Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Right Of Way topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission denies Miller Road right-of-way vacation after access and procedural concerns
Summary
The Middletown Planning Commission denied a petition to vacate part of Miller Road, citing an invalid petition signature, missing consent from an abutting owner and conflict with the City Street Master Plan; opponents warned vacating would landlock a neighboring parcel.
The Middletown Planning Commission voted to deny a right-of-way vacation petition for Miller Road on May 13, 2026, after staff and neighboring property owners raised procedural and access concerns.
City planning staff told the commission the application to vacate roughly 30 feet of Miller Road was procedurally deficient: a signature associated with the Middletown City School District parcel appeared invalid and the adjoining southern parcel did not sign the petition, so the application lacked the written consent the Ohio revised code language cited in the staff report requires. Staff also said the requested vacation would conflict with the city’s adopted street master plan, which designates Miller Road as a future collector, and cautioned the city could face a Fifth Amendment takings claim if access were eliminated.
“An explanation of the requested right-of-way vacation was not received with the application,” the planner said, noting the application would create nonconforming parcels and was inconsistent with Destination Middletown and the development code.
Applicants Tim and Megan Schmolly, who live at the end of the road, urged the commission to either have the city pave and maintain Miller Road or formally vacate it so neighbors could assume upkeep. Tim Schmolly said the roadway "has not been maintained at all" during his time in Middletown and described repeated police responses to the 4700 block: “Every single call back to 2007 has, with the exception of one, has been us.”
Opposition focused on access for a neighboring parcel. Attorney Patrick O’Neil, representing property owner Amy Ernst at 4822 Miller Road, told the commission vacating the public right-of-way would remove the only means of ingress and egress to his client’s land and could effectively landlock the parcel. “To vacate that public right of way would deny my client access to her property,” O’Neil said, urging the commission to follow staff’s recommendation to deny.
Commissioners debated the review criteria—public interest, potential detriment to neighbors and consistency with the master plan—and several members said the application lacked a sufficient legal or procedural foundation for approval. A motion to deny was moved and seconded and the commission voted to deny the petition.
The commission’s denial is a recommendation to City Council; staff noted any ultimate change in maintenance or a future roadway connection would involve council action and additional studies. No follow-up direction to staff beyond the recommendation was recorded at the meeting.
