Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Do we have an echo tonight? No echo. That's good. Hey, this is a um Oh, we do. We do. Have the echo. We all set. Go.

want me to try it? Yeah. on January 8th.

Keep going. Okay. So, may I have a motion to approve the minutes uh for the regular meeting on January 14th? So, moved. Second.

Motion is made and seconded to approve those minutes. Is there any discussion? I I have a question on these. Um for the um item 4B, we were looking at amendments as a result of the state laws. Uh the the opening paragraph said uh all of the recommendations were required, but I thought they were two discretionary items. And I thought uh when you go over to page three at the top, it it says minus section 728. Those are the discretionary items, are they not?

Well, all of the amendments, all of those sections need to be amended. It's just within section 28 there's a couple of areas of that are discretionary. Yeah. So, um we we passed all of the required ones but we we held back on the two discretionary ones as I recall on that one section 728 held that back. So that's on tonight. Okay. Okay. So is there any any other discussion on the minutes for January 14th? All those in favor of approval say I oppose nay.

Chair votes I. Motion passes. Minutes are approved. I have a motion to approve the minutes for the special meeting on January 8th. I have that motion. So moved. Second. Motion is made and seconded. Any discussion? All those in favor say I. I.

Opposed? Nay. Chair votes I. Motion passes. Those minutes are approved. The next item is an item of correspondence. It's a memorandum of the town planner dated January 23rd, 2026 regarding an administrative subdivision approval for the Gaston family trust and the Mary A. Shaves revocable trust involving properties fronting on Honeyman Avenue and Turner Road.

Uh4% of this property is impervious. I guess. of the TRC. See?

We also have Todd Brighten who will address traffic uh from the proposed uh use. That is weird. Have the echo back. Uh so I guess I before we get going, I'll have Mr. Kagny come up. testing. Identify yourself. Lewis Kell Cagney.

Good evening. I just wanted to give a little background about the building. We've been looking at this building now for about Yeah. Okay. Right. So, we've been looking to purchase this building and what is the highest and best use and fits within testing. Testing testing. Okay, let's try this again. Okay. Uh looking at uh 345 Valley Road, you know, we're trying to figure out what is the the best use for it in terms of an office and business. Um the building sat vacant for many years and

we've you know engaged our architect to try to you know modernize the building uh the best way possible. So the existing building has a hip roof which also has you know a lot of room up there. You can see on the the the picture on the right that rear roof uh behind the front gable, there's a whole another floor up there that we want to activate. So, doing that um with this design here with the the gables in the front um and the overbuild with the gables there gives it um you know a great look uh for for new tenants. So, that's how we came up with the plan. existing site specific.

Um so we there's parking on the right side of the building. There's parking in the rear of the building which is all existing um hard surface and what we're going to do is uh change some of that pavement to permeable pavement to take on that rainwater. Um from my understanding, you know, from the history of the property, there's never been any water issues. uh any ponding water, anything like that. So, what we're going to do is we're gonna have a um a net decrease in uh permeable surface. And Chris Duhaml from Debris will be able to speak to that more. Addition uh that you're going to put on the back of that building. Is that the dark area in the back?

It's Yes, it's in the dark area. Yes. And is that uh primarily above pave uh the paved portion of the parking lot? Correct. Yeah. So the addition would go where the existing pavement is now. Use the property. You're going to have uh office businesses. Yes, that's the intent. Hours of operation. What do you normally expect? 9 to5. Yeah, probably 9 to5. Definitely.

You don't expect any noise or any noxious odors from the subject site? No, it's it's going to be a a class A type office building. So, you know, we're going to be uh looking at at their hours of operations and make sure that it's um you know, not disturbing anybody. Is it going to be similar to the use on the north of the building where the uh the animal hospital is? Absolutely. Check that it's going to have any adverse No, not at all. the use that's permitted. Yes. Yeah. And the reason we're here is that because we are on the zone one.

Yes. Now, let's just focusing on the the site variance uh side of the building parking setback. We're going to be right on the boundary line. Correct. Yes. The easement line. And that was in existence before you bought the building? Yes. That boundary line was there. Yes. You haven't done anything to create this. No, not at all.

Also, you have a a traffic expert who's going to address the traffic generated from the site, correct? Yes. Do you see any uh hazards that are going to be No, no hazards that were found in the report. I'm looking at this. That's not the only uh change to the building. You know, the in a sense the whole building is is is changed, right?

That that's the only addition to the building. The only addition to the uh what do you call it? To the footprint. Footprint, right? Okay. Yeah. will change. You'll you'll take off the whole the whole roof will come off the existing structure. It would be either be done taking off sections of the roof with uh dormers or gables, that sort of thing. But right now in the existing hip roof, uh there there is a whole another floor up there that that that needs to be activated. How many uh units are going to be in the uh new building?

It it it depends on what the market drives. you know, some some, you know, businesses are looking for uh smaller units, larger units. So, it would be kind of, you know, almost like a flex space depending on, you know, some of the existing uh prospects that we've spoken to. Um, so I'm thinking about like say parking and things like that, you know, with these type of businesses, will there be heavy traffic in and out of them? Uh, or is that No, not necessarily. U, we meet all the parking requirements that that are required for, you know, the business district. Um so we don't we don't really see it the parking being an issue.

I mean I I think in one of your documents you mentioned something about uh uh uh what is it transportation and utility type uh you know businesses you know what is that it's it office basically office. Uhhuh. Yeah. Okay. So you you just envision say maybe a couple of people in the office with an occasional client dropping in. Is that is that Yeah. some accounting office or um you know engineers office something like that. Okay. Thank you.

Comments. Um, I know that building fairly well and I think it's a very solid building to begin with and I'm looking forward to seeing what you can do with it to in expansion and uh what kind of businesses you'll have in it. Of course, I would mine was more a medical thing.

Great. Thank you. Um, with the addition of the opening activating the second floor, what's the total square footage of the building approximately? It's first and second floor. There's no usable space on the lower the lowest level. The the the lower level is a is a kind of like a walk out basement.

Okay. Uh they'll have mechanical um you know space in the in the front side and then it will have there will be some doors on the right and left uh with windows also uh so someone could walk into their own business and not have it to go down the hallway or elevator. So the lower level is is is currently um you know office and whatnot. Yeah. So, would it be fair to say though that the first floor and the second floor total about 4776 ft a piece? Are they pretty identical? Yeah.

All right. Second question is, by activating the second floor, are there any ADA requirements that are going to be triggered as a result of that? Because right now, you probably don't have any vertical transportation in there, do you? We we we plan on we plan on having an elevator shaft and proper egress and and all that. Yeah. As required.

And then is there I mean I've looked at the parking ratios. Are there is there movement up or down with that in terms of adding to parking, diminishing parking as a result of the uh expansion? So, so the parking ratio meets meets the requirements obviously, you know. No, but I mean compared to what's there today? Are you there is added parking from what is we will add some parking from from what is there today. I mean obviously you know the more parking the better. Um but you know I think the type of the type of usage

um will have to be monitored to make sure you know everyone stays on their side. I'm just thinking about the total number of parking spaces. I think from what I'm seeing seeing in the materials it's 30 plus or minus. Yeah.

