Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Applications topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Several Middletown development applications continued as studies or applicants are incomplete
Summary
The Middletown Planning Board on Jan. 8 continued multiple development applications — including an eight‑unit adaptive reuse, a planned 72‑unit hotel and a small commercial building — citing missing studies or absent applicant representation.
Get email alerts on the Development Applications topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At its Jan. 8 meeting the Middletown Planning Board continued multiple development applications after staff or applicants indicated materials or representation were not ready for full review.
The board continued a combined preliminary and final development plan application by Jeff Flipshears on behalf of CCE Development LLC for adaptive reuse of an existing commercial building at 499 East Main Road into an eight‑unit multifamily dwelling. Attorney Jay Lynch told the board the project—s traffic study had not yet been received; the applicant asked the board to continue the matter and the board set the continuance to the March 12 meeting.
A separate major land‑development application from CBUN LLC for a 12,000‑square‑foot hotel (72 units) at 240 Kudnick Avenue was also continued. The applicant—s attorney was not present, the application as advertised did not include additional zoning relief the board determined was necessary, and the planner advised that approval could not be granted in absentia. After the planner contacted the applicant—s attorney and confirmed a continuance request, the board moved the matter to the Feb. 12 meeting.
The Seascapes Holding LLC application for a 2,442‑square‑foot commercial building at 985 (lot 28) was discussed; additional documentation had been filed late and the board voted to continue the public hearing and, where appropriate, refer technical documents such as traffic reports to the town—s consulting engineer for review.
In each case, the board emphasized the need for timely submission of critical documents (traffic studies, revised zoning requests) and for applicants or their counsel to be available at hearings so the board can hear testimony and expert witnesses.

