Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

no it's not an application You won't cross this road. Yeah. What's that? Yes. Thank you. Yes. Okay, they asked, they requested an extension to that. At the meeting. I don't know. Maybe because of the other commercial business. Yeah, I mean, those kind of go hand in hand. Yeah, yeah. One person requested support. Yes. Thank you.

Good evening. It's 7 o'clock. I'm going to call to order the Town of Winchester Plain and Zoning Commission meeting for August 24th, 2026. We'll start with the roll call. Scott Eisenhower. Peter Varchin. Robert Platt. Adam Quagliaroli. Charlene Lavoie.

Arista Malaka.

John Cooney is absent and excused, and we're going to sit Charlene in his place. All right. Uh, agenda review. Anybody have anything?

I have one thing at the bottom of the agenda, future public hearings, PCC 2619. That should read 107 West Bloomfield, not 109. We're going to write on the agenda when it comes up for an actual public hearing. All right.

Now we have item number three, public comment. uh generally it's not related to agenda items but if you're here to talk about the commercial in the rr zone come forward anybody want to talk about it okay

I don't know too much about it. It just came to light last week that you guys were looking at possibly allowing commercial use in our zone. Uh, we have a similar situation next to my property. I'm sure you guys are aware of that. Um, and I, to start that precedent of having a commercial property in the residential zone, it's 80% of somewhere in Winston where if you could knock down a house and put in a commercial commercial use our, our, situation now, that driveway is 60 feet from our house. So how do you buffer that? There's no way to do that after the fact if that property went to commercial. Like I said, I don't know anything about their property there. I'm against the commercial use in the residential zone. And reading through the plan of conservation and development, it totally goes against everything that it says about the rural zone in that plan, which, you know, you as a board have adopted. There's a couple of sections that are devoted to the rural zone, and it never mentions, you know, one thing about commercial development being allowed there. It does say low impact, you know, residential development, like a housing development, but there's not a thing that refers to allowing commercial in that type RR zone. So like I said, I wish I was a little more prepared tonight. I didn't realize we were going to be able to speak on this site because it was on the agenda. So, but I'll.

Well, gentlemen, we don't, but it's not an item of business. It was a discussion we're going to have. Right, right.

Yeah.

All right. Appreciate that. As a side note, with the court case that happened up there, and that being let go to the side, there's commercial use on that property happening now with no permits. There's nothing. That was allowed by the town and the court, really by the town, by letting that court case go. So now the same thing is occurring with no special use permits and just being let to happen. And now what the recourse is for that, there is none because it was let go. So just for, you know, I don't know the reasons behind that, but thank you. Thank you.

Anybody else want to speak for anything? Okay, saying none. So item four, public hearings for PZC-26-15 has been continued until September 14th. So we won't discuss that. Number five, old business. I don't think we have any. So then we go on to number six, new business, PZC-26-20, applicant Ann Bowen, location 45 Center Street, town zone, town center, proposed summary view, middle housing, convert mixed use to two residential units. You're here.

I'm here. It's 48.

48. 48.

It's 48.

So I just know the dates. Six, seven years ago, I bought the property and bought it as a two-family. When I converted the electric over, not that Eversource is a source of anything, they told me both the upstairs and the downstairs were residential, so I rented it as two apartments. All the utilities are separate. They both have front and back doors. I guess the house probably built this two-family because that's the way it looks. And it wasn't until I'm just now putting it on the market to sell it. Amanda Blosky is the realtor, and we're listening as two family. She said it's town center mixed use, and I didn't know that, so I'm here just requesting that be made, I guess, town center residential, two family.

So I guess what are we required to do tonight?

