Key Takeaways
- The Stonington Planning and Zoning Commission deferred its review of READCO’s expanded technology‑park proposal because the application was not filed the required 10 days before the hearing.
- READCO now seeks to build two 80,080‑square‑foot, four‑story office buildings (160,160 sf total) and a up‑to‑125,000‑sf, two‑story light‑manufacturing facility, set in a park‑like campus with walking trails and solar panels.
- The project represents a significant scale‑up from the original single‑building technology center approved in late 2025 re‑vision to meet growing demand for tech‑focused space, and will be located on a vacant parcel off upper Route 2, adjacent to the ongoing Stonington Village residential development.
- Preliminary design feedback from the Architectural Design Review Board emphasized landscaping, tree planting, drainage, signage, and the incorporation of locally resonant materials.
- The rescheduled public hearing is set for 7 p.m. on August 4 at the Stonington Board of Education Office in Mystic, giving residents another opportunity to comment on the proposal.
Deferral of the Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Due to Procedural Oversight
On Tuesday evening, the Stonington Planning and Zoning Commission was poised to reevaluate READCO’s application for a zoning amendment that would allow a substantially larger technology park on Route 2 in Pawcatuck. However, as the agenda item was called, READCO’s attorney, John Casey of Robinson & Cole, announced that his team had “recently been informed of a procedural issue” and requested that the matter be postponed. The commission accepted the request without debate, moving the discussion to a later date. The deferral underscores the importance of adhering to municipal filing timelines, which are designed to ensure adequate public notice and staff review before deliberations begin.
Scope and Components of the Proposed READCO Technology Park
READCO envisions a mixed‑use technology campus comprising two four‑story office buildings, each providing 80,080 square feet of floor area for a combined 160,160 sf of office space. In addition, the plan includes a two‑story light‑manufacturing development facility that could reach up to 125,000 sf. The buildings would be set within a landscaped park featuring walking trails, open green spaces, and amenities intended to foster a collaborative, campus‑like atmosphere. This scale represents a notable increase over the earlier, more modest technology center proposal and reflects READCO’s response to heightened market demand for flexible, high‑quality tech spaces in southeastern Connecticut.
Evolution of the Project from Initial Approval to Expanded Vision
The town originally granted approval in late 2025 for a smaller technology center consisting of a single 80,000‑square‑foot, four‑story building. After that approval, READCO conducted market analysis and concluded that the demand for office and research‑and‑development space warranted a larger footprint. In June, the developer announced it had “re‑envisioned” the project as a expansive technology park, seeking to add a second office tower and a substantial manufacturing component. This evolution illustrates a common pattern in suburban development where initial approvals serve as a foundation for later, more ambitious phases as economic conditions and tenant interest shift.
Zoning Amendment Request for Neighborhood Development District Zone
To accommodate the expanded footprint, READCO submitted an application to amend the zoning regulations for the Neighborhood Development District Zone. The amendment would permit the additional office and manufacturing buildings, as well as associated site improvements such as parking, utilities, and landscaping. Without this amendment, the current zoning would limit the parcel to lower‑intensity uses, preventing the construction of the proposed structures. The Planning and Zoning Commission’s role is to evaluate whether the requested changes align with the town’s comprehensive plan, infrastructure capacity, and community character.
Procedural Issue Identified: Late Application Filing
According to Stonington Planning and Zoning Specialist Adrianna Bancroft‑Jones, the deferral resulted from a missing copy of the application that had not been filed with the town clerk at least ten days prior to the scheduled hearing—a statutory requirement designed to give staff and the public sufficient time to review documents. Bancroft‑Jones confirmed that the application has since been filed correctly. READCO development director Phil Bondo echoed this, noting that while the application had not been “administratively submitted” on time, all other noticing requirements (such as public notices and signage) had been satisfied. The town attorney concurred that postponing the meeting until the filing deficiency was remedied was the appropriate course.
