last survey done for these guys here? That was 2021. 2021. So that's four years old now. So we didn't require it now, but say in two years two years we could

then that's six years old. or if we don't require it then you know then we start running into eight years and 10 years. So I'm just looking at the time frame for when it is required and and if the economy is booming and there's lots of work and the surveyors can't get there. Uh

yeah, you know, you I mean one one of the things you can do too is and and every site is different and every application's going to be different. But you know, when the application comes in to be accepted by you for that first meeting to get accepted and have the hearing scheduled, if the commission is aware that gee, you know, the survey is eight years old, you know, staff can supply you with that information right off the bat. Uh survey is eight years old or 10 years old, we want a new survey. You've got 65 days to open the hearing. So that gives you two months before you even open the hearing. So they they can start on that process right off right right away. And then and then that additional three months if you need it. Five if they can't get a survey in five months then you know that then I think there's problems. Yeah.

Okay. And and that's recognizing that you know getting survey work in in Winstead right now is challenging. We're we're limited. We're hearing that all the time that you know people are having a hard time but they're not waiting five months generally. You want to consider putting a cap on how long the survey is applicable for? Can we do that? I I could permit. You can I mean you could say that you need it every you need one every time you could. I I don't think you need it.

Yeah. And I think every site's a little different, you know, if if they're coming to us and saying like this one has been quiet for many years, you know, so the survey from 2021 is probably still fairly close to what existing conditions are. And and I think it's based on the quantity they take out every year, too. I mean, if you got a large volume of, you know, all of a sudden and I think that's something this one becomes a large volume on a yearly basis. They increase the volume or double it, then we would want an survey done every two years or four years. Sorry, the aerial shot on mountain top because I mean you could clearly see that there was not difference between the last

right and and what was pictured in the aerial photograph. Was that aerial photograph taken recently? Uh one of them was 2020 and the the most recent one was 2025. So there's five year span between those. No, there was some there were some changes. Yes. Some heavy changes in five years. Yeah. How is the renewal permit integrated to this? Is it in the I don't I don't see it in the procedure. What excavation renewal permit question? Yeah. So I I'd sent over a copy of uh the electronic permit or you were going to integrate it electronically.

Oh yeah, which it is now. I can I can sort of show you what that form looks like. So now I think I think I'm pretty sure I did that. Let me check. Well, Jeremy's looking that up. Uh when Scott called uh this afternoon to let us know he might not be able to make it tonight, he did bring up again uh the issue of recycling materials uh at excavation properties. Uh so while we have uh the excavation regulation up here, uh is that something we want to add? Jeremy and I have discussed this a little bit in house and it it seems like it's just a sort of secondary nature to the business that this material coming in to be processed, right? So it's coming in from various sources. It's not being mined on that site.

Correct. So uh wait. So I'm confused. So what does he talk about recycling processing? Yes. The process but it's not I think there's an excavation permit and there is can be processing that's accessory to the excavation which I think would be make sense. But if it's just a processing center where there's no excavation taking place, I think that would require a permit too. I don't know if we allow for that for just a processing site. I think that's part of what he's getting at here. So, do we want to allow just

like Mountaintop has that uh recycling stockpiling route 800 across from South? Yeah, that's not processing really. They're not processing any of that. They're mostly hauling in and out of their piling there. Maybe miners recycling, but that's they're not really processing down there.

So, so currently processing is only allowed as an accessory use. Yes, I'm okay with that. Could l process there if they wanted to. Yeah. The way it stands because it's an excavation site. So the processing is accessory to Yeah. Yeah. The processing is what happens when they excavate. We're talking about bringing material in to recycle it and then be mixed in with their with their product.

Even if it started there and went out to a job and then was coming back for whatever reason. I think that's what Scott's thinking about. Well, I think a lot of it is when you dig up a road, that stuff goes Yeah. When uh you mill a road, that stuff goes somewhere. You know, millions now are very commodity. Highly priced. Yeah. Uh so I think that's a a bigger regulation than just adding some something here.

Yeah. I think the thought process was that you know some to some extent these operations might be doing some of that and so is there a desire to add that as an accessory use up to a certain amount right to say you know as part of this as part of the operation you might be able to bring in and I don't even know what a reasonable amount would be because this isn't my area of expertise but you know 5,000 cubic yards of you recycled material for on-site processing for redistribution at a later time or something along those lines is I think what we were batting around a little bit because of Scott's comment at the last meeting.

My thought is keep the regulations we've got that to change these and then maybe you could look and see what other what other towns have that they have anything as far as the material recycling yards or anything like that any regulation so we can have it a standalone regulation. Okay. Yeah. stand a zone that could be applied to well stand alone for to the right excavation business right they might have one right there in I mean you know would because I see them hauling a lot of stuff in there I drive by there every day and there seems like they're hauling as much stuff in as they're hauling out you figure most like building when they're bu when you dig a foundation that material's got to go somewhere

right uh when they were going to do that piece up on 211 West Wakefield. There's going to be a lot of a lot of material removed from there because that was going to require an excavation permit that was going to go somewhere. So, yeah, there there's a need for that. I think we just need to figure out how to address it.

Well, and and I think that, you know, that's a such a very it could be accessory to what we're talking about to the excavation, but you know, these stockyards and different things. We have such limited, you know, industrial commercial land that they need. I don't know that that would be the highest and best use for us to start start asking for that. I like that it's accessory to an excavation operation. I think when we review these, we can determine what is accessory. if it's a big, you know, a big site with, you know, they're going to show us what their processing and stockpiles look like, you know, and and some sites can have have more, some sites are going to have less. As long as they're staying within what they're proposing, I don't I don't think we need to really create a regulation that's because it's going to be in the plan, right? And it's accessory and we're going to look at it and say, "Yes, we feel this is accessory."

If if we want to start looking like a landscaping or stockpile yard or something. I think that's that's different. Part of the original earth excavation permit is hours of operation and an estimated number of trucks per day, right? So, if you do an accessory, it's going to potentially affect those. Well, but whatever they submit that they have to stay to, right? So, that would have to include their accessory uses, too. We Yeah, I think and then so you mentioned that that that uh that site could be going on for 100 years,

right? And are we going to go back to the original permit of what was agreed upon for hours operation and number of trucks and is it always is it always going back to original or are we going to include that part of the renewal? Well, I think that's why the renewal coming back in as a you know every two years gives you that opportunity to do that, right? Now you're saying it's it's the original and whatever those hours are. It gives you the opportunity to review that and make make whether or not it makes sense to go back to that original approval. How well are we going to retain that original permit? It's in the office. It's got to be there essentially forever.