So this is a case of, I mean, it's really a paperwork thing. I think as Anne mentioned, I think we all discovered that it was on the books as a mixed use. And when we touched base with the assessor's office, it's in their records as a mixed use. It had some commercial space on the ground floor at some point in the past. We're not totally sure what the time frame is on that. But in order to get it right, it needed to come here. This is the town center zone, but as you'll recall, back in July, we approved new mixed use and middle housing regulations, which would allow these conversions from mixed use to anywhere between two and nine units. As a summary review, which for your purposes is essentially a site plan, we had some design criteria in those regulations, and I'll pull a picture of the structure up in a minute so you can see what it looks like. So it is essentially, for your purposes, it's very similar to a site plan. If you wanted to act on it tonight, if there are questions that you have that you need answers to, we can get those for you and come back to the next meeting, but that's what we're going to do. From our standpoint, I think I covered it in my staff report, it's got landscaping, it's got a tree out in front, it's got foundation plantings, It kind of checks all the boxes off in that regulation that we adopted a while back. I'm going to go ahead and throw it on the screen just so you can see the front of it. That's the front of it as it appeared a couple of years ago. i think it's pretty much the same as it is as it stands today i don't think it doesn't have the yellow flag so this has all several utilities yeah water yeah it's well the water

It's town water, so it's town water, town sewer.

How many meters for town water?

I think it's all one building, and as a landlord, I pay the water and sewer. I also pay for trash because there are two single people living there. It seems silly for them to both have trash barrels for their one bag a week. But there's separate electric meters. Downstairs is oil. Upstairs is electric.

So it seems like it meets everything. Yeah, from where I sit, it meets all your requirements. So do we need a draft motion for this? We have one of those.

That's in the new business.

This is the public hearing.

It's not public hearing. It's under new business. Oh, OK, yeah.

Okay, I make a motion to approve application, or first of all, before we go any further, anybody here have any comments? Anybody in the audience have any comments? It's not a public hearing. It's not a public hearing. Okay, so everybody here is good? Okay. So I make a motion to approve application number 26-20, summary review, owner Ann Bowen, address 48 Center Street, Zone Town C. proposal summary review for middle housing conversion from mixed use to two family for the following reasons. This application is considered consistent with the town's planning and conservation and development. This application meets the criteria and standards of section 415-47.1 middle housing and mixed use development. This application is consistent with the provisions of the special assessment public act 25-1 with the following conditions. in evaluating this application, the plan is under commission and has relied upon information provided by the applicant. And if such information is subpoenaed, proves to be false, deceptive, incomplete, and or inaccurate, this permit shall be modified, suspended, or revoked. Okay, all in favor? Okay. so i don't have to do anything so now we're on to item number seven other business number a discussion in marina related regulations

no changes from the last time we talked about this a couple of weeks ago other than what we had discussed at that meeting a couple of weeks ago so i'm going to go ahead and get up on the screen for you just give me a minute you're moving faster than i am tonight arista had emailed the group with some suggested changes we made those changes there were a couple of Typographical errors, thank you, Willie, for pointing those out. So I fixed that between what you saw on Friday and tonight, and that was emailed out earlier today. Definitions, just as we talked about a couple weeks ago. So I'll leave those up if you want to read through them.

Can I just ask, where did the... the three consecutive months. Was that something new that was discussed last month?

No, that was discussed a while back. It could be three, it could be two, it could be however you want to do it. I think the thinking was if it's going to sit there for a while, maybe we screen it and have the ability to do a special permit process or something along those lines.

So we're thinking if it's just there for the summer months, we don't want, we want to treat it different than if it's, I'm not, I'm not going to, I'm it's fine. I was just wondering what, cause I don't remember talking about it. I don't know if there was something that came last month.

So one of the things that came up and correct me if I'm wrong, anybody, one of the things that came up was if the trailers are sitting around for a while, maybe we want to be able to put a fence around them. but our landscaping requirements and our parking requirements wouldn't necessarily force a fence to go around those trailers if they're there for a long duration. But if it sits there for more than three months, so what's voting season? May until September, right? June, July, August, three months. If things are being stored for a long period, then it's a special permit and then the commission can request a fence or some other school. So that I think makes sense, but I mean, if it's,

if they're repairing and servicing boats for two months, just like any other use, they'd probably still be still wanting to come in for a special use permit. It's not allowed, and then on day 91, you need a special use permit.

