Cheshire commission approves settlement in 869 West Main appeal after securing $200,000 design commitment for traffic improvements

The Cheshire Planning & Zoning Commission on Feb. 9 approved a proposed stipulated judgment resolving the administrative appeal over a 869 West Main Street zone‑change application, accepting a settlement that would secure a town contribution toward traffic‑improvement design and preserve the commission’s ability to review future site‑plan and special‑permit applications.

Town attorney Jeff D’Onofrio outlined the settlement terms and legal context. The original 2024 application sought rezoning under the commission’s Regulation 44a (which implements Connecticut General Statutes 8‑30g affordable‑housing provisions) for a 74‑unit apartment proposal with 25% of units set aside as affordable for 40 years. The commission denied the zone change in 2024 on commercial‑loss and traffic‑impact grounds; the applicant appealed to the courts.

Under the proposed settlement, if the zone change is ultimately approved and the town proceeds with the traffic solution identified in town studies, the applicant would contribute $200,000 to the town for design costs and would donate a portion of land at the northwest corner of the property to facilitate the traffic improvements, provided that any donation would not affect the project’s compliance with density, parking or layout requirements. The settlement also includes a commitment by the commission to consider — if and when proposed by an applicant — an amendment to Regulation 44a that would allow the commission to consider a reduced affordable‑unit requirement when a developer makes a significant contribution to a public amenity.

D’Onofrio emphasized that the stipulation applies only to the zone‑change portion of the case and that the commission retains full authority to evaluate any future special‑permit or site‑plan application on the merits. “Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing here is intended to or shall limit the commission’s authority to review the special permit and site application to be filed by 869 West Main regarding the subject property,” he said.

Public commenters raised questions about appearances of conflicts of interest and consultant relationships. Caitlin Walken asked whether a town council member’s association with the applicant and overlapping professional ties between firms raised ethical concerns; town counsel responded that ownership of property by a public official does not automatically disqualify an application and that the town had retained an independent traffic consultant (Barton & Loguidice) separate from the applicant’s consultant (SLR). Counsel said the appeal is a record‑based administrative proceeding and that the record, not outside relationships, controls judicial review.

Commissioners debated legal risk and public benefit and concluded the settlement offered a better practical outcome than prolonged litigation: a contribution toward traffic‑improvement design that the town would otherwise not receive, plus land conveyance if needed. The commission approved the stipulated judgment (with the word “roundabout” replaced in the text by the broader term “traffic improvements”) by majority vote; one commissioner recorded a dissent. The applicant will still be required to return for a public special‑permit and site‑plan review if the zone change is approved.