So recycling business if you look at like road construction most of that's happening at night at night. Now uh that material would be coming in realistically 24 hours a day. So you really couldn't limit hours of operation because they're paved at night, they mill at night. So well, that's why I think that that's a totally separate type of Yeah, it'd have to be a standalone regulation regulation to go along with

That's what I said. the people that have the the uh equipment to process it, like Mountaintop would have the equipment there to process it because they're making different grades of material and they can actually integrate some of this recycling stuff into their stuff. Well, like canavos, right? They they don't excavate there. They bring their stuff in, they process it, they haul it out and use it in other jobs. So, I mean, do they even do anything down there anymore? Yeah. I mean, I think so. I mean, I don't know. Sand soil and they bring it in, stockpile it. Yeah. But that's all in that's all held in resale. Yeah. So I mean I think that that's the type of thing which I think is different yard down there is the old Picasso property. There's a lot of stuff materials there.

Lot of stuff that he's brought in. So

So yeah, we should look at that as a way to add it in. I don't know. Um, Adam, to answer your question about what are we capturing in the online permitting system, we just pulled the questions off from the old paper form. So, date will last renewal, date of original approval, amount of cubic yards uh peritted originally, cubic yards removed to date, and are you requesting excavate outside the original limits of excavation? And I think, you know, the answer to that question is really going to inform what we're going to need in terms of survey. uh you know they say yes of course we're going to want a new plan that shows that um and then these are the questions that are there for making new excavation permit same same questions but then there's some additional ones hours of operation estimated number of trucks per day size type of material

should we just ask the hours in the renewal even if it's just a confirmation of the same yeah we Yeah. Okay. To reinforce the Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Make sure we all know what we're talking about. That's a good idea there. It's there every two years updated. We can do that. All right. So, anything else on this uh excavation language at the moment? I'm good.

Good. pretty lengthy as it is. We're not we're not touching most. Okay. Farm stands. This is where we had quite a bit of discussion last time around. So, we kind of kind of re uh worked this based on the conversation. I think I captured the tenor of the discussion, but if not, you can set me straight. Uh so, farm stand originally this was farm stands, permanent. We got rid of the permanent. We're just calling it farm stands and homesteading stands. So we have the permanent farm stands um which doesn't change. And then we have B which is this homesteading stand. So one homesteading stand should be allowed on existing residential properties without the need for permits for the sale of produce, agriculture products or products made with a cottage food license or similar with the following requirements. One stand per property. Uh all items for sale must be either grown or produced on site. Homesteading stand should be temporary in nature such as a cart or small trailer or small structure no larger than 24 square feet I think was the number we settled on. Uh stand should be located on the property or set back a minimum of 10 feet from the edge of pavement of the front street whichever is further. So so the way that reads is if your property line is 10 feet back from the edge of pavement you can be at your property line. If your property line is three feet back from the edge of pavement you got to be seven feet into your property. So you're you're no less than 10 feet uh from the edge pavement.

Um homesteading stand shall not exceed 8 ft in height unless it's part of an existing structure. So if somebody's using their porch then you know the height limitation is kind of moot. Um maintained in good condition. One sign may be placed advertising the home setting stand in accordance with the following. Maximum size shall not exceed four feet. May not be lit. uh may not be placed in the right of way nor in a location where it will impede sight lines. Um and sign shall be removed anytime the homesteading stand is removed or not open. So you know it's a little bit lengthy but the the reason for that is we're saying no permits needed. You have to follow these rules but they're fairly straightforward so that if we get a complaint the enforcement officer can go out and look at it and say yes it meets the regs or no it doesn't meet the reg. and then address it.

So, uh the maximum size of the sign shall not exceed four feet. Four feet high, four feet long. It should say four square feet. Four square feet. I would think I think that's what we agreed upon. So, you know, I mean, I would think any configuration, you know, could be one one and a half by I can't do math that that easily. Could be two by two would be the normal thing, right? As long as there's a size that's good. Uh, anybody got any discussion, comments, additions?

Nice changes. Oh, looks good. What does the enforcement look like if there were to violate? They just roll a cart. Well, yeah. It'll depend on the is the sign too big, cut it down. Is it too close to the pavement? Roll it back. You know, I think it'll be uh easy solutions. Yeah. Yeah. Not a very complex one.

I hope we we know we have a bunch of these things that meet this out there, you know, across town. And, you know, for the most part, it's not going to be a problem. And we're not getting complaints now. It's just But we have we have had the question a couple of times, you know, I've got this cottage food. I'm gonna have this cottage food business. What, you know, I think we've got a hearing that opens next month for a cottage food license, home home permit. And, you know, we've had these questions before. I've got vegetables. Can I sell them out on the street? Well, the answer is no, you can't. Uh, now now you can. And be legit. I think it's Yeah, it's not good when people call and they're trying to play by the rules. You say, "Well, you can't do it because the rules don't work." So, and then they say, "But what about the guy up the street from me that's selling eggs out by the road and has this little, you know,

and that's the nightmare. Oh, here we go. No, I think this is great. It's It's a good good addition. They have 30-day grand openings. There's feather flags and banner. Well, we have good good rules for that, so I could always default to those.

Uh parking regulations. I honestly don't remember what we added here. I got to look. Oh, this is the uh this is the provision that ties back to a state statute that was changed a couple of years ago uh requiring uh EV charging infrastructure. So, this is already statute, but I like putting this stuff within the regulations so that people are aware of it, right? Um so, we just referenced the the public act there's 2225. All new parking lots consisting of at least 30 parking spaces associated with any commercial or multi-unit multi-unit residential building shall provide electric vehicle charging infrastructure that's capable of supporting level two stations. And so really what that means is you've got to put the conduit in the ground. You don't have to provide the charging unit itself. You just have to make the provisions available for the future. I've had almost no push back on this in reality when developments come in because it's you're just throwing a conduit in the ground across the parking lot so you don't have to dig the parking lot up later. So that's pretty straightforward. Any questions, comments, concerns? Uh signage. This is the one where we got into uh signs in the window. So, we added signage placed in the window of any commercial establishment shall not obscure more than 50% of the window area and shall not be internally illuminated.

Anything there? We good? Yeah. Straight forward.

Uh, and this is so definition section 4155. We removed tobacco sales from retail small And we created a retail smoke shop category uh retail establishment where 20% or more of the sales display areas dedicated to the display or sale of tobacco and related products containing tobacco and nicotine electronic nicotine delivery systems, nicotine pouches, vaporizers, flavorings, other smokeless tobacco products, paraphernalia accessories, other related products, or any combination of the above andor contains areas for the consumption of smokable products. For the purpose of this definition, related products include but not limited to products sold at vape shops. So, we're just trying to regulate these smoke shops independently of small retail sales. The goal, of course, is to try to keep them away from Main Street or downtown. Um, that is mostly stolen, I think, from either Greenwich or some other town shoreline already. So, uh, any concerns on that definition?

No, I think we went over that pretty heavily when we were doing it. Okay. So that's it for that piece of it, the written piece of it. I want to pull up the use table because we made some changes there. A moment to integrate smoke shop.

Yeah. Um this is we've made a number of changes in here. So, some of what I've done here with some of the residential parking standards relates to the housing bill that was um approved. Uh, and I I didn't get too far into it, but the but the parking stuff was pretty straightforward because the requirement in 8002, and I'm going to talk about that in a little bit, but in the housing legislation that was passed back in what was that, November, Christa?

