SC20996 - High Watch Recovery Center, Inc. v. Planning & Zoning Commission ("This appeal requires us to revisit the recurrent and sometimes elusive distinction in land use law between a permissible intensification and an impermissible expansion of a valid preexisting nonconforming use. The defendant, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Kent (commission), denied the special permit application submitted by the plaintiff, High Watch Recovery Center, Inc., to build a 2100 square foot greenhouse on property located at 47 Carter Road in the town of Kent (subject property) in connection with the plaintiff's nonconforming use of the subject property for agricultural therapy. Applying the factors set forth in Zachs v. Zoning Board of Appeals, 218 Conn. 324, 332, 589 A.2d 351 (1991), the Appellate Court concluded that the installation of the greenhouse, also known as a hoop house, was a permissible intensification because the greenhouse would be located on land already devoted to the nonconforming use and would not change the nature, character, or kind of use involved. See High Watch Recovery Center, Inc. v. Planning & Zoning Commission, 223 Conn. App. 424, 449–51, 308 A.3d 1060 (2024). We disagree and conclude that there is substantial evidence in the record to support the commission's determination that the hoop house would be an illegal expansion of the nonconforming use because it would change the character of that use from seasonal to year-round. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Appellate Court.")