All right. Okay. [clears throat] Question is this. Tell me why Well, we started looking at, you know, modernizing the building with with egresses and and and the driver for all of this was a secondary staircase, which it doesn't have right now. So, in terms of for life safety, we had to put an additional staircase within the distance of egress in the rear of the building. So once we did that and we tried to you know figure out the different spaces and try to align the building with the proper gables architecturally um it it kind of evolved into that um you know that addition off the back and to try to square it off. So um it evolved originally from life safety but um the the buffer from what I understand is is a vegetation a visual buffer. Um, so there there's no um there's no abutters necessarily to our back uh in the rear. So, uh during the TRC with the fire department, I met the fire chief out there and we reviewed it and he wanted to have proper um area to pull in. So, there was a uh one parking couple parking spaces at the back right of the property where we had to modify the curbing. Um but, you know, there's plenty of access to be able to get in. Second question has

no uh read the report from the conservation recommend

and Mike and your credentials. Oh, uh Karen Barbara. I am member of the Middletown Tree Commission. Um I'm also uh a landscape designer and have been so for 30 years. Um working on the island and actually all over um all over Rhode Island. So

like to hear from you. Um well in looking at the plan there were a few things that um first of all the conservation commission requested that we look at this um sort of a remediation of um having the um permeable paving parking lot um be right on the boundary. So in order to sort of offset that um the decision was made by myself and other members of the tree commission to make a native habitat that would support um wildlife which um is prevalent in that area anyway obviously. So, uh, I I followed the, um, the original design with just grasses on the south, no, north side of the permeable parking area. Um, I just changed it to a native grass. I used all natives in this in this plan. Um and then on the far side, which would be the south side, um where the dumpsters are going to be, there was immediately a red flag from us, which was that it was going to be encompassed by um um arborites, which would have turned out the deer would have annihilated them. So that would have been a suggestion to change that. So I decided to go ahead and do a full comprehensive native planting there which um can

handle the wetlands that that are there. Um and I did a grouping of shrubs and grasses and perennials that would be a full season interest to whomever was looking at it as a as a human. But it was much more interesting to as a habitat for birds and insects that are going to be in in that area. So, um we did change out um the trees. They had used three trees that I I I like the tree, but um they weren't natives. And we decided that we would in in keeping with the allnative aspect of the plan, we changed those to two instead of three. um a a type of white oak that would enhance the whole theme of what we were planting. So um oak is the tree the most um the tree that supports most habitat in the entire world. Oak is is that tree. So that was that was an easy one to go ahead with. Um, also I was concerned with how close those parodia were going to be to the building. I realized that they're a a vestig parodia, which means that it's very tight, but I still felt like it was going to be close to the building over time. And what what the tree commission is interested in is making something practical as well as beautiful. Um, so um that's why the change was made for those two those two um trees. So, we don't have any problem with the birch on the other side as you enter the parking lot, that lower parking lot. That's a native tree and it's going to do well there in the wet. Um so, um but there is some ponding in that parking lot. Um

uh on the far on the end of the parking lot. Um, so we were concerned with the water flow to keep going through there and onto the um the swale that's beyond that. So, um, that's one of the reasons why I didn't want to put a tree um as close to the edge of the parking lot. I put it in farther. Um, which I did have a um a wetlands engineer come with me to look at the site as well. He's actually the same engineer who did the BJ's work um for their wetlands. So I thought um he knew the area very well and he had no problems with what I was proposing. So um do you have any other questions? Um there was uh some concern raised about the uh porous pavement that's going to be put in not fully compensating for the use of water and

absolutely correct. We we did that. We felt like this was a good offset to the fact that I'm I'm very happy that they're using permeable pavers, but that we were still having um a large part of an area paved rather than be permeable. Um it's it's just grasses there now. So, we we felt like this was a better choice. Plantings that you recommend would adequately address that. I'm sorry. the the plantings that were recommended would adequately address that. Yes, I feel that it's a good offset. It's a good remediation of of that. So, anybody have any questions? Thank you.

You're welcome. Um, so uh you had said that um you most likely would accept most if not all of these recommendations. Is that correct? That's correct. I you know we did our our landscape architect to review it as well. I I let the experts uh delve into that. I'm not that's above my pay grade. So I'm not going to comment on that. But but what I can represent to the the board is that if there going to be any changes or any suggested changes, our landscape expert would go back to the tree committee and then they could have that discussion which I think it'd be more productive

and uh tree commission is fine with that. You usually do that. Yeah. Okay. Um, the only other question I have is on the traffic study. I'll have Mr. Brighton come up then.

Good evening. Todd Brayen with Bryant Associates. Good evening. You want to ask your questions first or you want me to give a little presentation? Well, nobody else had questions, so let me just ask my question. Okay. Um in your keep going

in in your um traffic study document you mentioned that um for the previous use well first of all you say that um you you estimated the number of trips from both the planned use and the current use from these references that you normally news and um you came up with a a number of I think it was uh 252 for the uh planned use and you made a statement that that was about 20 trips fewer than the previous use. Yes.

Which would be 272 trips per day, which is like one every two minutes. More than one every two minutes over an eight hour day. Over an eight hour day. And that just seems awfully large for what I remember that business being like. I don't remember that many cars ever coming out of that place at that uh amount. Well, it it's uh to clarify that a little bit. It's it's entering and exiting. So, a car I understand half the number of trips cars. Did you Did you make any counts there? I I take it you didn't make any actual counts. We didn't count because it's not open. So,

make any observations on that? uh just in a field review and the building's not open so there's no way of knowing what it generated so we had to estimate it. I know I I can't do anything about this. You used um um an accepted reference but that number seems awfully high and in the future you know it would be good if you could back it up somehow. Just uh it's very difficult for me to accept that but I have no choice in the matter. So well if you if you look at I can I can explain a little bit. So like in the peak hour

um for the what we ex estimated for the existing or the previous use 23 trips. So that's actually if you cut that in half it's about 11 cars. So that's really one every six minutes approximately. Still high for that for that previous use. But with the with the medical office I drive that I drove that road very often many times. Yeah. Anyway, but either way, these numbers aren't high for either the the previous use or the the proposed use. They're they're not wanted to make that comment. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else have any comments? Go ahead, Mike.

Oh, in in in regards to the to the building itself, uh I guess one of the questions, you know, when we looked at the original building, it looked like there was mechanicals on the roof. Yeah. Was there any uh what's is are there proposed mechanicals on the roof for the uh renovated building? Yeah. Existing uh conditions currently have a few condensers on the roof and some also on the left side of the building. Um, you know, as we get further along in the process, we'll do a, you know, a full mechanical design, but, uh, I mean, I they probably be split between the roof and also on the side, similar to what the existing is. So, the requirement is if they're on the roof, they have to be, uh, kind of shielded. Yeah. Yeah.

