Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transit Adjacent Density topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission recommends against developer’s transit-adjacent density amendment
Summary
The Stratford Planning Commission voted to recommend against a developer-proposed text amendment that would allow RM1-equivalent multi‑family density in RS zones when a new transit-adjacent test is met, citing removal of a special-permit review, unclear transit criteria and late, inconsistent submittals.
The Stratford Planning Commission voted June 16 to recommend against a proposed text amendment from Broadbridge Avenue LLC that would create a "transit adjacent density adjustment" allowing RM1 (multi‑family) density in RS4 single‑family zones when named criteria are met.
At a public meeting, Patricia Sullivan, attorney to the commission, told members the revised draft deletes a prior section, incorporates RM1 dimensional standards, revises transit-access language and omits special‑permit provisions that previously required site-level review. She said the applicant’s attorney had emailed alleging improper procedure and that the town attorney had responded earlier the same day that the Planning Commission may nonetheless consider the amended submission.
Commissioners raised multiple concerns during questioning. Alternate member Seth Levine said the revised text appears to change a requirement of direct street frontage on a designated transit route to allowing sites within 500 feet of a transit stop, a change he said would broaden the number of qualifying parcels. Commissioner Kathleen Callahan and others said language referencing Greater Bridgeport Transit and the new 500‑foot standard was unclear. Multiple members said the amended draft arrived late and lacked the technical documentation (for example, the RM1 dimensional standard set) necessary to evaluate impacts.
Several commissioners flagged the removal of the special‑permit requirement as a major problem. Chair Joe Garrics and others noted that special permits allow commissions to review drainage, sewage, traffic and other public‑safety impacts; without that review, high‑density projects could proceed as a matter of right with limited local scrutiny.
Andrea Corcoran moved to recommend against the amended text amendment, citing the removal of the special‑permit process, the new 500‑foot transit buffer and unclear transit‑access criteria; the motion was seconded and carried by voice vote.
Next steps: The Planning Commission’s negative recommendation will be transmitted to the Zoning Commission, which will consider the amendment; staff noted that a negative recommendation changes the voting threshold for the Zoning Commission (a supermajority would be required for approval). The applicant may resubmit with clarified language and fuller documentation.