Um, there's a provision in there that says you cannot we cannot regulate parking for uh residential developments of less than 16 units. So, I just wanted to clean up the language on that and we'll talk more about that. Um, but I just figured Looking at the use table, let's just incorporate that now. Um, affordable housing, you can see point 75 per bedroom. Uh, when the development contains more than 16 units because if you're above 16 units, we can regulate the amount of parking. We can require What was that again? Above 16 units. Above 16 units, we can continue to have a minimum parking requirement for the the unit. Um,

one of the questions is what happens if you have 16 And that's will be determined. Hopefully that gets cleaned up this this session. And I and I will say we'll talk a little bit about this, but uh my firm Tiki has um uh we've hired Hower and Sage to do a session with all of our um client towns and the commission members. So you'll all be invited. That's March 11th. I think it's a Thursday evening. It'll be an online session. You're all welcome and encouraged to attend. Um it's probably going to be Rich Roberts, um Ken Slater, uh Mark Brance, and um I'm missing one of the heavy hitters at that firm, but sort of top land use attorneys in the state to kind of go through this bill and give you some really solid information to go on and give us some real good advice in terms of what we need to do with our regulations to be compliant with this

legislation. in the evening or Yeah, it'll it'll I don't know exactly what time it'll be, but it'll be an evening meeting because it's geared towards our commission members. We want you all to be able to attend. Do we get credit for that? I was just going to ask. Yes, we should. We training will be there for sure. Yeah, it it will we'll we'll count it towards your

So, once you get once that's set up, you'll zoom link and all that. It'll be online because we've got towns all over the state. We don't expect people to drive anywhere. Um, so it'll be online and we'll have it open to you and we'll get you that information, but put it in your calendars. It is scheduled for March 11th. Um, and as soon as that flyer is put together, we'll get that out. Um, okay, just continuing on down the line here. So, dwell, so this goes along with what we had talked about uh with regard to downtown. So, dwelling units in a mixeduse building above the first floor. Um we uh talked about this for downtown zoning permit in the uh in the uh town center zone. Um oh actually so all right so this is another 802 thing because you you now have to allow uh dwelling units in all of your commercial zones. You have to allow these middle housing. I I wonder if maybe it makes sense to keep this hearing open so that I can kind of fully develop some of this stuff for the next year.

Yeah. Rather than do it again. There's Yeah, I I almost I almost want to leave this use table alone and skip over some of this until after we get through the March 11th thing. But I mean I I so regardless of what the bill says and I think that there's more guidance going to come out and we can do that. But I think regardless of what the bill says, town gateway, uh town center Town Center Residential and I don't know about the Hunt Lake business district. Maybe we take that one out for now because I don't know that. That's fine. But we want housing on the first floor. We want to make that as easy as possible, right?

Or even if we're just comfortable with town center, I think we should get at least the town center approved tonight and then if we want to come back to others, but I would be comfortable with the other the other two. Yeah, I think maybe town center, residential town center makes sense. Yep. Take out time for now. We'll come back to that. Yeah. Depending on what that says. I agree. Okay. Um one and a half car spaces per unit. Yeah. How's that going to affect 508? There's no parking required in our town center. There's not in the town center zone. There's no parking requirement for it,

but we're going to do parking in town center by special permit. That's what you're going to get cleared up, right? No, first floor residential special permit. Um, first floor. First floor res because what I, you know, the conversation we had a while back was trying to make mixed use on Main Street easier. So making that a site plan

with residential units up above as zoning permits. So if somebody wanted to come in and they had office space up on the second and third floor of their building and they wanted to convert some of that over to residential, they could come in and get a zoning permit for those. But if they wanted to convert the the first floor to residential, it would need to come to you for a special permit because we want to maintain that uh street level commercial retail space. So that's the thinking here. So that's why dwelling units in a mixeduse building, and that's the key, dwelling units in a mixeduse building above the first floor is a zoning permit. Dwelling units in a mixeduse building on the first floor is a special permit.

Yeah. And I think for now what we'll do is we'll we'll pull we'll do we'll just copy the format from below above it for now and we'll come back to the other zones filing when we talk 8002 in a couple weeks. Um manufactured home this is something we had talked about a while back anyway was converting that over to a zoning permit. Uh the other reality and again I I included the other zones as zoning permits because one of the changes in 802 is we can no longer look at manufactured homes which is the HUD units the sort of trailers for lack of a better we can't look at those any differently than a standard single family home anymore. Uh there was a provision in the statute that that uh is changing as of July 1. So we can do one of two things. We can strip out manufactured home al together because it has to be permitted like a single family home or we can leave it in there and just change it over to z doesn't really make much difference.

So if we can't treat it any different why do we have it? That's and that's that's what we can strip it right out. So then we're going to strip the definition manufacturing manufactured home and trailers out of our zoning regulations. I think we might want to leave the definition in there only because um the permitting process is slightly different than a single family home with regard to building permit. And you know, so it sort of informs our office that it's a manufactured home versus a stickuilt home or a or a prefab.

Maybe where it's a single family dwelling and we put manufactured homes in the same block. Yeah, we could do that. Or we can change the definition to say that it's regulated the same as a single family. Either way, I think because we won't be able to ask for that different parking standard anymore either. Right. Right. Yeah. So, correct. Well, yeah. I mean, we really can't have any of those parking standards in there for anything under 16 units. We'll figure that all out as we as we work through the 802 stuff. But I think we'll move we'll move on the all the items that we've been talking about. We'll move on those and then we'll kind of come back to this again to deal with 802 after March I think is probably

yeah we can do it our last second meeting in March. Yeah. To finalize these hopefully and get well and we have time because those regulations don't take effect till July 1, right? So we have time we have time to get the attorney's guidance and some different things. Yeah. Um so we can even leave it as is for now if you want. Wasn't that wasn't Okay. There was legislation from a couple of years ago, I think it was 2129, that said you couldn't treat them any differently than a single family home if the minimum width was 22 feet. This latest round of legislation strips out the 22 foot width requirement. Yeah. So, I mean, we we sort of have to have a zoning permit anyway.

Yeah. Right. So, leave it. Okay. So, we'll just pull this whole line. probably think that makes sense, right? And then we'll we'll come back later and clean up the definition. All right. Um, running down again, I added I added some of the or I cleaned up some of the off streetet parking stuff uh in that righth hand column because of the legislation. Oh, good. Caught that. Oh, yeah. The erroneous residential uses box.

It's It's all over the place. So, I just stripped out. Yeah, carried through. Residential uses just carries through throughout this entire table. So, I stripped it out so that when it sent back to open gov or general code, they clean it up. Uh, okay. Retail smoke shop zoning permit in the town gateway and the production PNI zone, but it is not in the TC zone. Good there. Mhm. Okay. Good. Yeah, we discussed that last time. Um,

farm stand permanent uh farm stand. You know, I think these farm stands are only allowed on permitted farms and those farms are a zoning permit use. So, I think it makes sense to rather than require a special permit for those farm stands, we could do a site plan, but I don't know, this is just me sort of throwing this at you to think about. Um, I don't know if a farm stand on a permitted farm should have to go through the special permit requirement. That's my own thinking. Um, but it's up to you. Isn't a farm stand built into the farm? No. The way has always been is it's a special permit. Okay.