From view. Okay. Yep. Yeah. They'll have to have some sort of visual screening around them. Yep. Right. Okay. Yeah. And even from the street side, this elevation here, you can't see that. You can't see that flat roof anyway, but uh we'll we'll follow the law. And and signage at this point, we don't talk about signage. It's more for a preliminary. We did we did show, you know, a sign uh in that front gable at the front entry. Okay. Um but are you planning some sort of a a big sign with No, not no. Yeah. [clears throat]

Yeah. I mean, if there's say uh you know, 10 businesses in there, right? Going to have to you're going to want to identify them, I suppose, for the road, right? So,

the comments Joe given that this is in a zone one watershed protection district, I'd love to have a brief little overview from your engineer as it relates to storm water management.

Right. Hi, my name is Chris Du Hamill, professional engineer and land surveyor with Depre Engineering offices at 90 Broadway in Newport. Uh, this is um a 1.42 42 acre site um developed with a existing office building of 3767 uh square feet parking that's pvious impervious parking of 33 spaces to handicapped. Um there's an existing storm water retention basin that's built um to accommodate the development and to uh mitigate peak runoff that was previously approved by DM and constructed. Uh this is within the uh watershed of the Bailey Brook. The Bailey Brook is uh along the eastern boundary of the of the site. The tributary to the Ba Bailey Brook is along the eastern boundary of the site. There's an associated 200t riverbank wetland now. Um, previously 100 foot, now the new DM regulations require 200 foot. Um, so the 200t riverbank envelopes the just about the entire site, the existing building, the existing parking um certainly the drainage uh re storer area. Uh, the proposed development with the addition as Mr. Kagny has stated would uh would provide for an additional 2,57 square foot of a of a bumpout um to the west west west boundary. The dark area that you can see on that that plan that bumpout would be located over an

existing per imperous parking lot. Um so there is no increase in uh imperous surface within that area. Um there would be an increase in imperous surface by uh moving the parking providing for parking and the uh west side of the boundary moving within 3 and 1/2 ft of the Wesley boundary uh for for the parking allowing for a 24T uh travel aisle to access the parking lot to um access the parking. So that was offset by providing for uh pvious parking pavers, concrete pavers and that would drain um and infiltrate at the location of the of the parking area. what what um what this also and we've also uh incorporated uh the same concrete pavers at the north end of the property uh that is adjacent to the um 50-foot rightway uh leading to the site. [snorts] Um what this pvious paving does is provide for water quality improvements over what exists today. Back in when this uh original development was permitted and and uh constructed, there was no requirement for water quality improvements. So, by allowing for a a sand filter media to intercept that first flush of runoff and to and to filter it within that with that place that qualifies under DEM stormwater regulations as a water quality improvement. So, we're meeting we're we're we're bringing the site into conformance um with water quality. We're also uh within conformance for an offset of the increased uh runoff that would be from an increase in imperous surface. We

simply meet that by not increasing the amount of uh imperous surfaces. We actually have a decrease. Um, currently on site there's 16,640 square foot of imperous surfaces between the road and the existing parking areas. Uh, we're providing for 3,267 square foot of uh concrete pavers. Um, the post development would would have 14,527 square ft of uh impervious. So, it's a reduction of 2,113 square ft of imperous surface. So, that alone um would reduce the runoff on site. The sand filter of the concrete pavers would provide for uh water quality improvements. Um, you know, beyond the water quality for a minute, uh, the the zero foot setback on the north side, uh, [clears throat] this site is accessed. It has frontage on on Valley Road. Uh, uh, but the of 144 ft on Valley Road, but the access is from a 50-foot defasable e easement that that runs on the north side of the site. Um and that's a paved paved access that this this property enjoys that that uh use. So there's an existing um parking that's directly off of uh valley uh the defasable easement. This pro this uh continues to use that. So the zero foot is uh is what what is out there today and we're continuing to use that. um the

3 and 1/2t uh buffer from the uh uh west side of the of the property. Um that's that's a reduction from what is out there presently, the 10 the 10-ft minimum that's required. We're using 7 feet. We're moving the the parking seven feet closer to the to the buffer. This would allow for the fire access, emergency access, ped uh vehicle access um to those parking spaces and the 9 by18 designed parking spaces. Um to the to the uh west side, uh that property is undeveloped. It's owned by the city of New Newport. Um there's a wetland that's on the property that would pretty much prelude um development of that parcel to begin with. We're not directing any discharge of runoff water or any use of that uh that new city of Newport parcel. We are we have a 3 and a half foot buffer um that we're going to going to maintain. Um we we're more than happy to offset it with the uh proposed landscaping that that was suggested. our landscape architect um hasn't been able to look at all the the native species that were provided, but I'm I'm certain that she won't have any any objection to that. So, I I uh we we also have a lighting plan um that's been presented that could be reviewed a preliminary plan, but the lighting plan is for lights within the to be mounted on the building to be um down uh dark sky compliant um so it doesn't spill over into the Newport city of Newport or the uh the uh pond area or certainly the wetland area. There's no

there's it's all within the uh existing parking area and the entrances um to the building. Um, I think that's uh if if there's any questions I Yeah, I wanted to ask what if any um maintenance requirements are there with the sand filter, you know, by increasing the pvious area, you know, the pavement. Is there any maintenance required of that?

Sure. I I worked with a town engineer. I should should note that um the standard um details for this uh concrete pavers stormrete pavers um doesn't require a geoteexile to be underneath the pavers to to isolate the sand filter media. Um and it was you know talking with the engineer it was felt that if we had that uh wrap of the geoexile fabric on the on the base of it we we had asked for the base of it to be uh wrapped but to also wrap it on the top of it. It'll further protect any silt sediment that uh could potentially clog the pores of that. Um the maintenance would be vacuuming uh twice a year of of the structure so that it freely drains. um you know over a number of years uh the you know the would the structure would have to be rebuilt. Uh so it's limited to the areas of of parking of cars parking. It's not within the travel lane of of the aisles where you get a lot of um tire turning potent potential uh moving of the of the concrete pavers or it's so it's it's in a well suited area. It's designed for this area just to have parking o over the concrete pavers. So, there is maintenance on anything, but it would be a vacuum uh truck and that would be a part of the homeowners association. Well, not homeowners, business um entity that would um maintain that.

Okay. Any other comments? EJ, I was wondering how many units there will be anticipated in the building itself. I'm sorry. How many units will be

the architect has has designed the um the site which we utilize for the parking calculations on the first floor. There is there is a there's um commercial the lower floor has commercial with uh what what did he call it? Yeah, the data storage. Thank you. And and that that is governed by the number of employees that would be employed there. Eight employees. Uh the first floor has um general business uh and and uh of 1900 square feet and office of 2787 square ft. So this is um petitionable spaces that could have a number of businesses but it was meant to be um usable space of about 4700 square ft. And then the second floor um from the street level of Valley Road is um 4,700 square feet. Again, something that could be petitioned. So, the number of businesses is based on the market.

