Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Woods topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Woods Services seeks overlay rezoning; board authorizes advertisement for planning review
Summary
Woods Services proposed an overlay rezoning covering about 11 parcels (roughly 200 acres) to better reflect institutional uses; developers say one 20-acre parcel is under contract for mixed-use. The board authorized advertisement to move the petition to county and township planning commissions despite public concern about potential development and resale.
Woods Services asked the Middletown Township Board of Supervisors to authorize advertisement of an overlay rezoning petition that would apply to 11 Woods-owned parcels covering roughly 200 acres and would better accommodate the institution’s mix of uses on properties currently zoned R-1.
Mike McGinnis, representing Woods Services, told the board the R-1 District is primarily single-family residential and does not match Woods’ long-standing campus of institutional buildings and services for people with disabilities. McGinnis said the overlay is intended to address past nonconformities and provide flexibility for how Woods operates and maintains its properties. He said the goal is to proceed to the planning commissions for review, take comments and return for a detailed presentation and any required board action.
Michael Markman, president of BT Investments and contract purchaser of one 20-acre parcel, described plans for a mixed-use parcel with residential and retail "live-shop" development on the cross-hatched 20-acre site; Woods and Markman said they will present full plans to the planning commission. Board staff explained the role of county and township planning commissions in reviewing zoning petitions and said authorization tonight would merely allow the petition to proceed to that review stage.
Several residents urged caution. Public commenters raised concerns the rezoning could be used to facilitate sale to private developers and accelerate apartment development; one resident urged the board to "pump the brakes" and wait to see how the developer performs on projects elsewhere. Board members emphasized the current vote was to authorize advertisement and referral to the planning commissions, not to enact zoning changes; the motion to authorize moving forward passed 3–1.
What’s next: the petition will be reviewed by the Bucks County Planning Commission and the Middletown Planning Commission; staff and applicants will return with detailed plans and proposed ordinance language for full board consideration if recommended.