So let me reread it because I want to make sure that we're all on the same page. So it really, the three consecutive months thing, should only pertain to the outside storage of boats and personal watercraft. Not the repair, the servicing and all those things should be a major, no matter what, the three months should pertain to the storage, the length of time that something's being stored. So if we need to change the verbiage a little bit or change the punctuation, I wanna get that right.

So, I mean, so they can store it for two months, take it away for a month, bring it back.

That's not gonna happen.

I think, I mean, I don't know why we would need that. If they're storing. Outside storage. Outside storage. Regardless. Yeah. Okay. And just get rid of it for a period of exceeding three months and both that and then you have it again. outside storage of boats in Pernaltova under minor.

Would you want to strip out outside storage of boats from minor? Or would you want to put that in?

Less than three months.

Yeah, right. That was the thinking, was if it's a shorter period.

So it should be three months per year.

that provocative because then you take it away for sure if that's if that three months in a calendar year that then i'm okay with that okay that's not really a long duration is it well then that's where it's a site plan versus a special use permit or do we just say outside storage of boats and their trailers is major no matter what the duration is i mean could you say that the major

marina services major also will include marina services minor.

No, because that's a different issue. Yeah. Right.

Right. We're trying to.

Yeah, separate them. Lower intensity stuff.

Right.

Or maybe we get rid of the three month thing and just say temporary outside storage of boats and promotional watercrafts isn't minor.

Define temporary. Yeah. I always struggle with temporary.

Temporary is an issue.

I mean, I worked out of a temporary office building that had been there for 33 years before it got ripped down.

Because you've got to set a time limit, period.

So that was my thinking on that. But I mean, if you'd rather have outside storage just be under major and require a special permit, I think that's okay.

I usually go by temporary under the building code because people used to put in the hoop houses. And I would sign off for zoning, but the building official would say if it's there for longer than six months, six months and under is temporary. Anything over six months, it's a permanent structure because you know they never move them. That's why it's a temporary definition.

So I think it's less than three months per calendar year. Okay.

And I think, how do you enforce that too? Is it by boat or is it by an area? So if I see an area and a boat's there, the clock starts ticking. If there's a boat there still after three months, I don't care what boat it is, you've been storing something there for more than three months. Does that make sense? It does.

And I mean, I think to your point, enforcement of that's going to be challenging anyway. Yeah.

So it would be a designated storage area, right? Right. So any neighbor could take a picture and see a boat stored there. That's the designated area for storage.

Well, but I think we're overthinking that because... Hold on one second.

So there's a problem in the... We're discussing the minor right now.

Well, we're sort of discussing both at the same time.

Okay, so...

retail sales of boats that boat may sit around for six months or longer does that count as that boat did some storage i was going to bring that up too so we have parking as a principal use in rural did we change that to allow that in this zone yes and we had a major and a minor parking lot yeah so i think If it's storage, it's storage. And if it's parking, it's parking, right? And I think in itself that draws a line, but I think the zoning enforcement officer could say, yeah, this is a parking lot. versus these are the boats that are stored. They're not weathertight. They're not there with no trailers.

Well, I think the struggle is that over there, the use is going to fluctuate. In the off-season, it's going to be boat storage. And in the on-season, it's going to be a parking lot. Half, anyway.

So I think they're going to have to get a major.

He's going to have to get a major and a minor regardless.

So let's just eliminate that from the minor. Okay. Does that make sense? The minor.

storage of boats and personal watercraft so they just have to get a special use permit for any storage but if you have a brand new boat there and it sits there for six months is that storage or is that something else i don't think it is if it's active i mean personally my feeling is if it's actively for sale if it's actively being marketed it's to me it fits under the retail sales it's not being stored it's just waiting for somebody who's

Just going to remove that sentence.

Yeah, so I think the idea would be for under minor, we would just remove the outside storage of boats. That's that portion altogether. And then under major, just going to remove the time period.

That certainly makes it easier from an enforcement standpoint. You store them there, you fence it up.