Mike, BJ, you all set? Okay. Thanks,

Mike. So, so you imply that the the drainage system has a has a a lifespan. So, and would have to be rebuilt over a certain period of time uh in the operations and maintenance uh plan. Is is there a schedule for rebuilding after a certain number of years? Uh it it it would um any drainage best management um practice storm water management system requires maintenance. uh the existing uh extended dry detention basin that is constructed built on site. You can see on the sitewalk how it's all mowed and there's no woody vegetation that's uh you know within that area. So that that protects the sidewalls from from uh piping, groundwater piping might blow it out. So that that has to be continued. Uh yeah,

the pvious blocks uh do they get to a point where they you know sweeping them is not going to uh you know keep them you know uh pvious anymore? Are they going to just kind of block up and become impervious after a while if even if you do certain amount of maintenance on them? I

I would say that's true. I but but having regular regular twice a year vacuuming is what's recommended and that's part of the operation maintenance that can be reported to the public works director if if so you so choose but uh it's it's it's it's a very limited use like I said it's not pvious pavement over the uh over the entire parking lot and commercial developments uh we've we've We've designed pvious pavement and um and it's it's worked, but it doesn't have the the same um over a number of years with the travel the tire travel. It it marks up the previous pavement more and so it doesn't have that same allure of a of a class A office space. So this concrete pavers has has more resiliency and and uh and wrapping the fabric around the the uh the sand filter is is something that would give it more resiliency as well. So I think this a good choice for this type of business storm water management. Um Chris, you have to prepare a storm water management plan for this project. Is that correct?

Yes, we have. And that has to be approved by the town engineer. Is that correct? Yes, it it does. Okay. Any other comments? I'm fine. Thank you. Of course. Criteria for a special Yes. Do you have an opinion as to

it will improve the uh water quality discharge. This will be in conformance with the current um RIM stormwater management manual and um this would allow for water quality improvements where none exists today. Thank you. Thank you. Any other comments, questions? Okay, Ron, you're going to have to help me get the sequence right here. We first have to ask for comments from the public. Comments. Oh, that's right. That's right. Public hearing. I do that. Thank you. So, is there anyone from the public who would like to comment? Melissa

Melissa Welch, 535 Walcott Avenue. I'm chair of the Conservation Commission and I just want to add a little clarity to what we've already heard. Um the conservation commission did uh vote to recommend approval with conditions and those conditions were to address the issue of the loss of um green that green buffer at the western side of the property. So as we've heard the western side of the property the green buffer which is currently grass was going from 10 ft wide down to 3 and 1/2 ft wide. Now, I do want to clarify that we on the conservation commission very much approve of the idea of porous pavement. That's great. We totally agree that porest pavement is a great improvement over imperous pavement. The pavement that's in existing right now definitely an improvement, but it doesn't fully compensate for the loss of the green space there that where it was currently grass. But we recognize that um just having it be grass is not a um is not as beneficial as it could be to habitat in that area. So our recommendation was to make a better compensation for that loss of green space was to add in those native plantings that the tree commission has recommended. So there's more of an effort to improve the overall um environment of the existing green the green space that will be after the development and we very much appreciate the tree commission's help with that coming up with a plan that really improves the overall habitat overall habitat um greater biodiversity in the area uh greater habitat for pollinators birds and other wildlife. So that's what we were aiming for. We still would rather have had some additional buffer at the western edge of the property, but

we think this is a good um this helps to compensate for the loss of that green buffer by having the added biodiversity with the various plantings. And so we really appreciate that the tree commission came up with that great plan and we want to see that go forward and we hope that a maintenance plan for the landscaping will also be part of the final plan. Yeah. Well, I agree. It would have been nice to see a larger separation there, but I think the tree commission has come up with a good plan. Yes. Um I hear the applicants saying they're willing to work with them as uh tree commission has done many times and they are required to put in a a landscape maintenance plan. So that will be part of the great package.

Thank you very much. Thank you. Is there anyone else in the public who would like to speak? online. Anyone online wishing to speak, please raise your hand. Anyone else? I have a motion to close the public hearing. So moved. Second. Motion is made and seconded to close the public hearing. Any discussion? All those in favor say I. I. Oppose. Nay. Chair votes I. Motion passes. The public hearing is closed. We have to take these in a certain order. Is that correct?

Yeah. As as it being a unified review, we'll do the zoning first. Zoning uh request for zoning relief. So, you've got two requests. One for special use permit for development within zone one of the watershed protection district and then the variance request. So, I think you could probably take those separately.

Yeah. Um, I would apply I guess I would apply the conditions to all of the decisions that you're making. So, you've got three recommended conditions. The first being the um submission of a of a landscape plan that addresses the comments of the tree commission. Um the second being uh final review of the stormwater management plan by the town engineer and the third one being uh providing the a copy of the closed circuit television um inspection

inspection. Uh and I would even though it says in the memo prior to permitting I would recommend that those three conditions be addressed prior to preliminary plan. So when they come back for a preliminary plan review, hopefully all of those items will be addressed at that point. Good suggestion. Thank you. So again, I I think you know, start with the special use permit um with the recommended conditions and the findings. Okay. So may I have a motion um to approve the request for a special use permit uh subject to the three conditions that Ron read out? So moved.

Second. Motion is made and seconded. Is there any discussion? Those in favor say I. I. I. Oppos? Nay. Chair votes I. Motion passes. Uh may I have a motion to approve the request for the variance uh of the zoning ordinance uh for the zero foot setback uh subject to the three conditions that Ron read and the findings and the findings and the findings and the findings. That motion I moved second. Motion is made and seconded. Is there any discussion? All those in favor say I. I oppose nay.

Chair votes I. Motion passes. Now we move to the variances. Nope. You've got the you've got the variance done. So this is now the approval of the master plan, land development project master plan with the waivers. Waivers. Okay. Uh actually it's just the one waiver now because they've removed um one of the waivers. The landscaping one. Yep. There's um that right. The landscaping waiver is no longer required. 25% landscaping waiver is no longer required. There's still a waiver necessary for 10 foot wide landscape buffer along the property lines. So, there's that one waiver that you'd consider as part of the approval of the master plan along with the conditions and the findings.

Okay. So, may I have um that motion, please? Um for the granting of the U variance, I'm sorry, master plan approval and the waiver for the 10- foot wide landscape buffer. That motion please. So moved. Second. Motion is made and seconded uh to approve uh to give master plan approval along with approval of the uh waiver request for the 10- foot wide uh for relief from the 10 foot wide uh landscape buffering. With the conditions and findings. With the conditions and findings. Thank you. There any uh further discussion? All those in favor say I.

I approve. Nay. She votes I. Motion passes. Thank you. Good luck with this prepare.

We look forward to that. [clears throat] It's recorded. Next item on the agenda is item 5A. This is a request of Melo Realy Inc. owner and Codington Cove Land Condominium Association applicants for a waiver from design standards. Thanks. Take your discussion outside, please.

Uh standard section 521.2.Ctown rules and regulations regarding the subdivision and development of land for use of exterior building materials, vinyl siding not meeting design requirements. Property is located at 300 Cington Highway, tax assessors plat, lot 103. I have a motion to open the public hearing. So moved. Second. Motion is made and seconded to open the public hearing. Is there any discussion? All those in favor say I. I.

