Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Acorn Hill Lighting topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission votes 3–2 to send Acorn Hill lighting proposal to TPZ for 8-24 review, conditions attached

Commission on the Use of Publicly Owned Properties · June 23, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After public comment and hours of discussion about history, environmental concerns and costs, the commission voted 3–2 to recommend the Board of Selectmen refer the Acorn Hill lighting project to the Town Plan and Zoning Commission for review under Conn. Gen. Stat. §8-24, conditioned on formalizing the town’s relationship with Bethwood regarding lighting.

The Commission on the Use of Publicly Owned Properties voted 3–2 on June 22 to recommend the Board of Selectmen refer the proposed Acorn Hill field lighting project to the Town Plan and Zoning Commission for review under Connecticut General Statutes §8-24. The motion, as amended, asks the Board of Selectmen to refer the proposal for the mandatory 8-24 review and conditions that any approval be accompanied by a formalized relationship between the town and Bethwood covering use and operations of lighting.

The vote followed more than an hour of public comment from residents and league representatives and extended discussion among commissioners about process, legal history and safeguards. Anoka Farooqi, a Woodbridge resident, urged the commission to seek an integrated vision that preserves natural areas while improving recreational access. “Imagine a community connected by trails, open spaces, and shared destinations,” Farooqi said, urging restoration and public stewardship of Acorn Hill rather than its industrialization.

Bob Hill, who said he lives at 68 Acorn Hill Road, told the commission he had submitted a packet of documents and raised questions about zoning and finances, including an estimate that lighting could cost “$380,000” and concerns about resulting debt service and electricity costs. He also pointed to zoning language he said prohibits floodlights and urged due diligence on schedules and field usage.

Representatives of Bethwood said the league has local support: Chris Bartel, a Bethwood board member from Bethany, reported 319 signatures backing the proposal and thanked the commission for listening.

Commissioners debated whether a referral to TPZ implicitly favored moving the project forward. The chair and several members argued an 8-24 review is a required technical step for improvements on town-owned property that would allow TPZ to evaluate traffic, environmental impacts and regulatory compliance. Other members said the commission should go further by recommending formal memoranda of understanding with Bethwood, specifying insurance and operational responsibilities, curfews and negotiating processes to protect neighbors and wildlife.

The final motion read aloud at the meeting recommended that the Board of Selectmen formally refer the proposed Acorn Hill lighting project to the Town Plan and Zoning Commission for review under section 8-24 of the Connecticut General Statutes, on the condition that the town formalize its relationship with Bethwood regarding lighting. Commissioners agreed that additional recommendations — including encouraging the Board of Selectmen to facilitate compromise between parties and suggesting curfew and operational safeguards — would be included in the commission’s written report to the Board of Selectmen.

The chair said the 1995 minutes and a summary of public comments would be included in the factual portion of the recommendation; the packet forwarded to the Board of Selectmen will outline the history, the 1995 language, relevant zoning information and the public comments received. The motion passed 3–2. The commission noted the 8-24 review and subsequent TPZ process will include public hearings and a more detailed presentation of technical and regulatory information.

Next steps: the commission will deliver its written recommendation and supporting packet to the Board of Selectmen, which may refer the matter to TPZ for the 8-24 review; TPZ’s review and any subsequent special-exception request could require additional public hearings and a Board of Selectmen vote to implement or override TPZ guidance.