So were we adding... Yeah, I'll pull up... ...representational sales?

so we at the last meeting we discussed recreational sales however i think the commission at that time felt it was better to add marina services major and minor to town center to deal with the situation that's active because if we go with recreational vehicle sales that could be a lot of different things except for marina services

Oh, it's under minor. Okay, never mind. It's under minor. It's under minor. Gotcha. Okay, I'm good.

So then on the use table... which added major and minor marina services, special use permit in, or major special use permit in Highland Lake Business and Town Center, minor site plan in Highland Lake Business and Town Center. And then, as we had also discussed, parking lot small scale site plan HLP, large scale site plan HLP. Yes, yes. And then we had also discussed, where's the warehouse? What page is that on? Warehouse.

Personal storage. Personal storage, yeah.

I don't like business. Yeah.

Yeah, there's a storage personal mini warehouse. I thought, I guess I guessed that. You handed it in, and then you struck it out. I struck it out. You said probably not on purpose. You probably just hit the wrong line. We had talked about putting in personal and mini storage warehouses in HLB because of that one building on the corner that put up their sign, Jeff stopped them. But in conversations, the commission seemed to agree that it was a reasonable use for that area. So we keep it in there, we take it out, it's up to you all.

The question that I have is the storage personal and mini warehouse. Does that include outside storage?

It does not. No. You have an outdoor storage business, outdoor limited.

That would not include any outdoor storage, correct? No.

All right. And it's a special use permit, so you could dictate that as a condition of approval.

So can I just say that I don't necessarily think that use would be harmful up there, but I think we have such limited HLB zones. Do we want to waste any of that? I don't say waste. That's the wrong word. Do we want to devote or dedicate any of it to that use versus some other recreational type commercial uses since there's such limited... How did that get in there to start with?

I saw him hanging the sign. Yeah.

Where?

At LaPointe's flooring. I guess that might make sense over there. Yeah, I think his idea is to capitalize on the soon-to-be units at the old nursing home.

Yeah, I mean, there's probably a need for storage in the Lake neighborhood anyway just because of the size of the lots.

Let's bring up the marina again just look at that one more time In the first paragraph do we need a bunch of and ors?

Because it looks like the qualifiers are dockage and mooring, or is it dockage and or mooring? Do we really have to be pedantic about it and have a bunch of and-ors in there where we see the ands? Oh, I see.

Yeah, and or mooring of both. Yeah.

Oh, wait a minute. Mooring. Define mooring.

I mean, to me, you're connected to a mooring ball. You're not attached to a dock.

Okay. Back when Don got the permits to put the docks out, the mooring balls were removed from his permit. Okay. Because they used to have a lot of mooring balls out there. And to swap off where the mooring balls go, and you get the docks.

So we can take the mooring out?

Yes, let's take the mooring out.

Okay. That solves Adam's and or problem.

There's just one spot. That one. That's just one spot.

Like I said, you're all moving faster than I am tonight. Sale and or rental of supplies.

I suppose you're right. We should probably do that once in a while.

boats in or personal watercraft well i don't it's uh they're the term arena should not include accessory usage as a sale and i don't think you need to work because they're accessory maintenance and repair i think that's inclusive they're not including this and that shall include accessory uses such as oh

It's just the first sentence.

And a station for fueling the boats.

And then boats and or personal

I said, what do we need the Andor for?

Well, so I guess the question is, never mind.

The fueling of boats and personal watercraft. Fueling of boats?

Yeah, I mean, I don't know that it's necessary. Dockage.

I mean, if they ever got rid of their gas, would they still be considered a marina?

Right. It would be, sure. Right.

So if this is and, what might they want?

Yeah. You wouldn't have the fueling station here out of the dock, I would think. Right?

What was that? No. Sorry, a couple of notes.

So that's not going to be an Android. Not everybody gets gas at that place.

So I mean, really, the fueling is really accessory, right? So with the marina, that provides fee or compensation for the dockage of boats and personal watercraft.

And I think we added at one point and along the way, we added the fueling into that definition because it's there. Because it's already there, so we don't necessarily need to put it in the definition, I suppose. It's been approved.

You want to word it for sale of fuel? Instead of fueling?

