Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board approves 345 Valley Road master plan, special-use permit and setback variance with conditions
Summary
The Middletown Planning Board approved a special-use permit, a 0-foot setback variance and master plan approval for work at 345 Valley Road, attaching three conditions covering landscaping, stormwater review and a CCTV inspection. Engineers said the project reduces impervious area and adds water‑quality measures.
The Town of Middletown Planning Board on a voice vote approved master plan and land‑use relief for a redevelopment at 345 Valley Road, authorizing a special‑use permit for development within Zone 1 of the Watershed Protection District and granting a variance for a 0‑foot setback.
Planner Ron read three conditions the board attached to approval: submission of a landscape plan that addresses Tree Commission comments, final stormwater‑management plan review and approval by the town engineer, and a copy of the closed‑circuit television inspection to be provided prior to preliminary plan review.
Applicant representative Lewis Kalkagney said the project converts a long‑vacant office building into modern office and flex space, activates the second floor and places a small rear addition on existing paved area. “We’re trying to figure out what is the highest and best use,” Kalkagney said, noting hours are expected to be typical office hours and that the use is not expected to generate noise.
Project engineer Chris Duhamel told the board the site is 1.42 acres with an existing 3,767‑square‑foot building and 16,640 square feet of impervious surface. After redesign and the introduction of concrete permeable pavers and a sand‑filter detail, Duhamel said the post‑development impervious total would be 14,527 square feet — “a reduction of 2,113 square feet of impervious surface.” He said the sand filter and pavers provide a water‑quality improvement that was not required when the site was originally permitted.
“We simply meet that by not increasing the amount of impervious surfaces — we actually have a decrease,” Duhamel said, adding that maintenance (vacuuming) of the paver/sand filter system is expected twice a year and would be the responsibility of the business association that manages the site.
Board members questioned trip estimates in the applicant’s traffic study. Todd Brayton of Bryant Associates said the study used standard reference trip rates and estimated roughly 252 daily vehicle trips for the proposed use — about 20 trips fewer than the previous use. Brayton said no on‑site counts were possible because the building is not currently occupied and that the study therefore relied on standard reference rates.
Members of the Tree Commission and the Conservation Commission urged additional landscaping to compensate for the loss of a grassy buffer at the west edge of the site. Karen Barbera of the Tree Commission described a native‑planting scheme that replaces non‑native trees with two native white oaks and adds shrubs and grasses to improve habitat and stormwater function; Melissa Welch, chair of the Conservation Commission, said her commission “recommended approval with conditions” that the native planting plan and a landscape maintenance plan be included in the final submission.
Next steps for the project include submittal of the agreed landscape plan, final stormwater plan approval by the town engineer and the inclusion of the CCTV inspection record as required by the board’s conditions. The applicant will return for preliminary plan review once those materials are filed.
The board voted unanimously by voice to approve the permit requests and master plan with the conditions read into the record; the chair cast the deciding aye when called for.