For a farm standard, it's not considered a right of use or anything. No. So, that's my thinking was to just make it a little bit easier if you've got a farm. Do we limit the size of them? I think you do. I'd have to go back and look at that because I I agree with you to a point at some point you look at like alignment orchards like Yeah. That's not Yeah. Right. stand anymore, but you're right. So long as we limit what we call a farm stand, I think you're right. That's a full-blown store. 200 square feet.

Um Floor area shall not exceed 200 square ft. You see, this is kind of sort of talking in circles. Anyway, because your use table always required a special permit, but then this says it only requires a special permit if it's over 200 square feet. I I would almost say put a put a maximum square footage in there and call is what I would think.

Yeah. Or just to add in the table of the youth table, you know, farm stands under 200 square feet and 200 more. Sure. So 200 and more could be a special permit. Less than 200 could be do we want to go site plan or do we want to go zoning permit? Zoning permit.

CP for under 200. So if if you've got a primitive farm and you're converting say part of barn to your farm stand and the barn is 20 by 24. So should that be 200 for free and you got to get special permit for the other? I mean, if it's a permitted farm and you're comm converting an existing building,

but I think there should still be special exceptions because that when you get to that size of a farmhouse or a farm stand, it generates a much different use, right? It's a lot busier. There's different part, you know, so even though the building is already there, it's a much bigger farm stand. And I think that's where the special exception comes in.

Turn retail all more intense use. than a you know smaller farm stand. That's my anyway. Okay. Is that

so permit? Right. Uh yeah, we wanted to go zoning permit. There you go. Can't get my cursor that box. Okay. So, zoning permit if it's under 200 feet. Special permit if it's over. Everybody's good with that because these are on permitted farms only, right? Right. Right. They're on permitted farms only. Correct.

Okay. Um, landscape and construction yard. We wanted to add that to uh the PI zone and we said one parking space per employee. So I think what we came up with I don't know a month or so ago still on board with that makes sense. Okay.

So yeah um this is where we made some changes. So mixeduse building uh we're going from we're going from special permit to site plan uh in the town center zones already it's so mixed building it's a site plan across the board instead of a special per there a A little hard to tell with the red from where you guys are sitting, but I think I crossed out the wrong letter there.

Your S is red and your P is black. I know. Should be the other way around. We We want them to be P all the way across instead of SP. I got you. I'm with you. I'm just messing with you. No, that's okay. I It's You know, you look at this stuff and you start to get woozy. punch

and and I'm going to recommend that we get through this and we leave the hearing open so that I can go through this one more time and clean this stuff up so that it's, you know, more presentable for any public that wants to look at it. Okay. Um, we had a category in there of seasonal cottages. I think this is something Jeff and I talked about in the office. It's a site plan use. Seasonal cottage is a is a residential structure. It's just not meant to be used year round. So, if we're allowing if we're allowing full-scale residential units to be built by a zoning permit, why aren't we allowing seasonal cottages to be built? Can you actually build a seasonal cottage to cottage to this building standards that it requires? I

I've had building officials tell me that yes, you can. Um I've done it in another town. So, you know, if if it's they're in our regs, we can take them out. But, um, you know, we I've had people that have had old seasonal cottages who said it's fallen apart and I want to rebuild it, but I don't ever want my family to live here full, you know, year round. So, I want to rebuild it as a seasonal cottage. There's some provision, I guess, in the code that allowed it to happen. So, So, then the question is, if it's a seasonal cottage, how is it taxed? You'd have to ask the tax that question. I don't know

because you could say all of a sudden like your weekenders that are around. We don't live there all the time, so you can't tax us full value. Yeah. I mean, I think it's I think it's taxed on the value of the structure, not not so much the use, but what's the value out there? I mean, because you could have a a year round house that's not lived in year round, too. So seasonal has to specify no heat or something like that. Something along those lines, right? And I think I think you do have a if I remember correctly, I think you have a definition for it that that states an amount of time within the within the calendar year. I think you looking it up.

Yeah. Seasonal cottage, a detach detached dwelling intended and designed for human occupancy by a single family for seasonal or recreational use and not for permanent residents but having an approved safe water and sewage disposal system. So could you have a a primary residence with a seasonal cottage and an accessory apartment? I don't think so. I don't think so. It doesn't sound like it would cuz you said detached, right? Yeah,

you could have an you could have the accessory apartment that is seasonal, but I don't think you can have a seasonal and an accessory apartment because you're you're not typically allowed to have more than one residential structure on a single family lot unless you have the approval for an accessory apartment. Yeah, that definition is not would not be considered an accessory apartment. So that I I look at that as I have a lot on the lake, a vacant lot, which I don't even really know how realistically is this thing ever going to get used. Probably not. But, you know, if you had a if you had a a vacant lot, you could come in and do a seasonal cottage on it instead of a a year round.

We did have lots in Winster that had multiple seasonal cottages per run. Sure. At one time. Sure. Lake community makes total sense. Yeah. And I'm sure there's still some out there, right? I mean, I'm sure there are still some cottages around that are not insulated and they're 2x4 studded walls and, you know, people go there for the summer. Pull the water meter out in the winter time so that way they don't get charged for it. Well, it does say a detached dwelling makes me assume there's a there's a separate dwelling structure on the on the property, right? There doesn't have to be. Well, I I don't think And by this that would could be

right. It doesn't have to be, but this it makes me assume that it can be like TRS up there. I mean a single family home is across the street. He's got three or four. Well, I think where you're you're going I don't think it changes. Nobody knows how the number of units that could be in a lot. So if it's a single family accessory or it's a two, it doesn't change that area. It doesn't allow that additional living unit when it wouldn't otherwise be permitted. We just allow it to not have heat.

Yeah. I mean, again, you could almost take that out of the use table because it, you know, it would be somebody's choice to make it a seasonal cottage versus a a year- round home. They still have to have sewage disposal. They still have to have water. They still have to have an electric connection. So, they still have to have single family. So, so you do have them existing in town now, right? Some on Park Pond. Sure. Up there off of you have the other group on Highland Lake. So, probably should leave it in. Yeah. Yeah. I don't think there's any.

Okay. So the qu the question is do you do you want to do you want to retain uh you know the permitting function or do you want to release that to the zoning enforcement officer? I think they should I think it should be no different than residents. Okay myself that's my personal opinion. Agree. Agreed. Anybody good with that?

All right. Accessory apartment. We already talked about moving that from special permit over to zoning permit. Um Jeff and I talked about this one in in the office uh taking taking accessory apartment out of the town center zone because you can already have a two family in the town center zone. You can already have multiple dwellings in the two two in the town center zone. So, it's sort of redundant to say, "Well, you got to come in and get a separate permit for accessory apartment, but I could just have a two family." So, it's it's it's sort of one of those it's just redundant to have it in there. Can you have two single families in a town center? Yeah, you can. Yeah.

