Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Code Update topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultants outline timetable, engagement and procedural changes in Middletown code update
Summary
Consultants told the Middletown Planning Commission they have completed early engagement and drafting of administrative provisions, reported 140 survey responses, and proposed changes including clearer review‑authority tables, notification options, streamlined applicant rules, and draft fee/penalty adjustments for commissioner review.
Consultants from Gibbons Planning Group presented a study session to the Middletown Planning Commission on an update to the city's development code, focusing on administrative provisions and a multi‑phase schedule that aims for adoption in 2026. Brent Gibbons, co‑owner of Gibbons Planning Group, said the work will proceed in three main drafting phases for the commission: administrative provisions now, zoning districts next, and general development standards later.
The consultants summarized public engagement so far: a community workshop in October, stakeholder interviews, and an online survey that will remain open through the later November deadline. "As of today, we've received 140 surveys back," Brent Gibbons said, noting staff and commission will receive a summarized engagement report once the comment window closes.
Why it matters: the administrative chapter lays out how entitlements are reviewed, who is the review authority and appeal body, and how enforcement is handled. Consultants proposed a new review‑authority table to replace dense paragraph text, clearer rules about who may submit applications (property‑owner sign‑off required if a non‑owner files), and more transparent notification options to improve public awareness of projects.
On public notice and signage, the consultants described optional poster or city‑mandated signs for larger projects. The team noted constitutional limits on content and suggested signs include application type, contact information and a URL. Commissioners generally asked staff to draft optional signage standards for later review rather than mandating immediate code changes.
Staff and commissioners discussed process tradeoffs: moving some administrative tasks to a development code administrator could speed routine approvals but would require specific appeal paths to maintain transparency. Jacob Schulte, assistant director and acting director for the city's Community and Economic Development department, emphasized staff neutrality and urged clear review criteria and documentation for any duties shifted to staff.
Consultants also proposed changes to fees, fee‑waiver criteria and penalties (discussed in later agenda items), and a codified informal "notice of potential violation" step intended to encourage voluntary compliance before formal enforcement. The team gave tentative dates for future study sessions: zoning districts (January 22), development standards (April 23) and a full draft review (July).
Next steps: consultants will prepare draft language on signage options, proposed edits to administrative chapters and the review‑authority table for the commission and staff to review at upcoming study sessions.
