BRIDGEPORT -- Zoning officials Monday will consider taking the first step toward finalizing a proposed settlement with a developer who wants to build apartments at the former Testo's restaurant site.
But whether the full deal eventually goes through or Mayor Joe Ganim's administration takes a chance and heads to trial remains to be seen.
"The question is, is it best at this point for the city and neighborhood for the project to move forward under this settlement ... or is it better to continue the court case?" said Thomas Gaudett, Ganim's chief administrative officer.
Last month, lawyers for Bridgeport and developer Amit Lakhotia had reached a tentative deal to allow the latter to move forward with constructing a 173-unit residential complex at Madison and Westfield avenues in the North End.
Lakhotia purchased the property, formerly co-owned by veteran Democratic Town Chairman Mario Testa, last year and was granted his zoning and building permits for 177 apartments. He also demolished the structure, which had been an Italian restaurant, catering hall and unofficial Democratic Party headquarters that served its last meal New Year's Eve, 2022.
But after some neighbors, elected officials and activists decried the lack of a public hearing for the project, Ganim took the unusual step of hiring an outside law firm to scrutinize the process. Ultimately errors were discovered and Lakhotia's permits rescinded, so last fall the developer went to court.
Under the pending settlement, which requires action by two municipal land use boards -- the zoning commission and the zoning board of appeals -- and of a judge, Lakhotia would trim the total units by four and make some modest design changes so the building is "more conducive to the character of the neighborhood."
On Monday the planning and zoning commission will consider another piece of the deal to allow Lakhotia to construct a second driveway on a neighboring parcel for tenant parking. The outside law firm's review last year of the permitting process concluded Lakhotia had not obtained that necessary approval to use the adjacent lot in that way.
Gaudett emphasized the zoning commission's vote is just one piece of the settlement and not the final word on it. He said that regardless of what happens with the lawsuit and what is built on the property that additional driveway is needed for improved traffic flow.
"This issue is kind of a separate issue but certainly related to the ultimate settlement," Gaudett said.
Stephen Bellis, the developer's lawyer, agreed.
"The zoning board of appeals has to approve the settlement in totality," he said. "It would have been preferential I believe to have the ZBA vote first and then go to the zoning commission."
Initially the plan was for the ZBA to vote at its mid-October meeting. But that was put off in part because Ganim, Aikeem Boyd and Jeanette Herron, the City Council members who represent the neighborhood in question and some residents there were unaware of the proposed settlement and wanted more time to understand it.
That process is still underway, according to Boyd, Herron and Gaudett.
"I'm getting mixed reviews," Herron said. "Some people are totally against it."
Like Omar Genao, who helped rally the opposition to the project last year.
"I do not agree with the terms of the settlement at all," Genao said in a statement. "The city settled for their interests and not the interests of the community."
Mario Marcoccia also lives by the old Testo's site.
"I personally feel they should go to court," he said of the Ganim administration. "177 (units) to 173, what's the difference? There's no difference."
Herron is unhappy with the revised size of the redesigned structure -- "I personally don't see much change," she said -- but admitted that if the case goes to trial and Bridgeport loses, Lakhotia can build his original proposal.
And there is another wrinkle, noted Boyd. The initial apartments were approved under zoning regulations which have since changed and now require ground floor retail on that piece of land. So even were the city to prevail in court, neighbors still might not be happy with what Lakhotia builds if it includes not just apartments but stores.
"If this goes to court, more than likely the city would lose," Boyd said. "My stance is I don't want anything there that gaudy. (But) the only alternative is to settle for a building that's just residential, which while not ideal, is a better situation than having something with retail at the bottom."
Gaudett said, "There are potentially issues that can be raised under any scenario here. So the question is what's the best deal that can be negotiated?"
Bellis for his part said he believes his client has agreed to reasonable "accommodations" and would prevail should the trial move forward.
"Would they (residents) prefer nothing be there? Probably, but that's not realistic," he said. "But I think the project has been scaled down a bit."