Yeah. And it's more limiting, right? Well, I guess they can pick either one. Yeah. Yeah, I mean you you if you come in and say, "Yeah, it's more limiting, right, in terms of the size, but there's there's no reason, you know, you could have an,800 square foot second dwelling unit in that zone, right?" So, and it wouldn't say somebody couldn't come in and still for 900 foot. We just two single family, right? Right. So the accessory apartment if it's just a zoning permit. So that's under the public law 25-1. The CP for an accessory apartment zoning.

Yeah. I mean the whole accessory apartment thing is under 25-1. So do we have control over that? Yeah, you do because you so accessory apartments was originally 20 public act 2129. Winchester opted out of it and so you were able to retain your own regulations that you already had. Um and so we that's where the 900 square foot requirement comes from. We added the two-bedroom note on that. So yeah, you have you have full control over that. Um, so the discussion a couple of months ago was to move it from special permit to zoning permit just to make it a little bit easier, but it could certainly stay as a special permit if you wanted to. So the areas where it's already like two families, there's no reason in my mind to have it.

Yes, I agree. But as as uh other than that, I think it should be a special permit. Yeah, I agree. So we're back to Well, but but it's it's uh the regulations that we just changed, they said it was a um zoning permit if it's in an existing structure, right? Yeah. And then if it's an it's a detached. No, we had been focusing on it as a zoning permit all along whether it was detached or attached, right? Because it was over a garage or so, right? Yeah. I mean,

so we've been basically looking at it as an old construction. What about if you're going to build new with an accessory apartment or would that be or would that be an ADU? Right. An ADU. ADU accessory apartment. Same thing. Interchangeable. Yeah. So, the the language we came up with here was, you know, it used to be the ZBA issuing a special exception. We changed that to zoning enforcement officer may issue a zoning permit author authorizing the installation and use of an accessory apartment in a detached accessory structure or as part of the existing residential structure on a single family home lot on the following conditions.

Yeah. And I think we were we're talking about these are the smaller lots or the smaller units. It has to be owner occupied. They're not two family. We wanted to allow these to be easy for in-law apartments or, you know, a little extra income for people to be able to afford to stay in their homes. So, if we're going to do it as a zoning permit, shouldn't we make something noted in the accessory apartments? Okay. We already do. No variances shall be issued. Okay. I just want to make sure that was there. All right. I'm I'm good with it now.

You're good with that? Okay. Yeah, I think I mean that's what we had been talking about all along was to sort of bring it in line with the statute because the statute requirement was that it was a zoning permit across the board no matter what. And so you you still have some more criteria in there than than what the public act would would allow you to have. Um but again sort of making it a little bit simpler for people.

Okay. Uh family child care home again that's bringing this in line with statutory requirements just making it a zoning permit. We can't treat them any different than a single family home. So just converting those to zoning permit from a site plan. Again, just requirement there. Um outdoor dining as an accessory use, adding that as a zoning permit again to be in line with state statute that was updated a couple of years ago. Um, outdoor dining is required to be uh an asset right use anywhere there's an existing restaurant. So, we added that in as a zoning permit in all of the zones where restaurants are currently allowed. We can still review it for parking requirements and all the rest of it, but it has to be allowed as a zoning permit. So,

I checked a little bit is it's allowed in PNI probably because you have distillery and PNI, right? Um, and tap tasting room. Not necessarily restaurant, but I think restaurants are allowed in those two. I didn't see restaurant and PNI. Well, I might have an old one. Okay. Well, so that's interesting. Let's take a peek at that because if the old one didn't have it in PNI, then we need to have that conversation whether or not that was a Yeah, no, you're right. Oh, but but high turnover fast food is

that's why and it's a special permit use. So if you come in for a special permit for that, then you're entitled to the outdoor uh the outdoor and again it's an accessory use. You've already got to be permitted for the restaurant. So that's why I included it. And then part two of my question is uh the retail smoke shop is allowed in Town Gateway and PNI. Are they going to apply for outdoor dining for retail smoke shop? Do they want to allow that? because it does talk about andor contains areas for the consumption of smokable products. Do we want to have outdoor areas of smokable products in those areas? PNI and see an issue.

So, but this is for retail. This isn't like a cigar bar. Well, it does say and or in in retail smoke shop in our proposed regulations here and or contains areas for the consumption of smokable products in our contain. Yeah. So, list all the products, right? So, yeah. And then we should look at that. Go back and look at that one because you're going to allow the smoking in the building. Well, my explosive landlords always say no smoking in the building, but you don't want to be.

So, would you if you allowed outdoor I don't like that. So just say they could set up a table outside of the vaping shop and everybody can just sit out there and say say if it was down here on Main Street, everybody going by just has to walk through all the Right. So would you want to def in the definitions? I'm just looking for it here.

So the reg statute doesn't allow smoking in any restaurant or bar, right? No. Correct. So or public place. Now you can't even smoke on a sidewalk, right? Is that the new I think you're right. Yeah, I think you're right. passed a couple years ago. Yeah. Yeah. That was all part of the Clean Air Act updates. Yeah. The cannabis stuff and Yeah, the cannabis stuff for sure. You're not Yeah. And I think that the cigarette smoking got lumped in with some So, I don't know that that is

Yeah. I think we need to just let statute dictate some of that stuff. Yeah. I don't know that that could even happen. And you know, we we do reviews for the city of Hartford and and I actually reviewed a a hookah lounge not too long ago. And there's all kinds of HVAC requirements that they have to abide by uh when they're setting up those things. The building official has to go through a whole review process on the filtration system and the clean air intake and what goes out of the space. Yeah. The air exchange rate.

Yeah. Yeah. So, it's it's pretty heavily regulated at the state level if you're going to allow those in, you know, those smoking areas as part of your operation. That's for inside. Yeah, it seems like we're allowing it for, you know, outside, right? So, I mean, we could, I think, just put a period after above then delete and or contains areas for consumption of smokable products. Yeah. Just keep it as a retail Yeah. space and get rid of that. It takes away that. Good catch.

Okay. Temporary healthcare units. We'll talk to you about that. That was a public act that was approved a couple of years a couple years ago now, 2017. Um, sort of like accessory dwelling units, but they're temporary. They come in, they leave when they're no longer needed. There's a public act that regulates all of that. Again, it's we have to allow these things by zoning permit. I just think putting it out there in the open in the use table makes sense so that it's nobody can say that we didn't.