I don't think we even need any of it, right? An area that provides for a fee or compensation of dockage of boats and personal watercraft. And within that, as a primary use, fueling I think would be the accessory use to that.

Well, and that fuel station was a major discussion on this board, I know.

We could put a sentence in there that as an accessory use, a marina may include a station for fueling. Right.

Well, I mean, that's already in there under Marina Services Major, the fueling thing. Why do we have to put it up?

Because that would be on a separate site.

Yeah, it would be on a separate site. Okay. But I also think it was originally in there, and then we wanted to include it in the main Marina definition because of its actual location.

Because of location type. It's at the Marina. It's at the Marina on the water side. Yeah, right.

I think it looks good like it is.

I do, too.

Every time we look at this, we change it.

Every time. It's been a rough one. Well, so, you know, we can put it there as it is right now. We can set up a hearing date. When do we want to get this in front of you and open up a hearing? I would probably suggest a second meeting in September. September 28th?

Yeah.

Okay, so we'll set it up and we'll open a hearing on the 28th.

I get this every time I sit under that thing. I think that's great. Do you need a motion for that? Every meeting. Over here. But, I mean, I don't get this. Right here. I'm not sure that's far enough.

We have code 360, right? Have we surveyed other areas, other towns that have existing regulations?

It's kind of where I originally came up with the Marina Services as an accessory. And then we narrowed it down to kind of just stick with the existing uses that we've got. So, yes. But we've made changes there.

I'll try it.

So the only question, just because I know the property, is one of these properties or two of these properties are going to have to have the...

service is minor for the long-term storage but they have residential houses on them is that going to fit into this well the residential houses get to stay there the pre-existing legal so they get to just stay there and whatever they come up with for a plan is going to have to just fit around those uses if they want to keep why it's a special use permit so that they can be creative with their design and you can be creative with your requirements to some degree.

I guess the other question is have you shown these to Eric at all?

I think I emailed him to him last week but I need to double check that. But he knows we're in the works and he knows he's getting a copy of it if I haven't sent it to him already. I talked to him on Thursday.

Alright. Not overly concerned?

Not overly concerned. All right. No, he's actually kind of happy to hear that the commission wanted to go a simpler path than what we had originally discussed. Because Eric and Jeff and I sat down a while ago and discussed kind of a new section to deal with this.

Yes.

And he was okay with that. And then when I told him that we were going to just define it and add some uses to the use table, he was more okay with that idea. So...

And that's the first thing was getting out of control. Makes it a little easier.

Much too cumbersome.

Yeah. So anybody else got any changes, thoughts on this marina thing? We're good to go for the public hearing? All right. Can always change it again if we do not.

Thanks, Jeremy. That's been a lot of work.

That's okay. Thank you all. So now for the storage and the HLV zone, are we going to do that? Is that going to be something that we're going to have to have a hearing on or what?

Yeah, we can wrap this all up in one hearing. I would think so. Changes to the use table and changes to the definition section.

All right. So you have some concerns about the business? No. All right.

No. I mean, no. No.

Is it yourself? All right, so let's put them both together. We'll get this done.

Thank you.

Now let's go on to... for the public hearing, or we just... No, we don't have an invitation yet, so I need to put that in, and then we'll just schedule it. Okay. So, item B, discussion of commercial type uses in the RR zone.

So, based on our conversation last week, I was going to let you lead this discussion, sir.

So... This business is in the RR zone. It started out with one applicant and as we start looking and looking, there are many people with businesses that are hiding out in the RR zone. There is a much larger wood processor hiding out in the RR zone with a commercial type wood processor. There are construction companies that have hit out in the RR zone. There are landscapers and just a lot of things as we were dealing into this, businesses that have hit out and no neighbors have complained ever, there's never been a complaint and they've just operated like that. And now we have an issue with one person that we need to figure out what to do.

So classic slippery slope.

Very much so. I thought I was going to just take off forever.

Start getting bigger every day.

I mean, it got bigger and bigger as it went along. So it's like some of these people have been in business for their whole life, some others for at least 10 years. So how do we handle something like this? It started out as a little snowball and just got to be a big giant one. Now, you said there are some businesses that are allowed in the RR zone. Yeah.

