Zoning amendment dispute over ‘transit‑adjacent’ density prompts ethics, timing fight; hearing continued

The Stratford Zoning Commission on June 24 heard a heated procedural challenge to a proposed change to section 5.1 that would create a new "transit‑adjacent density adjustment" for properties near transit.

Attorney for the petitioner raised concerns about how the application was processed, saying the planning staff’s handling of revised language and a subsequent re‑referral to the Planning Commission created procedural irregularities that could affect which review should control. The attorney asked the Zoning Commission to decide whether the initial Planning Commission review or the later re‑referral governs the application’s procedural standard.

The attorney also urged the panel to require the Planning & Zoning Administrator to state on the record the reason for recusal. Reading from the town ethics code, he quoted: "Upon discovery of an actual or potential conflict of interest, a public official or employee shall . . . state on the record, disclose the conflict, and thereafter abstain from voting or otherwise participating in any further proceedings on such issue." The lawyer said staff edits and a revised consultant report raised fairness questions and left open the prospect of future legal challenges.

Applicant Steve Shapiro, representing 2803 Broadbridge Avenue LLC, responded that the agreement to have an outside consultant review the matter was proposed to avoid the appearance of bias. He told the commission that an agreement with the mayor and the decision to use an outside consultant was intended to remove any suggestion of staff partiality, and that changes to the draft language were made in response to town counsel’s comments.

Neighbors and organized groups packed the public‑comment list. David Greenwood, speaking on behalf of a nearby resident, said the proposal "is not a minor or technical correction. It is a permanent change to the zoning regulations that could impact residents across the town," arguing the change would enable greater density near bus stops beyond the downtown area and alter neighborhood character.

Commissioners and town counsel spent time clarifying statutory deadlines for text‑amendment hearings. Staff determined there were nine days remaining in the statutory window to continue the public hearing; based on that schedule the commission voted to continue the text amendment, the related special‑permit and site‑plan items, to a special meeting on July 1, 2026 at 6 p.m. in council chambers so the procedural and substantive questions can be resolved with additional staff input and public comment.

What’s next: The commission will reconvene July 1 to take up the text amendment and the related site and permit requests. Staff has been asked to compile the procedural record, any relevant ethics disclosures, and any missing technical materials before the special meeting.