And that is it. So, you've got a couple things in here you were going to change. We're going to leave this open. Is that what your plan was? I I think I'd like to leave it open just so that I can clean it and make sure that, you know, there was one that I needed to add uh a use column to and I couldn't get my cursor to show up into it. I want to make sure that all of the P's are P's and the SPS are SPS and this, you know, make sure all of those things are what they're supposed to be. Uhhuh. We have a clean, presentable version of this. So, you want you want to leave this open till our second meeting in March, which would be the 23rd. I I don't think we have to leave it that open. I I don't

I thought you wanted to wait till we went through the housing thing on the 11th. I think it makes sense to let's do what we've got here because we've got some potential movement on some things on Main Street, some other areas that we want to get moving. So, I think leave this open till your next meeting and then act on it at the end of this month and then let's get through the March uh 11th session and then we'll revisit everything with relation with you know as it relates to I'll make a motion to continue the public hearing. We got PZC 25-20 uh 23. No, this is this is 20. 20. Yeah, this is 20. Yep.

Yeah, it's 20. Okay. Sorry. to our February 23rd meeting. Second. Any discussion? All in favor? Okay.

25-20. 21. We haven't had public hearing yet. That's next. That was 4C. The next one is going to be One is for the fire suppression. Yeah. 23-25-21 is our next public hearing to have now. Okay. So, we extended the hearing. So, we're all good with that.

Good. So, now we're going to open the public hearing for PZA 25-21 applicant town of Winchester. Updates to subdivision regulation section 400-53 fires depression requirements. Second. I'll second. All in favor. Okay. Um we've talked about this a couple of times. I know Peter, you brought up to me the last time we met just making uh making it consistent to say town of Winchester Fire Service throughout the document. Yeah, you were. Yeah. So, did you do that on uh item EC? I think it was at the bottom of the first page. E

yeah service town of Winchester should be that was the only one. That was the only one I believe. So, uh I got another one here under G. Oh, up under D, I think it was too. the top. Oh, yeah. Yep. Yep. I got that one. Okay. We changed that one. Yes. Yeah. Under G. Town of Winchester Fire Service. There's a few of them.

Yeah. All of them should be town fire. Fire service responsibilities. I think that's all.

Chief Field was invited to be here tonight, but he had another prior commitment. He wasn't able to make it, but I mean, he's pretty much wrote these. Uh, I was going to say he wrote them. Well, he wrote them. Yeah, we worked together on them, but he wrote them from Torington or somebody else's, but yeah, we all agreed upon things and changed a few things. All right. Any other concerns? Questions?

These these came about because we have no regulations for subdivisions. We already have current uh system that in town that's not maintained. Not nobody has who knows who owns it. So, it's a problem. That's why we we're looking to add this to the regulations. We see if there's any public comment on this one. Any public comment? Come on. Speak up. Good work. All right. So, we going to good with closing this and uh I think you can close it tonight if you're ready. Vote on it. Yeah.

All right. Uh I'll make a motion to close PCC 25 25-21. I'll second. Adam, any discussion? No. All in favor of closing. Okay. So, it's not on the agenda to vote on it. It's not. You can add it if you'd like. I'll make a motion to add PZC2-21 to the old business agenda or new business agenda, I should say. No, old old business. Old business agenda. Okay. Second, John. So that'll become number uh item 5C. Lauren,

5C, I mixed something up somewhere. So I'm ready to catch up. We'll go through. We'll straighten it out. So we have first and a second on that. Did you want to just John? Yeah. John second to move it. Yeah. Okay. Got a hold on. Okay. We'll vote on moving it. Adding it to the agenda. Yeah. I'll I'll make a motion to approve. Right. Well, all in favor, right, to add. All in favor? Y. All right. So, now we got a open that under old business. Right.

Okay. I'll make a motion to approve proposed revisions to subdivision regulations for fire systems, fire ponds, and dried hydrants. B 400-53. Second. I don't have a draft motion for this one. Okay.

There you go.

Okay. To make a motion approve application 2521, zoning regulation change applicant down in Winchester, Connecticut. Motion to Winchester Planning and Zone Commission adopt the following subdivision regulations text amendments updates to subdivision regulations section 400-53 fire suppression requirements. You want to put a date on there. They become effective. Oh yes, which we should do that. Um you want to go with March 1st? Yeah, that'll work. Effective March 1st, 2026. Second.

Any discussion? All in favor? All right. Okay, put that one. So, now we can move on to item six, new business. CGS-8-24 review bond funding for the replacement of the Pearson school roof in accordance with Connecticut General Statute section 8-24 review. Oh, that's it.

That's it. Okay. So, we had this paper that was passed out to us. Okay, selectman like to walk us through this.

Boy, he's taking off his coat. I'm turning off my coat cuz I'm hot. I'm getting ready. The Pearson school roof. Um I know that that we approved to go to bonding for it. Um everybody knows that definitely need roof. So they're leaking. It's 30 years old past this lifespan. So it's definitely time to pull this person set up to kind of work with the company and the group and everything. I think it was a requirement of bond council that this had to be done. So, do we have any sort of a

I do text on this? I've got I've got a draft motion from Shane. Give me a moment.

This is I think I put it in the in the staff report to you as well. You know, there there is language in your plan of concept. Really, what this is is a review to ensure that it's in consist consistent with your POC. It's an existing school building. It needs a new roof. There's language in your POC that talks about maintaining your infrastructure and upgrading buildings as as you know, as needed. And there's some language in there about trying to add green infrastructure throughout the town as as uh as opportunities come up. Um you know, maybe it's an opportunity at some point down the road to put some solar up there since you're getting a new a new roof. It's one of those things that sometimes makes sense financially, sometimes, sometimes it doesn't, whatever. Um, but I would say it is consistent with your PC to

I can do a motion on the roof over there. So, the draft motions up on the screen. You got a motion up. So, we have to read this whole thing. Uh, I can read it for you if you'd like. I can zip through it pretty quickly. I can do it if you want. I got no problem. You're you're turning around craning your neck. It's probably easier for me.

We'll let you Consider an enteron a resolution approving pursuant to section 8-24 of the ke of general statute improvements to town uh improvements to the Pearson school roof resolved with the planning and zoning commission for the town of Winchester hereby approves the following project pursuant to 824 of the general statutes Connecticut revision 1958 as amended replacement of the roof and portions of the building envelope consisting of but not limited to full removal of existing roof down to the deck removal removal of all asbestous containing materials installation of a new high performance roofing system and Modified pumin pumin system on low slope section. Installation of a vapor barrier. Fire rated coverboard. A new tapered insulation system. Installation of a structural standing seam metal roof system on steep slope sections. Replacement of gypson plank decking. Removal of abandoned mechanical units. And install installation of structural decking. Installation of drains and flashing to meet code requirements. Reporting of repointing of deteriorated brick facade. Installation of wall paneling on chimney. cleaning and reopening of clogged weep holes. The appropriation may be spent for the preparation of schematic drawings and outline specifications for the project design, demolition and construction costs, equipment, materials, utility site improvement, survey costs, architects fees, engineering fees, other consultants fees, legal fees, net temporary interest, and other financing costs and other expenses related to the project. Provide that this resolution is for approval of conceptual plans only. The project is subject to and shall comply with all applicable zoning site plan in the wetland and other laws, regulations, and permit approvals. And this resolution shall not be a determination that the project is in compliance with any such applicable laws, regulations, and permit approvals.