Oppos? Nay. Chair votes I. The public hearing is open. Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the board. Gerard Galvin from Galvin Law. uh [clears throat] on behalf of the applicant here. Um

so uh many of you I I think four of you were with us at the site visit just last week but all of you may remember uh we were before you with this project uh for master plan approval in May of 2024 and that's the hearing at which in which we addressed uh all of the waiver requests uh that came along uh with that project and at that hearing we addressed a waiver request for materials, siding materials uh that deviated from the town standards and at that time the proposal um contemplated a metal frame building and uh Spencer's the architect of record and we he spoke about uh why the waiver was appropriate to allow for metal siding at that time.

[clears throat]

We eventually uh gained approval uh for the project final plan approval and the plan set that was attached with that final plan approval contained those metal siding uh sided buildings um which you see uh up here. Following that approval, uh, you know, the the rest of the process began to take place. Uh, and at some point, and I think it was in an effort, and we have, uh, two of our principles here, Will Lopes and Ed Lopes, in the back, and they can speak to this if you have any questions, but I think in an effort to, uh, have the building be a bit more aesthetically pleasing, a a bit more in line with the New England uh, aesthetic that we seek to drive at uh, in our standards. uh they uh changed out the metal siding component of the building with vinyl siding uh that's u horizontal and we have uh a bit of that material here and those who were at the site visit saw that uh a bit of a step back the front of the building um was very specifically uh designed by Spencer to front face on Codington Highway with a a true New England aesthetic Um, I think it's a clapper or a Yeah, you you can you can describe what it is, but that's not an issue here. One building has been built and the units there have been sold. Um I think generally speaking there's been um good degree of acceptance and happiness with how that has looked from the abutters perspective and and I think from the town but it was brought to our attention that that deviated from uh the type of waiver we received at that master plan. So the way to uh to remedy that is we're we're here tonight asking for a revision to the waiver that you previously granted. You previously

granted a waiver from this section to allow for metal siding and tonight we're asking that you uh grant it amend that waiver to allow for the vinyl siding that is up on the one existing building uh that they hope to carry forward to the remaining three buildings that have not yet been constructed. Uh [clears throat] so that is the request. Um we do uh in my letter to you asking for your consideration we uh submitted a photograph of what the metal sighting would look like. Uh we have um brought in what the the vinyl sighting looks like. We do have Spencer here who can speak to the um I think good planning practice of this and the idea that this fits with u some of our other goals in the standard specifically trying to make it look like that New England aesthetic. Um, so if you have any questions for me, I'm happy to take it. Uh, Will and Ed are here if you have any questions for them. Um, and but otherwise, I'll let Spencer come and speak to the, uh, the change in material.

Hello. Do I need to swear in or sign in? Do I need to sign in or swear in?

Just identify yourself and give architect for the project. Um, so just to clarify, when we were here originally, we were thinking this was a metal building. And a metal building siding is integral to the structure of the building. It's not something you can sort of take off or not use or switch out. It's actually engineered to keep the building vertical and it has sheer strength to it. So um when the decision was made to follow the design but switch to a non-metal building, so a more traditional wood frame building um obviously that metal siding which would be integral to the metal building isn't needed or really wanted. Um, and so we have the ability to have a more traditional plywood siding and then we would use um, you know, a more traditional looking, more New England looking uh, exterior sighting for the sides and back. The front remains just as we had proposed to you. It's up. It's there. You can see it. I think it looks great. it uh definitely when you're driving by is a little bit more aesthetic than the piles of asphalt that have been here since I've been on the island. Um but that is uh that's kind of the rationale of how it sort of changed as we built the building slightly differently and and the the non-metal building or switching to a more traditional style building uh is a better building for in a number of ways. metal buildings are the sort of least expensive, flimsiest sort of construction. So, I think if anything, this is a uh benefit to the owner, benefit to the tenants, and ultimately a better product that stands in the town. So, I think from an architectural perspective, driving past it down Codington, looking along the sides of

the building, the 4-in clapboard is more of a New England style siding than what you would get on a metal building, which we're all familiar with, which is that vertical corrugated metal look, which we kind of thought we were we were going to get anyway with the building, but I've just explained why it's changed. Any questions for me? Sure. Use the mic, please.

Uh, first I I know you mentioned it and I I did as well, but we're primarily concerned or substantially concerned with how these properties are going to look from the road. and this property in particular, you know, you've you've took special care to uh present these front buildings in a particular way to Codington Highway where cars are are flying by. Um the areas of these buildings that we're talking about uh with this siding, they're set further back. There's landscape buffering um on one side, correct? And the bus station on the other. That's right.

So they're not substantially visible from from the road. Correct. That's why we paid particular attention to the front of the building and that those aspects remain unchanged from the initial approval.

And then just the material itself. I know um I've heard concerns before about the material, vinyl material generally, but this is a material that is accepted um as a material, a sighting material across industrial zones and residential and other commercial buildings. Your experience um safe and it's generally accepted. Yeah, I'd say vinyl siding is probably the most used sighting on the island for sure and probably across the country. So, it's very common. In fact, it's the most common sighting that I know of

and compliant with every fire safety standard that uh would be applied. Haven't I haven't heard any issues with that. Um, usually when we're dealing with fire ratings on buildings, it's typically interior keeping two spaces safe from one another. um most buildings, in fact, you can imagine if it was uh cedar, it would be more flammable.

I have any comments or questions, Joe? From uh Spencer, from a aesthetics and maintenance standpoint, the vinyl compared to the metal, explain if any differences. Yeah. So, uh I would say they're pretty similar. They both last for years. Uh having worked on metal buildings over the years that were 20, 30, 40 years old. They do need paint um over time and sometimes they rust. Uh the vinyl I that issue at all.

So So would this material have like a lifetime warranty on it associated with it or something? So I just but uh I know one of the reasons people use it so prevalently is that they don't have to do anything to it ever maybe hose it down occasionally.

So mentally I'm trying to look at this as an upgrade. All right. Um so I was at the site visit you know and um you know I saw uh the look of it you know and and to me it looked better than say what uh you know a metal building would be you know but I guess um so this board this board has a function here you know so uh you know we set up design standards and you know when you come before us you know we kind of approve certain design standards and things like this you know but when you put it when you decide to go ahead you know and just put the stuff up you know which is different from what we expected, you know. Yeah. Why why why did you have to do it that way? Why didn't you just come before us before you did that, you know?