You do have some commercial uses that are allowed in the RR. And I'm just going to pull the use table up again. So it's not unprecedented to... look at a commercial operation in the rural residential. Just scrolling through, veterinary hospitals, banquet facilities, country inn, commercial greenhouse or nursery, kennel, roadside oriented limited retail enterprise, commercial stables. Uh, these are public or institutional uses, but sort of commercial recreation, congregate residents, daycare, public rec facility, public safety facility, utility facility. So I, you know, there are certain commercial uses that are allowed in the residential zone, all by special use permit. I think if the commission wanted to, we could do some research on. how other towns handle this, and on large lots where you have the ability to put unit uses in the middle of the lot with a big enough buffer and all that kind of stuff, there might be certain uses that are somewhat consistent with rural residential areas. We're not talking about town center residential. We're not talking about town single family or any of those areas where you've got small lots. I think you're probably looking at five to 10 acre lots minimum for some of those activities. I think personally, I think of activities that are supportive of residential uses like landscapers or, you know, obviously we've been discussing wood processing facilities, people that are selling wood to homeowners to burn the wood in their homes. So there might be a path forward there if the commission's interested. We can do some digging about what our other area towns are doing. Rista might have some ideas just for having worked at the POG. If there's an interest, we can research this out a little bit more.

Well, my opinion might be a little unpopular, but I think that Mr. Steve brought up a pretty good point, that the purpose of zoning is protecting the uses that are allowed, right? And so we do allow for certain commercial uses that I think make sense. You know, they're commercial by nature, but they're still that residential feel, farming, you know, childcare centers, recreation, different things. I think when you, and I'm gonna preface this by saying I wasn't at the original public hearing for the wood processing. I'm not opining on this application or anything that's gonna be proposed. I really haven't looked into it. But in general, if we're going to allow a landscaper, or a mason or a something, right? I believe it has to be connected to a home occupation. That person should have to live there just like the neighbors have to live there. They should have to live with the noise and the condition of that property just like the neighbors do because it's still residential. And it should be owner occupied running that business. There are, and I worked in New Hartford, we had some pretty good regulations for contractor shop and storage that allowed a little bit more higher density than a home occupation. You know, so if the guy with his landscaping trailer or something along those lines. We had a backhoe tool truck guy that brought his truck home every day, right? And so we also had, you know, regulations for the parking of commercial vehicles so i think there's a couple ways we could go about it but i really don't think we should go down this line of just pure commercial uses in a rural residential zone unless it really makes sense for that use to be in a residential zone and i you know i think the uses that we're starting to talk about and then i wasn't here last meeting If we wanna allow them, they should be connected to a residence, in my opinion. And there are some good regulations out there that allow that.

Why don't you take a look, Jeremy? I mean, I think that's a good proposal, that he take a look, put something together, and bring what other communities are doing on this.

What are the other types of uses you guys were talking about? other than landscaping or construction?

We haven't talked about it other than this application.

I started exploring and I just did a quick Google search, not Google search, Facebook search for wood and discovered a very large wood processor. And then thinking different things about what have you seen out there and you know there was different businesses that basically are home occupation because the guys take their equipment home when they're not working. So this whole thing just kind of grew and grew and now it's like how do we, you've got people that have been in the business for, like I said, forever and you can't tell them, how do you tell them you can't do this anymore? You know, in my mind it grew pretty big and I think the whole board's going to have to figure this out. Well, what, how we're going to handle this and what's coming forth because it's a much larger subject than we thought it was.

If we do start changing things like that, how does that affect our plan of conservation development? It's approved by the COG and the state. I mean, that was done six years or so ago. And that's pretty plain. Mr. Steve had stated, you know, there's no mention of commercial development. Right, and we need to look. And if we start adding uses, you know, how does it affect that with the state and the COG? Those type things. That's my concern. Mm-hmm.

