Council hears plan for assisted‑living campus and 144 apartments near Hendrickson Road; fire and industrial buffer concerns raised

A proposal for a combined assisted‑living campus and adjacent multifamily apartment complex prompted technical questions and safety concerns at a July 1 Middletown City Council public hearing.

Developer Bill Morton of Leo Brown Group asked the council to approve a map amendment and preliminary development plan for a 124‑unit assisted‑living facility (personal care home) and six three‑story multifamily buildings totaling 144 units on a 10.79‑acre parcel requiring waivers from the I‑1 zoning district.

Why it matters: The property sits near industrial land and requires extension of Hendrickson Road for access. Staff told council the development conflicts with the city’s housing policy buffer around heavy industry and may worsen an oversupply of lower‑cost rental housing. Public‑safety staff warned development could increase emergency calls for service.

Key technical points from staff - Claire Fetters, city planner, said the I‑1 district does not allow skilled nursing and multifamily uses without an approved plan development district; the applicant requested waivers and must still submit elevations, lighting, landscaping and signage plans for code compliance. - The transportation chapter of the 2022 comprehensive plan identifies Hendrickson Road as requiring future westward extension; the parcel will require right‑of‑way work and private property negotiation for full road access. - Planning staff noted the project lies within 1,000 feet of heavy industry and conflicts with adopted housing policy buffers and concerns about “rental housing and overabundance of less competitive housing.”

Public‑safety and operational concerns - Fire division staff expressed concern about tight turning radii for ladder trucks and potential strain on emergency response if calls for service increase near an existing skilled‑nursing facility (Arlington Point is next door). - Chief Nelson and other council members asked about staffing, medical qualifications and expected calls: the developer said the assisted‑living building would be lighter acuity than a skilled nursing facility, would comply with state assisted‑living licensure, include certified nursing assistants and an RN on site, and that total payroll would be “probably around $2,000,000.” - The applicant said assisted‑living residents likely will use Medicaid waivers and that private market rates would be materially higher; he said the project will seek low‑income housing tax credits for financing and typically would market to age 60+ residents.

Council reaction Several council members said the location next to Cleveland‑Cliffs (a heavy industrial site) merits careful scrutiny and that the city needs a traffic impact study, stormwater plan and clarification on long‑term ownership. Councilman Paul Lawley said he “cannot support this development” under current staffing because it would “be a burden on the division of fire for calls for services” and urged the law department to explore impact fees or a moratorium on additional extended‑care facilities until public‑safety cost recovery is addressed.

Outcome and next steps Planning Commission had recommended approval 6–0 and staff included a conditional recommendation that council allow substitute uses for the planned development district and that architectural standards be met for multifamily units. Council did not vote on the map amendment at the meeting; staff and the applicant were directed to supply missing elevations, a lighting and landscaping plan, traffic and stormwater studies, and clearer responses on ownership and operations for further review.

Ending The project remains at the preliminary stage; council members asked for more detailed site plans, emergency‑access assurances and a clearer accounting of ongoing public‑safety costs before advancing the rezoning and plan development district approval.