Anita Mancini

The regular Board of Selectmen meeting included updates on communications, specifically regarding a plan for private beach associations. Public comment featured a resident expressing concerns over a recent appointment of an individual involved in a potential lawsuit against the town, citing it as not in the town's best interest due to ongoing legal fees, and inquired about the status of the Chan Heg landing dispute. Another resident spoke regarding their record and commitment to the zoning commission during the phase one rewrite, defending their rigorous review process. The board also addressed scheduling an appointment for Jackie Moos to the Sound View Commission and amending the agenda to include minutes from a Special Board of Selectmen meeting on January 12th. Actions included approving minutes for multiple prior meetings from January 5th, 16th, and 20th, and a budget review meeting on January 5th. Several appointments were handled for the Affordable Housing Commission, including naming Sean Mastriion to a permanent seat and Kent Gertie as an alternate, following discussions about commission structure. The board also began reviewing applications for the Parks and Recreation Commission.

The meeting commenced with an introductory segment confirming the members present and absent, including the temporary appointment of an alternate member. The public comment period featured several residents expressing concerns primarily regarding transparency and process related to a specific property matter at 43 Smith Neck Road, which had previously resulted in litigation. Concerns included the need for public review of revised plans following a legal settlement and the relevance of input from the Connecticut River Gateway Commission. The Commission proceeded to approve a special permit for 250 Shore Road, subject to nine stated conditions. Subsequently, the Commission adopted a settlement proposal for the 43 Smith Neck Road matter, citing material reduction in site impact, a 3,000 square foot reduction in home size, moving the home back 35 feet, and added vegetation. The meeting agenda was modified to include the election of officers. A public hearing was held for the proposed adoption of comprehensive revised zoning regulations (Case 2511), which aims to modernize the town's zoning framework; this hearing was explicitly kept open until the February 9th meeting. Another public hearing for Case 2510 regarding an extension for an educational institution use was also noted.

The meeting addressed several key items. New business included a discussion regarding Amtrak's plan to increase security along its right-of-way and designating the Planning Commission as the town contact for communications concerning these activities. The commission also discussed a lot line modification proposal involving the merger of undersized and nonconforming parcels, contingent upon review by legal counsel regarding the transfer deeds. Additionally, there was a discussion regarding the ongoing implications of new state housing legislation (the Plan of Conservation and Development context) and the proposal to form an interdepartmental task force involving Planning, Zoning, and the Board of Selectmen to coordinate the town's response.

The meeting commenced with a motion to add the reading of the minutes from the last regular meeting and the site walk agenda under old business. New business involved several applications: Application 25-5 for creating secondary access to Duck River Cemetery for funerals during historic bridge replacement, with discussion focusing on site walk logistics and marking the proposed dirt road. Application 25-6 concerns removal, filling, grading, and deck replacement at 661 Bispine Boulevard, with site walk scheduled for April 15th. Application 25-7 involves replacing an old shed with a larger, pre-made shed at 9 Duck River Lane, including necessary foundation work with anchor screws due to flood zone concerns. Application 25-8, an Eagle Scout project, proposes building a simple bridge over a marshy trail behind the high school, with a site visit scheduled for 5:00 p.m. on April 15th. Application 25-9 requests renewal of a permit for vegetation removal and herbicidal treatment of fragmites, and management of Ailanthus trees near wetlands at 316 Ferry Road. A state-approved pesticide application in Rogers Lake was also noted, though the Commission's jurisdiction is limited. Old business addressed the highly involved Application for 308-1 Mile Creek Road, LLC, regarding material placement and soil clearing within the 100-foot wetland boundary, discussing drafted motions (approval/denial) and specific conditions related to roadway material (replacing millings with wash crush stone), debris removal notification protocols, berm staking and remediation methods, and silt erosion control requirements. A procedural exchange occurred regarding public comment closure and discussion structure for this application.

The board meeting addressed Case 25-13 C 125 Shore Road, which involves requesting variances for the demolition of existing structures and the construction of a new FEMA compliant dwelling, an inground pool, and a detached garage within the Connecticut River and Tidal Water area, situated in the AE1 flood zone. Key discussion points included compliance with coastal site plan review standards, specifically regarding the removal of impervious surfaces (like the existing driveway) and relocation of the septic system outside the 100 ft review area, which received favorable initial comments from the Connecticut D agency. There was significant deliberation regarding the variances requested for the Connecticut River setbacks (100 ft) and coastal resource setbacks (200 ft), focusing on the application of the Coastal Jurisdiction Line (CJL) versus the wetlands themselves for buffer calculations. The applicant presented updated plans showing a reduction in impervious coverage and the relocation of the septic system, though the proposed building footprint slightly increased the coverage within the 100-foot area compared to the existing structure. The proposal also emphasized that the new construction would be FEMA compliant, unlike the current structure, despite being closer to the water, due to elevated floor heights.