By Tara Fischer

Staff Writer

(May 21, 2026) Members of the Berlin Planning Commission are seeking to review the town’s zoning and site plan process because of repeated confusion over project approvals, application requirements, and the interpretation of existing code.

During a discussion following a redevelopment proposal for Heron Park’s parcel 57 last week, commissioners and staff acknowledged that sections of the town code lack clear instructions on how to review and sign off on projects.

“The code needs to be revised,” town legal consultant Emily Morris said. “You guys have been doing [things a certain way], but it’s not codified that way, and it’s being used, especially by people not from here, in a really difficult way.”

Commission members requested that staff compile a formal list of problematic portions of code and potential revisions so the planning body can discuss changes and make recommendations.

Morris said she would work on assembling the proposed adjustments, hopefully before the end of the fiscal year, which is set for June 30.

Planning Director Ryan Hardesty acknowledged that staff have long had these concerns.

“We are well aware [the code] needs to be revised,” she said.

Discussion centered on confusion involving preliminary versus final site plan approvals.

Several members argued that the town should make it clear in the code that applicants receiving preliminary approval must return for final site plan approval before they can proceed with construction.

Morris maintained that such a requirement would likely make sense specifically for commercial projects.

“At least for commercial,” she said. “Maybe not for residential.”

Commissioner Newt Chandler, however, suggested the requirement should apply to all development projects in the Town of Berlin.

“I think for everyone,” he said. “We should look at things preliminary…”

Town staff also said inconsistent language in the existing code has created challenges for both developers and reviewers. Clearer procedures would benefit applicants, planning staff and commission members alike.

Additionally, planning commission members expressed frustration with disagreements over code interpretation occurring publicly during meetings, arguing that the back-and-forth can appear disorganized to applicants.

“It is really unprofessional to sit here… and see this back and forth between the town and planning commission in front of applicants looks really bad,” said commissioner Logan Hall. “There needs to be… even if code changes take a long time… guidance on the nuances of the code so we’re not having these conversations on recording in front of applicants.”

Morris agreed, noting that the town’s existing planning procedures have contributed to confusion.

“I don’t disagree with you,” Morris said. “The reality is the code needs to be clear. The checklist was not created by any of us… that’s creating confusion.”

Morris added other jurisdictions, including Worcester County, have more clearly defined approval processes.

“The county code has a clear process,” she said.

Commission chair Matt Stoehr proposed adding a future work session to the planning commission agenda to discuss language defining “substantial changes” to approved site plans and when modifications should trigger another review.

“Can we have a work session on coming up with verbiage on substantial changes to existing plans that were approved?” Stoehr asked. “And what constitutes a substantial change that requires it to come back?”

Morris also said conversations should address the level of detail applicants must provide at the preliminary stages and the expectations that apply before final approval.