Should we add to it that it complies with our plan of conservation development PLCD? Uh, I suspect that language is probably provided by the bond attorney and it says I think you're good. I'll make that motion. I'll second it. Any discussion? Can I just ask one question as best already been identified up there? There was but they didn't think it was it was maybe too serious to deal with. But it has been identified. If it's a 30-y old roof,

yeah, but it's I've been on several school building committees involved with Pearson in the past and there's minute areas on the rooftop external to the building, not internal because we did a complete internal removal of all asbestous in the building about 15 years ago and that but there is some in the roofing material. Yes. Probably the mastic. Probably the mastic. Yes, because there's been multiple repairs to that roof the last 25 years. Any more discussion? Do we understand if the the school will be disrupted? So, will it continue to be used as a school for during the period of usually they do these things over summer break? Summer break. Yeah.

Typically when they do it, that's what they're trying to shoot for. Is there any contingency of another school supporting some uh if it's not back up and running in time or they can get it done in time? Do we have capacity elsewhere? Is there any contingency? No. No. I believe they're looking at somewhere.

Any more discussion? All do they just put it out to bid? Yeah, they have to. Good. Okay. Just because the total cost of the project. Yes. Okay. All in favor? Unanimous. Okay. Now, item number B, review draft flood plane overlay district regulation.

So, this is something we've been talking about. Um, I put langage together. We don't need to talk in detail tonight about it. Uh got it in front of you. I think it was in should been in your packet. Um and if it's not it, I can email it out to everybody. No, I think it did get emailed and you should have your packet. Yeah. So, I would just say take a look at it and we can talk in detail about it at your next meeting. 24 pages today. Yeah, I was going to say, yeah, it's long. It's a it's a it's a lot of

it's a lot of language. Um, it's it's a long it's a lengthy regulation. It's, you know, but it it brings the town in compliance with the FEMA requirements, which as I look at it right now, you're not. There is an ordinance dealing with flood plane overlay stuff. Uh, but it is in no way, shape, or form updated to today's standards. This was updated back in 2018. These are the state model rags with essentially with the town of Winchester plugged in in all the municipal spots. So, it's the same regulation that everybody else across the state is using. Um, and it just keeps you consistent and and compliant with FEMA requirements. So, take a look at it. Um, we can discuss more in more detail. Anything here we can change or we have

you I mean, sure, we can change things. You know, one of the things that a lot of the shoreline towns have started to do is there's a um a provision in there that um the the floor system has to be one. you know, you've got sort of your base flood elevation and your mechanicals in your first floor has to be at least a foot above that. There are a lot of shoreline towns that have gone up to three feet above that. We call that freeboard. That's the the amount of space above your base flood elevation. Um, so you can increase those things. You can do some of that tweaking, but for the most part, this language is also reflected in the building code. So, we kind of want them to be the same. Um, I I would say, you know, there might be a few things that we can tweak here and there to make them a little bit more um strict in the flood flood zone areas, but for the most part, it sort of is what it is. One thing we need to talk about and figure out is where we want to put this in the zoning regulations. Do we want to create a new flood plane overlay zone? And so does it live in the um zoning district chapter or is it a a standard and it'll live in the standards chapter? And I've got to kind of wrap my head around what makes more sense. You know, having it as an overlay zone and showing it on the zoning map might have some benefit. Um but the flood study up in this part of the state is so old that it's hard to map that.

So I think we should do it as a standard. Yeah. And then, you know, because we require um the site plans for them to put the 100 and 500 year flood zones and we have the maps and if the maps ever change, that's when the regulations get apply and we wouldn't have to change our zoning map. Yeah. Okay. So, I think it's it makes sense to be the standard and you have to know the look. No. and and it's they have um FEMA has I'm sure you guys have probably used it but you go onto their website you put in the address and you can pull up the zone map and you can create a little firm map and it's free and I mean they're terrible maps to begin with especially up here where the flood is already so old yeah we're getting to it

but but they're but they're easy enough to get they're easy enough to print they're you know that that we can rely on that information and I think that's all FEMA has us do is rely on there for maps we have to actually just repeat that. You're saying that someone comes on the site plan, they're going to have the flood zone defined in that site. So, usually they do, right? If if it's there because the flood maps will give an elevation a lot of times and we're not going to have a map in our regulations. We're not going to have a map in our regulations. So, we can put this on our agenda for our next meeting to discuss and possibly approve. Yeah.

So, I have a question though like just for process on this. So, I agree that it should be in zoning and I agree that it should be in the our regulations. We should follow state model regs, but if we have an ordinance already, do we have to inform? I have to talk to Paul about how we want to handle it on that end of things. I think that my my thought is that that should reflect the zoning regulations. That ordinance should just be amended to point back to zoning regs, but we have to kind of talk. That's why I'm not even suggesting scheduling a hearing for this yet. I just want you all to kind of read through it and get comfortable with it and understand what we're trying to do. Um I'll talk with we'll talk with Paul and figure out how we need to adjust that ordinance because that's a length of your process.

Well, that's a it's minimum of a month and a half sit on this for now. Um but you know, I wanted to get it put together and have you look at it. Yeah. So there has to be some coordination. Yeah. So, this flood overlay, I know a lot of homeowners on Highland Lake now are being hit with insurance is asking them what the flood zone is and whether they're in it. Is there any way to update that? So, that is um and again, the flood study up here is old. So, Oh, yeah. It's very old and that's not even included,

right? So, when that happens with lakefront properties. Typically, the process is if it's if the house is shown to be in the flood zone, um you hire an engineer or surveyor. I think either one can do it, and you put together a a request for a what's called a letter of map amendment and you show that your house is above the base flood elevation by a certain amount and you you know, you have a surveyor or an engineer certify that. So, a lot of them have done have done the map amendments and some of them have just gotten uh spent the hundreds of dollars to get a surveyor to come out and give a statement certify that they're not within.

Yep. And then FEMA will issue the LOMA and then that that'll live, you know, they'll have that and we'll usually get a copy of it. They typ typically FEMA sends a copy to the town and then we can file it in the Oh, I didn't know. Some of them I just thought just sent it to their insurance company. Yeah, the insurance company should get it to, but typically the town, but they didn't they didn't do anything with FEMA. Some of them have done some of them had the map exclusions and some have just sent the paperwork to their insurance company. So, if the insurance company doesn't require a law, they won't go through that process. It's always Well, they do. They are several several Well, insurance companies might require somebody somewhere has looked at a map and said that house is too close to the water,

right? But what Jeremy So, some people So, if you did a survey and and you can prove on the survey that the the flood line is here and your house is out of the flood zone, then you don't have to do a lot. But what happens a lot of time is the flood line will be here and your house will be here, but the elevation of your house will be above the flood elevation number. So then you have to go through the low process to get that change because because you're within that flood line, but you're up high enough. So that's that's the process. But either way, it has to be all lakes not is flood is not flood level is not determined. That's what the map says, right?

