Middletown council receives West Main Road zoning, comprehensive plan and overlay amendments after contentious hearing

The Town of Middletown Town Council received on first reading three linked proposals Thursday to amend the town’s comprehensive plan, official zoning map and to add a West Main Road–Coddington overlay district that would enable a proposed mixed‑use redevelopment on West Main Road.

The petitions — a comprehensive plan future‑land‑use map change, a change to the official zoning map and an overlay zoning ordinance — were read into the record and formally received on first reading after the council heard a presentation from the developer’s attorney and more than two hours of public comment. If the council votes to move the measures forward after a second public hearing, the changes would clear the way for the developer to pursue engineering, permitting and master‑plan review for the site.

The council’s action tonight was procedural: receiving the three measures on first reading triggers a second public hearing (scheduled for Sept. 30) and the final council vote at that later meeting. The proposals did not approve any site plans or construction; developers and town staff repeatedly told the public that detailed master‑plan and permitting steps would follow only if the zoning and map changes are adopted.

Why it matters: The 15.27‑acre site includes a long‑discussed town‑owned parcel long identified in prior studies as a candidate for redevelopment. The overlay and map changes would create a special regulatory framework for a multi‑parcel redevelopment concept that the developer has described as a hotel, residential units with an affordable component, retail space and municipal uses. Opponents said the plans threaten open space and a veterans’ memorial and raise traffic, stormwater and sewer capacity concerns; supporters and the developer said the changes are necessary to attract tenants and finance a complex project that could produce new town revenue.

What the developer and town said: Gerard Galvin, attorney for the development team, told the council the team has revised its original overlay many times since first submitting a concept in 2021 and that the current proposal reflects more than 30 concessions made after planning‑board review. He summarized the project’s history, citing planning studies back to 2010–2011 and the town’s 2014–2015 comprehensive plan as background for the redevelopment effort and said the team continues to press four specific items the planning board asked be changed: allowing restaurants that serve alcohol as a permitted use in the overlay, allowing one additional non‑bank drive‑through by right, a stormwater standard tied to the state manual (“practicable” rather than the planning board’s suggested “where possible”), and two larger consolidated signs on West Main Road rather than a sign at the gateway corner.

Galvin said those four elements are important to the project’s viability and to the tenant pool the developers hope to attract. “Liquor stores are allowed by right in the limited business zone. There’s restaurants all up and down the West Main corridor,” he told the council. He said the team retained language limiting commercial hours and agreed to many other planning‑board conditions but could not accept the four items in their current form.

What the planning board said: The planning board held three hearings on the overlays and issued an advisory recommendation with numerous requested revisions. The board’s formal memo to the council states that its positive recommendation was conditioned on the requested revisions and that if all requested revisions are not made the board would recommend against adoption. Planning‑board members told the council they sought special use review for restaurants that serve alcohol and for certain drive‑throughs, and they asked that the corner at West Main and Coddington be preserved as a town gateway rather than a commercial sign.

Public concerns and the memorial: Dozens of residents voiced opposition in public comment. Recurring themes included preservation of Potsey Field (a long‑established recreational field that also serves as a veterans’ memorial), concerns about sewer and stormwater capacity, traffic and pedestrian safety, loss of open space, the adequacy of affordable housing in the developer’s proposal, and a perceived lack of a competitive procurement process. Several speakers emphasized that Potsey Field has a deed restriction and that the field was dedicated as recreational land; family members of Staff Sergeant Christopher Potts — the memorial’s namesake — spoke on the record saying the family opposes relocating that memorial ground.

Process and next steps: Town staff and the solicitor explained the procedural path. Under state law comprehensive plan and zoning amendments typically go first to the planning board for an advisory recommendation; the planning board issued its recommendation and a list of requested changes. Tonight the council voted to receive the three measures on first reading, which keeps the public‑hearing process open; a final council decision is scheduled for Sept. 30. Town staff repeated that if the overlay is adopted the developer would still need to file major‑land‑development applications, secure detailed engineering and state permits from the Department of Environmental Management (DEM), and undergo technical review and public hearings for master‑plan and preliminary/final plan approvals.

Outstanding policy disputes: The council and public focused on four issues that remain unresolved between the planning board and the developer: whether restaurants that serve alcohol should be allowed as a permitted use in the overlay or be subject to special‑use review; whether the overlay should allow more than one additional drive‑through by right; stormwater language that reflects the state DEM manual standard (“to the maximum extent practicable”) versus the planning board’s suggested “where possible”; and the number, size and placement of entry signage on West Main Road (the developer proposes two large consolidated signs and a smaller Coddington sign; the planning board asked that the West Main/Coddington corner be preserved as a town gateway without a commercial sign).

Council action: The council voted to receive the proposals on first reading. The votes were voice votes; no roll‑call tallies with individual names were recorded in the public transcript. The council will consider final action at a second public hearing on Sept. 30.

What was not decided: No master plan, site plan, building permit, final zoning adoption, or financing agreement was approved tonight. The council’s reception of the ordinances is a procedural step that allows additional public comment and a final vote at the next hearing.