Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Zoning Text Amendment topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Shelton planning panel advances zoning text amendment to allow fitness centers and medical offices in Office Park District

Shelton Planning and Zoning Commission · March 12, 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

The Shelton Planning and Zoning Commission advanced a text amendment March 11 to Article 24 (Schedule A) to permit certain fitness centers and to add 'offices and related services' to medical/dental uses in the Office Park District; the commission set conditions on definitions and staff review procedures.

The Shelton Planning and Zoning Commission voted March 11 to advance a text amendment that would change permitted uses in the Office Park District (OPD), adding fitness centers to line 16a and inserting "medical and dental clinics and offices and related services" for line 41 of Article 24, Schedule A of the city's zoning regulations. The public hearing on application 2606, filed by Dominic Thomas for TJT Capital Investments LLC, opened and closed the same evening after the applicant presented the proposed changes and no members of the public signed up to comment.

Attorney Thomas, representing the applicant, told the commission the amendment is intended to reflect how several OPD parcels developed historically and to provide flexibility for existing office buildings that already house medical and service-type tenants. "I think it's a reasonable change to allow some flexibility for the office buildings," he said, describing long-standing medical offices and classes such as Pilates and yoga that currently occupy OPD buildings.

The change would convert two OPD use lines from an 'x' (not permitted) to a 'p' (permitted) status: fitness centers (line 16a) and medical/dental clinics and offices with related services (line 41). Commissioners voiced two recurring concerns during the discussion: how to define "limited" versus "full service" fitness centers so the change cannot be applied too broadly, and whether on-site parking would be adequate if full-service fitness centers were allowed. Chair Robert Christian noted that staff would perform initial screening of permitted uses and could refer problematic applications to the commission.

Commissioners and staff agreed to two process safeguards: (1) staff will not review applications seeking approval under the new line 16a until the commission adopts a clarified definition for the relevant fitness-center terminology; and (2) language was amended to add "offices and related services" to line 41 so that existing medical and dental practitioners would not be left technically out of compliance. Staff was tasked with preparing a resolution reflecting those edits and with clarifying sentence fragments in the draft resolution (for example replacing phrasing that implied staff had been 'directed' when draft materials were prepared in advance).

A motion to approve the amendment (with the edits discussed) was moved by Commissioner Amato and seconded; a roll call recorded the following responses: Robert Christian — aye; Commissioner Kelly — aye; Commissioner Motto — aye; Commissioner Harger — aye; Commissioner Apple — no; Commissioner McGee — aye. The clerk's record also shows the phrase "Motion passes 5 2 1," which is inconsistent with the six named roll-call responses in the transcript; the roll call recorded in the transcript reflects five ayes and one no. The resolution sets the adoption effective date, if approved in final form, as 8:00 a.m. on March 27, 2026.

Next steps: staff will prepare the formal resolution for the commission's action and will place a separate agenda item at a later meeting to finalize or revise the fitness-center definition. No public comments were received during the March 11 hearing; the commission set conditions intended to preserve oversight on parking and site-plan issues if an applicant proposes a higher‑impact use.