And I also, I don't want to use my words carefully here because I'm not suggesting people intentionally violate zoning regulations, right? Not at all. But our zoning enforcement officer only has so much capacity, right? And so if there are people hiding out that aren't causing any problems, we're not going to, hunt them down and close their business. If they've been there for 10 or 15 years without us knowing.

They've been good neighbors, obviously.

Yeah, and if they change or something happens, we still have the enforcement tools to fix that, regardless of how long they've been there. I don't think just because people have not followed the zoning regulations and have gotten away with it should be a reason for us to change our zoning regulations.

that's a good point and if they're getting away with it then they're doing everything right and you know that's where i'm at how do we deal with this until they don't right well and maybe we don't deal with we have an application before you you heard the first part of the hearing last two weeks ago it's going to continue in september and maybe you just you know had a good discussion i think with the applicant at that time we game that out and see where that goes and I mean, that's the other answer, right? Is deal with the application in front of you and let that process play out.

What do you mean deal with it? If it doesn't fall, I mean, it doesn't fall under any.

Well, we're not talking about that application. But what I'm saying is you have an active application.

let that process play out because we haven't really got an application what we have is a request to change our regulations right to make an amendment to the regulations for that one specific use right and just like the other commercial uses i think we have to carefully consider whether that makes sense in you know a residential zone and again i'm not i apologize but with no intention of making any determination on that you know is it closer to a logging operation or you know a commercial use like we have to use our you know discretion when we're listening to what they're proposing to determine if we feel that's appropriate in a residential zone or not and not just make a blanket and the hard part is every one of them grow and when they grow that's when they start to stick out Well, and so maybe there's conditions or regulations that you put on for those sort of things. And like I said, the ones that are doing it and getting by, if big problems are causing the trouble, then we do enforcement, right? Then we'll know about it.

Anybody have anything else to say? Charlene, you're good? Anything else, Peter? No, I don't. That might be so.

Adam? I think the ones that we had in the past have been brazen, right? We found out about it because neighbors have spoken up about it or the community has spoken up about it. And to your point, it's not like we go out there looking for them. I think... I think we should lean heavily on our plan of conservation for the rural residential and then consider whether we want to proactively allow some of these items. There are a few case studies that we've had since I've been on the board where it's like, okay, this was done wrong, right? Or could have been done better. And I'd probably take a look at that and just weigh heavily on the plan of conservation. Whether it's in harmony with the rural residential, I do feel like some people can buy a lot of property and do many things without disturbing anyone else and still preserve the value of the land. That's it.

Any comments from our zoning official?

at your discretion, do whatever is decided. I wonder if a home occupation got brought up a little bit. I wonder if there's a way to look at that as a major and a minor. That probably wouldn't require a wholesale change to the POCV since we already allow it, sort of tweaking it, but I think looking into what other towns do and what's allowed and working is definitely there.

If Jeremy can get us some information on that, it would be nice to have.

I'll do some homework. In the meantime, obviously we've got an application that needs to play itself out, so we'll continue down that path. I'll do some homework and come back to you.

I asked about ECO 360. Do we have a login that we can use? Can you share a login for us? I don't know. You must have a town login. A municipal login? I thought it registered.

There's different levels of login. So there's the freebie, I think, where you can log in. And then there's, you probably have a specific login that's for the Winchester State. I'm not logging in. Well, I know because I do all those things.

No, I mean, I pull it up and just search it for anyone.

You're talking about the multi-code, and I have a multi-code account through my company that I can do the search.

I don't know... Yeah, I can bring up any towns.

Right, individually.

But is there like power users where you could search multiple towns at once? Yes, I can do that. Okay.

We cannot do that. You cannot do that, but let me look into how we can, if we can get you some version of that. I'll look into that. All right, so no more discussion.

Let's go on to item eight, approval of minutes for the August 10th, 2026 regular meeting.

I make a motion to approve minutes of the August 10th, 2026 planning and zoning meeting.

Second.

All in favor?

I abstain.

Any communication? From anybody? From staff? No? Nothing? Okay. I make a motion to adjourn. Second. All in favor?

Yes.

Oh, I did not second that. Both of them.

Is that or a juke?