Yeah. And I I can I can speak to what I think the confusion was. Um and if we need um Mr. Loes to elaborate, we we can have him do that. uh we sought the waiver from traditional materials and the material we spoke about at the hearing was the metal siding uh and that's and those were the plans that were done and and that's what was was carried through final approval. Um I I think in their planning process they did uh decide to shift gears in an effort to make it better as we're talking about. And I think there was just a mistaken belief that the waiver that was granted was a waiver from the use of traditional materials as opposed to being locked in to the metal. And and so that's why they proceeded. It it it wasn't an in out of an intent to thumb their nose at at the board in any way. It happened to make its way through the building permit process, which um we would have hoped it would have been caught there, but it wasn't. Again, that's not casting blame. It's just an unfortunate situation where um you know that that change was made. Certainly if I had been aware of it, we would have been asked to come back to seek uh permission and not, you know, say I'm sorry. Um but when we did catch it, we all understood that this was the process that we needed to go through, which is to come back before you explain what happened, explain why, and um hope you can understand that we think we've made this a better building. And certainly anytime uh we catch something in advance, we're going to be we we ask for permission and address that with you. It wasn't, you know, we feel badly about it. It's not what we wanted to have happen. U but it's where we found ourselves and that's why we're

here tonight. Other comments? Um I have a comment. Um, first of all, I I agree the building does look much better than if it had the metal siding. But I want to ask you this question. If we were to approve your request for this waiver as you have uh stated it, uh what's to prevent future applicants from coming in with a plan that is fully compliant with town ordinances and then go off and do what they want and come back and ask for permission to change. What What's to prevent that? Well, I think I think Mr. Chairman, you you have to just take every case as it comes and I hope you

But if we approve this, we're establishing a precedent.

No. Well, I No, I don't think that that's true. I think every one of these applications comes before you on their own. And I think the precedent here is Yeah. There there there was a mistake. Now, it's different than what you just said because we received a waiver to deviate from town standards on materials. We got an approval for a waiver that would have made this building look uglier than it does today. All we're asking for you to do is is revise the waiver that you already granted to allow for us to keep it looking better. And I will tell you, I I I struggled with this. I was very I was not pleased to hear that a different material went on there than was discussed at uh at the master plan. I don't like uh coming before you and acknowledging that an error took place and having to ask for this, but sometimes these things do happen and I think you have to judge whether it's appropriate or not and whether there's being, you know, we're forthright and we're we're trying to make it right. That's all I can tell you. I certainly don't think this would be a precedent to say somebody can come up here and lie to you or intentionally get away with anything. My clients understand you could very well deny this and they have to put metal up, but we put the application in. We're explaining it to you and we're hoping that, you know, together we can all understand that this is a better result than, you know, going back to the waiver you first uh first granted. Uh I I have to uh disagree with you about the kind of precedent this sets. I I think we would run into this over and over if we approve this and the way you have requested your uh waiver request, I would have to vote against it. But I do have a proposal that you modify your request and it it's a proposal that I

could support if you are willing to accept it. uh recognizing that um this this building as you have modified it um looks much better and is much more in line with the uh requirements the town has for New England style buildings. I would support a request if you modify it to say that you keep the vinyl on the building that you have completed and use composite siding on all sides of the three remaining buildings. you're willing to accept that, I would support that.

Well, you know, that uh I think raises significant Are you asking for an answer to that from If you want us to vote on it this evening, then yes, I I would like an answer on it.

Well, can you bear with me for a moment so I can ask my clients about their thoughts on that? Well, I I don't know that my clients are in a position to commit to the expense. They I don't know that they know that. Um, I I I think the position we're in is um, you know, I it's awkward to try to negotiate with you on this point and I'm, you know, I don't like the idea of having to do that, but um,

continue it if you wish.

Well, perhaps that's the answer. I I don't know how the other uh, board members feel about this. I I understand how you feel about it. The other alternative that I want to make sure or or or want to understand if you're open to is allowing the existing building to remain as is and allow for the metal that has previously been approved uh to go on the newly built ones which um again I don't think that serves anybody well but you know financial implications are real and you know I certainly tonight they can't commit to the kind of cost increase that you're proposing. Um so you know I would very much like to know uh

how the others feel. Yeah. And and maybe not necessarily a vote. I mean you've made it very clear how you feel and I don't know if that is representative. You know I know uh I can ask them I can ask them how they feel and you can get their views on it.

Yeah. I I I I you know we we received positive feedback from from I understand the point you're making about process and I appreciate it. Um but I would hate to have a a lesser project here than everybody's willing to have. Um because of that fear. I I think the board, you know, is in a really good position to enforce its rules. I think the enforcement branch of the town is in very a very good position to enforce the rules where there have been violations. When we realized this had come up, the town approached me and they said, "We have an issue here." And we talked about, "Well, how can we fix this?" And this this was how after discussion with Chris Costa and Ron and the solicitor, this was how you know the decision was made to try to correct this. And I understand your position and I don't like having to be here as I've I've said, but I think you have the ability to decipher and determine who is I think genuinely before you because of a mistake and is trying to make this right versus somebody who's trying to pull a fast one on the town. And I don't think this sets that precedent. So I I want if I could to get a sense from the other members who've some of whom have been on site I think who could see the benefit.

I just want to say I don't think you're pulling a fast one but I also want to say that it's not our job to decide who's trying to pull a fast one or not. We're up here to enforce the ordinances. But but no, but no, you make decisions about the plans and you did and they weren't followed and we were an enforcement action began and we were made aware of it and we're here to try to correct it and that's how enforcement happens. So, and I think you're well protected in that regard. I think you have a a very professional team looking to enforce your decisions and that's how this b that's how this came up. Um, so you know, again, I understand your position, but I just think in this circumstance, uh, we're trying.

Would you like to get a sense of the board? Yes, I would very much, Joe.

Um, I have mixed feelings. Um, I understand that mistakes do happen and I'm sitting here as a developer in private practice. Um how um you know when you have inspections at various points during the construction process thinking about precedent setting and when this gets catched, you know, at the onset of a change and people are made aware of, hey, wait a minute, that's not what we approved versus it's fully constructed and then realizing, hey, that's not what we approved. So, um I do believe the aesthetic of what's proposed is potentially better. Um and I am happy about that. But I Paul I get it in terms of you know we're not here to be the enforcement body but you know trying to set guidelines that people adhere to when an applicant comes before us. So um I appreciate the opinion of our chair. I would vote in favor of this. Um, and if you need additional time to consider the cost implications, I think that's prudent to kind of maybe

take a pause and come back. So, if I can make sure I'm understanding you, you're saying you vote to approve our request or the chairman's modification of that. I if you guys said it's all or nothing tonight.

Yeah. Um, but I I I would I would vote in favor of that. Um, I would like for you to consider Paul's request. Um, and you know, out of respect and um, adherence to our rules. And if I could just as I try to get a sense of the rest of the board, I want to respond to one point you made which I think is very pertinent. Uh a building permit request was filed, you know, with these with the plans and you know with with the materials and the discrepancy wasn't caught. And again, I'm not casting blame, but if

No, nor I I'm not trying to throw anybody under the bus either. If this had come up, you know, at that point, we we would have made the correction. Um, I get it. So, that's my opinion. Thank you, DJ.

Uh, my opinion, excuse me, and forgive me for my coughing because I don't know where that came from. I hope I'm not getting something. But uh I am very uh I liked everything I saw very very much. Uh my quandry is the setting of the president and this is one reason why I'm uh I I am for but I'm also setting a precedent with this. So uh I don't think I can vote for it at this stage.