So that's why it has to be certified by a surveyor and engineer, right? And typically the way because I've dealt with that too with but but it's a dam controlled lake and so they look at the elevation of the dam and the spillway. Well, there there is a level for the flood level, right? Right. They have to go through a lot of right. the insurance companies get squirly because the because there is no elevation published elevation of that. There's no published blood bud base flood elevation. There is no so that's why they're looking for those. Yeah, there is no there's no publish. Okay, you got it. So, we got some question. You got it. You're good.

All right. So discuss multiple dwellings regulation item C. Okay. So we had talked about or actually I think Willie it was you that brought up was the concept of kind of a family compound. Um and we talked about something we want to continue with.

Yeah. Well, we we had we had talked about talking about it further and so, you know, I I sent you a number of regulations primarily from Massachusetts, but a couple from the state as well of, you know, sort of multiple dwelling units allowed on properties on larger properties. Um, but when I look at your uh multifamily regulations, uh the way written currently provides for uh it's section 41548 in your regulations uh and it's it's a multif family dwelling rag which allows for multiple families in um I think it's currently high lake business town center residential town center and town gateway nothing in there says that it has to be one building it's just a multifamily regulation and there's criteria that you follow. It's a special permit right now. Um, nothing says one building. It could be a grouping of buildings. It could be multiple single family buildings the way it's written. Um, and so I wonder if that's something that the commission wants to pursue is allowing sort of multiple single family units on larger lots out in rural residential. Maybe there's a change that would would be able to be made to that multifamily dwelling regulation rather than reinventing the wheel since you've already got some standards. Um add a subsection that says, you know, in the rural residential zone, add some criteria, minimal lot size, things like that, distance between houses. We can we can play with that. But I just wanted to if the commission is interested in moving down this path, I wanted to kind of point you to the you do have a multif

family rag already and maybe it's as simple as amending it uh tweaking it to be specific to the rural residential use zone and then adding it to your use. So, just sort of a aside, how do you think, I'm just starting to think about this, but how do you think the new regulation that says we have to treat manufactured homes like single family? Does that open the door to trailer parks? I don't think it does because it says you have to treat them like single family. Oh, you mean if we if we went three single four single family? It

could. It could. Sure. I mean, you definitely, again, I think that's where you that's where you want a minimum lot size for this type of activity. Um, but yeah, it could. Do we currently allow that in our like town center gateway zones where we could where already we could have a Yeah, you do. But again, it's special permit. Yeah, you'd have to have minimum lot size and maximum number of structures. on that lot size.

Yeah. So, something to think about. We don't we don't have to move on that, you know, right now. Just give it some thought. Take a look at that section in your regulations. I think um take a look at your use table and if it's something we want to pursue, we can start to put some language together. What's the feeling? Pursue it or John, you got any feeling? wait for him to come up with something. No, I think we should pursue it. You think I don't know if we should pursue it right now,

but that's up to the commission. I guess I I think I think we need to really look at the regulations and then decide because I think the concept and the idea is is good, right? But I I think that we just have to look I just want to do some more thinking about how that might impact that might require that we have certain uses that we don't really want, right? Like if it's a trailer park or if it's a more dens. So I don't have an opinion at this moment. All right.

Could sit on it for a while. We've got plenty of other stuff floating out there right now and we've got um changes that we're going to need to make for 8002 so we can revisit this later. Yeah. I mean, you got to look at, you know, how how is it going to change the character character of the rural residential zone? Number one, how's it going to affect services, whether it's fire, ambulance, things like that? Height of the structures. There's a lot to look into if you're going to do a regulation. All right. I guess my mind too is on like what need is it serving? I guess it's serving more housing opportunities, right, for people. Um, or is it the more along the lines of a business, right?

I think the original conversation was about allowing family members to kind of construct individual housing units next to each other on, let's say, a family plot, right? Let's say you had a farm as 40 acres and, you know, mom and dad had their house and then they had four kids and they all want to kind of have a little bit of a a compound there and and we turned a little bit of a corner because enforcement of that's difficult. If one member decides that they want to sell their house, how do we deal with that? You know, you got a family member who says, "I don't want to live in this house anymore. I want to move out." Well, now are they forced to sell that house to somebody else in the family and how do we regulate that? So, just the the the concept of keeping it in a as a contained family unit owning these individual structures is kind of impractical. So that's

So as you're talking it's like I'm thinking maybe we look at it in our subdivision regulations or we look at it as maybe a conservation subdivision where they wouldn't need to have the frontage, you know, if if they were to, you know, so they could because because ultimately they could do that, right? if they had the right frontage and enough acres, they could subdivide the lot and give one to all their kids. Right. So, presuming that we're looking at this because maybe they don't have enough frontage or they something else. Maybe it's through subdivision and not zoning.

Yeah. And you have open space or I forget if it's called open space or conservation, but you have that type of subdivision already in your bags. And do we allow um and I'm sorry I I can go back and look, but do we allow um like a private road that's maybe a little bit more narrow, but to use frontage off of that versus a town road like in New Harford, we called them estate lots. So it was like a big long private driveway and you could use frontage off of that. So maybe that's something that we can can look at. Okay. There is property like that in Winchester. Yeah, just like the lake. There's several of them already.

Yeah, it's pretty large and has several structures on it. There's one up on Plat Hill next to the radio tower. There's three houses on that property, but it's a large property, right? And I think that was to do it. You have to have a large property. You can't have 10 acres. No, this is close to 50. Yeah. 60 here. All right. Well, what we Why don't we just put a pin in it for now? We'll get through all the other things we're working on. All right. In a couple months, good. Okay. Item seven, other business. We have any other business?

That was enough business. Come on, get ready. I think we're going to have a summer of this. talk to you about March 11th. Be on the lookout for an email from us on that. Um, and you've got two public hearings set for your next meeting. Uh, 309 Colbrook Road, that's a home and, uh, bachelor school. Uh, they're coming back for a modification of their special permit. Okay. Approval of the January 26. Make a motion to approve January 26 minutes. I got 28 on the minutes, but I I'm abstaining because I wasn't even there, but same.

I just want to make sure your dates are right because I'm the secretary. Oh, say 28 and the agenda is 26. Okay. Got a typo on it. Secretary. Oh, yeah. Because we had to cancel 26 or 28th. What was the right date? So, check the calendar. January. That's why. But I can't vote. So the 26th 26th 26th it was correct. It was the 28th and it was a special meeting. Oh no. It was the 28th because we moved it. Moved it because that's why the agenda I correct my motion to January 28th special meeting. Warren had it right.

I abstain too. I'll second it. And Jan Jan was at the meeting. She was Jan was here. Yes, she can vote. She can vote. No. All in favor? I I three. Got it. Okay. And then communications. Have we had enough communicating tonight? I think I communicate more than enough. Okay. I make a motion to adjourn the meeting. Second. All in favor everyone. job. You had a second, third, a fourth, and a fifth, I think.

All right. Thanks everybody. I know it was long. Thank you very much. That was good. Getting through all this mess, huh? We did it in two hours, too. Not bad.