Commission approves lot‑size exception for 29‑lot Sand Hill subdivision; preliminary subdivision fails for lack of votes

The Middletown Planning & Zoning Commission on Tuesday approved a special exception to permit reduced lot frontages and sizes for a proposed 29‑lot subdivision on East Main Street and Sand Hill Road, but the commission declined to grant preliminary subdivision approval after the final vote fell short of the charter’s threshold.

Attorney Richard Carella, representing M & S Acquisitions, told the commission the project would create 29 single‑family starter homes accessed by two cul‑de‑sacs and include two stormwater detention basins and a city‑dedicated access path to Bealfield School. Engineer John Gable described design changes made in response to Water & Sewer Division comments, including added hydrants, meter pits for long services and enhanced easement delineations. Gable said the ponds and stormwater system were “designed to capture the water quality treatment or the 1.3 inches 1st flush in addition to all the way up to the hundred year storm.”

Residents pressed the commission on flood risk and downstream impacts. “29 houses is a disaster waiting to happen,” said Richard Tenasi of Millbrook Road, citing natural springs, recurring basement flooding in the neighborhood and narrow rural streets. Peter LaPointe of Lee Street told commissioners the development “uses every inch” of the property and questioned grades, walkability and whether the detention basins could contain large storms.

Vice Chair Tyler Eckstrom favored approval of the special exception and urged an incremental approach, noting that a preliminary approval permits earth work but that final approvals and site‑level adjustments would return to the commission if field conditions require changes. The commission approved the special exception by roll call, 5–2 (aye: Eckstrom, Emery, Zinkowitz, Cunningham, McAvoy; nay: Patavino, Regan). It then approved a waiver for the cul‑de‑sac length requirement (6–1) but the motion to approve the preliminary subdivision failed on a separate roll call by a 4–3 margin; commissioners noted the city charter requires five affirmative votes for an approval in zoning capacity, so the subdivision application did not pass.

The commission and applicant discussed conditions the commission could attach if it chose to reconsider the subdivision, including a requirement that detention basins be modified in the field should unforeseen stormwater issues appear during construction. The applicant and engineers said they would rerun calculations and could redesign ponds or increase capacity if springs or soil conditions require it. Because the preliminary subdivision failed, no lots may be sold and the applicant will need to return if it seeks approval again.

Next steps: the applicant may revise plans and return for further review; the commission’s decision on the special exception stands independently of the failed preliminary subdivision vote.