Okay. Well, if I could have one more moment, please, with my clients, unless Well, Mr. Fenton, I'm happy to hear from you, Mike. Yeah. So, uh I I'm a little confused about uh you know u when you about Paul's proposal here, you know, like how that impacts, you know, the overall cost of your project. is that it sounds to me like what you described is, you know, you had a metal building and you decided to construct it out of wood, right? Well, it it Yeah, it wasn't a uh

I guess I'm I I don't understand the impact of how how Paul's uh proposal would impact, you know, the overall cost of the cost. Well, the cost for the the material that Mr. Crochi is looking for is substantially more than the cost of this material. But I don't know precisely. Composite material is Yes. So for instance, the front of the structure I think was built with that material in order to present as good a front-facing town that we could. Yeah. But it stopped where it did because it's cost prohibitive to throw on a tradesman center all the way back, right?

Um it it doesn't make sense. So um you know uh you know we have a can you give me a sense of you know what the impact is you know on that financial financially I mean um you know the uh say the overall cost of that composite say versus this vinyl. Do you have any sense Spencer indicates approximately three times more. Okay.

[laughter] I I just want to say we had a project come before us. I think it was two years ago and um they came in requesting vinyl siding and we rejected it suggested composite. They went back and came back to us saying that the cost was not that much different. So I suggest you do some more homework on that. down court.

Well, in my opinion, I I certainly very much respect our chair. Um, but at the same time, I would have to agree with Joe in this circumstance. Um, I don't think we're setting a precedent because I was I visited the job site and I think it's uh permissible for a board member to take into consideration the surrounding areas and that's very commercial. So for that reason I would support it. Well, no. So, I my clients have had the opportunity to hear, you know, your questions and your if I could have just a few minutes. I understand you have other business to attend to. If I could just speak with them briefly and get a sense of what they'd like me to do here.

Hi, uh members of the board, Ed Lopes, um principal, uh of Cington Cove Commons LLC, one of the principles. So, I hear your concerns. Um, to to the issue on how we got here, you know, on the plan set that we had, it said metal sighting or alternative or words to that effect. So, we understood that to mean that we could probably use another type of sighting. When we gave it to the vendor, this is what he came back with. And we never looked back until we went and tried to get our CFO. And then we figured that there there was an issue here. But we were upfront about it the whole time. We worked with the planning department and the legal folks and um you know we we understand what we did and we get it. To the chair's point, you know, we're willing to take a continuence, go back and look and see if you know what we can do on the siding. When we first looked at it, it was quite expensive. You know, building materials are extremely expensive. But with your indulgence, we will do that and come back and and and present those those findings if we can get a continuence to next month. Yeah. And that's that's fine. That if

I'm not here next month, um I don't Okay. We're going to need to consider that. We can continue it to two meetings out if you want. Is that okay? Let's So, um we we we are trying to come out of the ground with building two. Um but let's we we'll consider that. We just get the continuence. If it's going to be next month or the month after, we'll talk amongst ourselves and and the town. We could continue this to the uh April meeting. Yes, please. Yeah, that'd be good. Is that okay with everyone? Yes. Okay. So, we will uh leave the uh public hearing open and um I'll ask for a motion to continue this to the April regular meeting.

April 8th. April 8th. April 8th. We'll have we'll have to be sure that when the final are here. Well, he is his one. Well, no. The five of us were were here this evening. Don't I think you don't you have to stick with the same members when you're the planning board can members can simply

that would be acceptable on this type of project. So, we we have a motion might be finished this night tonight. [laughter] I can't control any of that. So I mean u with respect to uh what Charlie raised and what Mike just raised there could be a different five people or yes those different does that matter does that matter as long as we have a quorum? As long as there's a quorum those people can review uh the video of this evening's presentation in advance the next meeting. That's a and a decision. That's new to me. But you're you're an attorney. I'm not

It's different for for the zoning board, which I know you've sat on before. There's different requirements for different types of hearings. But we're I see what you mean. Okay. Yeah. There's no zoning issue here. It's just the waiver from the the planning board's regulations. That's why I'm misunderstanding. Okay. Okay. So, is there any further discussion on this motion to continue? All those in favor say I. I. Oppos? A chair votes eye. This item is continued to the regular meeting in April. April. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Thank you. The next item on the agenda is item 4B. This is a public hearing consideration of adoption of proposed amendments to the Middletown rules and regulations regarding the subdivision and development of land by adding appendix D traffic impact study requirements to implement requirements and guidelines for the preparation of traffic impact studies submitted for proposed subdivisions and development projects and to provide a recommendation to the town council for ratification of set amendments. May I have a motion to open the public hearing?

Second. Motion is made and seconded to open the public hearing. Any discussion? All those in favor say I. I. Nay. Chair votes eye. The public hearing is open. Um does anyone have any additional comments about the uh draft open it up to the public? So, is there any member of the public who wishes to comment on this? Online. There's nobody online. Last call. Anyone wish to speak on this? We have a motion to close the public hearing.

So moved. Second. Motion is made and seconded to close the public hearing. Any discussion? All those in favor say I. I. I oppose. Nay chair votes I. Public hearing is closed. So uh our we've now held the public hearing. So the vote uh we need to take is to forward this to the town council for you. Well, it would be a I guess a single motion, but the motion would be to approve or adopt the proposed standards as part of the town's land subdivision and land development regulations and then to forward a recommendation to the town council to ratify that adoption.

Thank you. So, uh, may I have a motion then to, um, uh, approve this for planning board use, um, subject to forwarding to the town council for ratification? That motion, please. Moved. Second.

Motion is made and seconded. Is there any discussion? All those in favor say I. I. Oppose. Nay. Chair votes I. Motion passes. Next item is item 4 C, a discussion and recommendation to the town council on proposed amendments to Middletown zoning ordinance town code chapter 152 section 728 regarding adaptive reuse to address uh to address changes to state law. There's uh no public hearing here. So um all read this draft comments on the draft.

So if I might, Mr. Chairman, yes, just to point out that as discussed earlier in the meeting, this was held back, this particular um amendment to the uh zoning ordinance to address some concerns that the board had raised in. Yeah. And the the the red changes we have seen before. It's the yellow changes

where Exactly. Exactly. So, where I've highlighted it in yellow, those are the things that have changed since the last time you saw this in response to comments made at the last meeting. Um again there are a couple of areas within section 728 that there there is some discretion allowed by the revised state law board had asked for consideration of allowing expansion of existing commercial buildings uh to some extent as part of an adaptive reuse project as currently implemented in town. Um, all adaptive reuse has to be within the existing envelope of the building without any expansion besides expansions necessary for code issues. The board asked that we look at the possibility of allowing for expansion. So, what I've drafted here and it's it's really up for discussion um is to allow a single story addition to any existing building. So one additional floor and or up to 50% increase in the footprint of the building. Um so both of those things could happen or one or you know one or either of those could happen as part of an adaptive reuse project which allows for some expansion to the building. It doesn't allow for unlimited expansion. And again, I think I pointed out at the last meeting, I'd be concerned if let's say we had a I don't know, a 2,000 foot commercial building and someone cames came in and said, "I want to adaptively reuse that into a 50,000 foot building." Well, that that's not the intent of adaptive reuse. Um, so there's some expansion opportunity in in the draft that I've I've provided to you, but it it there is a limit there.