Statements from READCO Legal and Development Teams on the Deferral
John Casey emphasized that the postponement was purely procedural and did not reflect any substantive concerns about the project’s merits. He assured the commission that READCO remains committed to working collaboratively with town officials to meet all regulatory milestones. Phil Bondo added that the proposed use—engineering offices and research‑and‑development spaces—would address a growing need in the community for high‑skill employment opportunities. He expressed confidence that the revised timeline would allow for thorough public vetting while keeping the project on track for eventual construction.
Feedback from the Architectural Design Review Board on Design and Site Features
On July 13, READCO presented preliminary renderings to the Architectural Design Review Board (ADRB) to solicit early design input. ADRB members raised several points: Breck Perkins urged increased tree plantings and lawn areas over additional pavement, advocating for a greener, more permeable site. Andrea Barella inquired about signage, sidewalk layout, and landscaping strategies to enhance the campus feel and pedestrian accessibility. Leslie Dricoll requested that the building façades incorporate materials or design motifs that reflect Stonington’s historic character, ensuring the development feels unique to the locale. The board also confirmed that the technology park would incorporate solar panels on the rooftops, aligning with sustainability goals.
Planned Site Amenities, Sustainability Features, and Design Considerations
In response to the ADRB’s feedback, READCO’s design team highlighted plans for a small park and picnic area within the site, intended to provide recreational space for employees and visitors. Walking trails would weave through landscaped buffers, promoting connectivity and encouraging alternative modes of transport. The inclusion of solar arrays on both office buildings aims to offset a portion of the campus’s energy consumption, reducing its carbon footprint. Materials selection is slated to emphasize durability and local aesthetic sensitivity, potentially using brick, stone, or wood accents that echo the architectural vernacular of nearby Stonington neighborhoods.
Relocation of the Project to Upper Route 2 and Integration with Stonington Village
Initially, the technology center was slated for the corner of Liberty Street and Voluntown Road. READCO subsequently shifted the proposal to a vacant parcel it owns farther north on upper Route 2, positioned just off the I‑95 corridor. This relocation offers better visibility and access for commuters while distancing the intensive use from more residential‑dense intersections. The site will abut READCO’s ongoing Stonington Village development, where multifamily apartments are currently under construction, creating a cohesive mixed‑use node that blends residential, office, and light‑industrial uses in close proximity.
Broader Redevelopment Context and Previous Approvals
The technology park fits within a larger revitalization vision for the area that received unanimous approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission in July 2024. At that time, the commission endorsed both the site and master plans for an $80 million mixed‑income redevelopment encompassing commercial, residential, and public‑space components. The earlier approval laid the groundwork for infrastructure upgrades, storm‑water management, and road improvements that will now support the intensified tech‑park use. By building on this authorized framework, READCO seeks to leverage existing approvals while adding a new, higher‑intensity layer that responds to evolving economic demands.
Upcoming Public Meeting Details and Opportunities for Community Input
The Planning and Zoning Commission has rescheduled the public hearing for 7 p.m. on August 4 at the Stonington Board of Education Office, located at 204 Mistuxet Avenue in Mystic. The meeting will be open to all residents, allowing them to ask questions, express concerns, and offer suggestions regarding the proposed technology park. Given the earlier deferral, town staff will have had additional time to review the application, and the commission will be positioned to make a well‑informed recommendation on the zoning amendment. Community participation at this stage is critical, as it will shape any conditions or modifications that may be attached to the eventual approval.
Potential Community Impact and Economic Considerations
If approved, the technology park could bring several hundred new jobs to Pawcatuck, particularly in engineering, research, and advanced manufacturing sectors, thereby diversifying the local employment base beyond traditional retail and service roles. The development may also increase the town’s tax base, providing additional revenue for municipal services and schools. However, residents may have concerns about traffic generation on Route 2, potential strain on existing infrastructure, and the visual impact of larger buildings in a semi‑rural setting. The design team’s emphasis on landscaping, solar energy, and pedestrian amenities aims to mitigate some of these effects, but the final outcome will depend on how closely the final plans address public feedback gathered at the August hearing and subsequent review cycles.