Planning commission hears Wawa planned‑development map amendment; staff recommends denial, motion to approve fails for lack of four affirmative votes

The Middletown Planning Commission on an unspecified date considered a preliminary development plan and map amendment to allow a Wawa convenience store with food service and retail fuel sales at the vacant CVS site at 3445 Union Road. City staff recommended denial, citing plan‑development minimum acreage, conflict with the BCH subdistrict use standards and comprehensive‑plan guidance, and the potential for oversaturation of retail fuel sales in the corridor.

City staff presented the case, saying the subject parcel is approximately 1.767 acres, that retail fuel sales are a prohibited use in the BCH zoning district per Middletown Development Code Table 1204‑3, and that the applicant sought a planned development (PD) map amendment and several waivers including from minimum PD site area requirements. Staff also noted outstanding engineering items: a Tier 2 traffic study is required and the sanitary connection and water‑line responsibilities needed clearer documentation.

Applicant Jonathan Woecker, a planner with McBride Dale Clarion, said the petition would change the property's zoning from BCH to PD so BCH development standards would no longer apply to the proposed PD. He described a roughly 6,300‑square‑foot store with a side pickup window, six (double‑sided) fuel dispenser islands, a low‑profile canopy, and about 40 employees, and said the design would reuse the CVS footprint and existing driveways. Woecker and developer representative Eric Doms said they planned to perform the Tier 2 traffic study requested by public works and that Wawa intends to offer delivery, app‑based order pickup and the potential for future EV charging infrastructure.

The staff report and staff presentation pointed to three principal objections: (1) the PD minimum site area is 5 acres and the parcel is substantially smaller; (2) retail fuel sales are prohibited in BCH and the PD request appears to be a spot change to allow a prohibited use; and (3) the comprehensive‑plan future land use designates the parcel as employment mixed‑use, where staff argued fuel sales are an incompatible primary use. Staff also flagged proximity to an existing BP station about 650 feet away and said the PD request could negatively affect future development expectations for the BCH subdistrict.

Commission discussion ranged between members who found the proposal inconsistent with the staff recommendation and members who expressed concerns about adding more fuel stations in the city. The commission took two formal actions: a motion to recommend approval of the preliminary development plan and map amendment failed because it did not receive the four affirmative votes required for a formal recommendation; the commission then voted to table the application to the Feb. 12 meeting with a full record of staff comments for further review.

The commission recorded vote on the approval motion was: three yes votes and one no vote (the motion did not carry because the commission requires an affirmative vote of all members present to act on an application). The subsequent motion to table passed unanimously among commissioners present. No final substantive approval or denial was recorded; the case will return to the Planning Commission on Feb. 12.

What happens next: the applicant must provide the Tier 2 traffic study and clarify sanitary and water‑service plans, and the Planning Commission and city staff will have another opportunity to review those materials before the Feb. 12 hearing. Because the applicant requested a zoning map amendment (PD), the commission's recommendation will be advisory to the City Council, which will make the final zoning decision if the process proceeds past the Planning Commission.

Sources: staff presentation to the Middletown Planning Commission; sworn testimony by applicant representative Jonathan Woecker; developer representative Eric Doms; and the Planning Commission public hearing record.