Yeah. Yeah. I go ahead. So, so this is really um to address the fact that we see and we recognize that some of these these petitions that we're hearing on the commercial side turn around and come back on the residential side and uh it's not fair to anybody. Uh so this kind of cleans that up. Is that fair to say? I think so. Yes. I think there I think there was an application earlier tonight. No, I mean I I agree with Char I agree with Charlie and and believe that this is very helpful. Appreciate it, Ron. So again, the num I agree with

the numbers I put in there for discussion. You know, if if if you know, one story is accept, you know, one additional story is acceptable, then you can leave that. If the 50% additional footprint, again, it's up for you guys to discuss. Um and and maybe I'll just point out the other area of of discretion. Um see, oh this was um actually Steve raised this. The possibility of allowing when you've got an adaptive reuse project on a site allowing for additional development on that site for residential use. Um, so under the adaptive reuse statute and under our regulations, if you've got, for example, the KVH building that's being converted into housing, if that property owner wanted to come in and add an additional building to that site, if they had the room and they could do it in compliance with zoning, under the current regulations, they couldn't add an additional building for residential use

because it's not allowed in that zoning district. Is that what the U yellow on page three is addressing? Yeah. Okay. So the language that I added and uh you know I guess I defer to the solicitor too on his thoughts of the language but the intent is that in a situation where you've got an adaptive reuse project whether it's a new one or something that maybe even happened a while back on that property. Additional building would be permitted for residential use provided they met all of the requirements

provided it meets all the zoning you know dimensional requirements. recognizing that as a res as a result of that adaptive reuse project, it's become a residential property essentially even though the zoning district typically would not allow for residential development. And I just to add, so I think it really just closes the loophole of people building commercial structures and then coming in and then just saying, "Oh, well, now we want to convert it." So it's that's more work for the developer and it's more work for the board and for the municipality and at the end of the day you still end up with residential structures. So it just closes those loopholes and I think is to the benefit of both developers and the town.

Yeah. Yeah. I agree. I agree. I agree. I think we all agree. So what is our action here to forward this to the board? If you're comfortable with the language as drafted, you could vote to forward it to the plan to the town council with a positive record. Okay. So, may I have a motion to forward this to the town council with a favorable recommendation to adopt it? So, moved. Second. Motion is made and second. Is there any discussion? All those in favor say I. I.

Oppose. Nay. Chair votes I. Motion passes. Next item on the agenda is item 4. Discussion and recommendation to the town council on proposed amendments to the Middletown zoning ordinance town code chapter 152 section 8002 regarding destruction or demolition of nonconforming structures regarding the subdivision and development of land for use of exterior building materials. Vinyl siding not meeting Oh, I'm sorry. I misread. I I didn't stop. [laughter] Stop after structures. Apologies everyone. So, has everyone read the uh document? Want to give some introduction?

Yes. So, this a this was actually put forward by the town solicitor's office as a result of a recent uh Supreme Rhode Island Supreme Court decision involving the town of Westerly. We're in the [clears throat] town of Westerly um which has very similar language to what we have in our zoning ordinance. Uh zoning relief was granted to a property owner after their building had been destroyed to allow them to rebuild the building um that was not in compliance with the zoning regulations. uh that that approval was uh overturned on appeal um because the Westerly zoning ordinance again with similar language did not indicate that the developer had the opportunity to seek zoning relief. Um the language basically said that if it didn't comply with the zoning requirements then they couldn't reconstruct the building. I think that um obviously that was not the intent of the language adopted in Westerly. That's uh why the zoning board there approved the zoning relief to allow the the developer to rebuild. Um but because someone appealed that decision, uh it was raised that the specific language in the zoning ordinance did not allow for that um relief to be granted. Recognizing that and a similarity between our our language and the westerly language, the solicitor suggested that we add this phrase to the end of those three sections and uh or three paragraphs in section 802 which states just that unless zoning relief from said provision is granted. It just clarifies and makes it explicitly clear that there is the opportunity for a property owner to go to the zoning board to seek relief uh if necessary.

And so our action would be to forward this to the town council for approval. Yes. So yes, Joe. So So what we're discussing in approving is just Ron the language that's in red text that you added to existing language that we currently have. Correct. Correct. Yes. And it closes the loophole and makes it crystal clear. Yes. I'm in favor of it. I think it's uh again well done. And I think we should uh have the proper language in place uh and not have it be open to interpretation andor misunderstanding. So,

yep. I agree. Great. So, may I have a a motion to forward this to the town council for their approval? Yeah, I I'll make the motion. Yes. Second. Motion is made and seconded to forward this to the town council for approval. Is there any discussion? All those in favor say I. I.

Opposed? Nay. Chair votes I. Motion passes. Next item on the agenda is item 6A, the status report on planning board action items. Does anyone have any comments on this document? Next item on the agenda, committee reports. Tree commission.

Tree commission is very busy as usual. It's preparing for the upcoming months um planting of new trees in designated streets where the uh street owners have asked for this and uh also uh just checking in general what is happening in the town for uh for development. Thank you. Open Space and Fields.

So, I was at the last meeting and uh the uh the Open Space and Fields committee was looking for a uh an access point to the uh Middletown uh valley trails from Valley Road. I guess uh presently there's access points at high on high street and also at behind uh I think it's behind the supermarket there but there's no access point for the residential properties along uh valley road. So um so there was a group that went out and they kind of identified an area which is down the access road from uh the entrance to the Kempenar uh property. I mean the Kempen clan bank property and off of that they're proposing a trail adding a trail that would connect into the u to the valley trails. So they're going to make that proposal to the town council and see if it could be funded soon.

Um Leon is not here but as it turned out I attended the last uh conservation commission meeting. Uh there were no applications before them and so they uh devoted the evening to discussion of um how they could make themselves more effective in the town. Uh which meant I mean you heard Melissa talking this evening about how they approached u um the 345 Valley Road project. They also want to broaden their activities as well. So Melissa may be coming in to talk to you about that. So that's what I can report on that. I assume the Middletown Center Citizens Committee's on hold until something happened.

Yeah, it was nice of her to come because Yeah, really did clarify some stuff for myself. Yeah, I think it was good that they both came. Yeah. Commission and the conservation commission. So upcoming upcoming meetings, we have um our uh joint meeting on March 16th, our regular meeting on March 11th, and we also have a special meeting on March 18th as well. Right. That is uh the public hearing for the comprehensive plan. Correct. Yeah. Any other comments people want to bring before the board? A motion to adjurnn. So move. Second.

Motion is made and seconded to adjurnn. Any discussion? All those in favor say I. I oppose. Nay. Chair votes I. Motion passes. Meetings adjourned. I have a um that was made two and a half years ago and there's an entirely different board and the superior court sent it back to the planning board to rewrite the decision. And apparently there's a problem entirely