Planning Board - Regular Meeting

This meeting will come to order. This is a regular meeting of the planning board. I wish to tell you that this meeting will end at 7 p.m. As you can see, we have only four members here, and one has to leave at 7 o'clock. We lose our quorum, so the meeting will end at 7. First item on the agenda this evening is a reconsideration of the vote on the recommendation to the town council on the appointment of a planning board member to serve on the middle town economic development advisory committee. This was a motion that was taken up at the last meeting at the last meeting. We also had four members present. So in order for the motion to pass, we needed three votes. When the vote was taken, one of the members abstained, and the remaining three members voted two to one, which meant that it did not receive the required three votes, so the motion did not pass. In order for it to be reconsidered, the motion must be raised by a person who was on the prevailing opinion. And since the only vote on the prevailing opinion was for Mr. Weber, I turn the floor over to Mr. Weber.

Okay, it seems fairly simple. Let's vote on this thing tonight and see where we come out. Anybody got any discussion on the issue? I just want to give a little background on that. Any discussion on this? I'll take a motion to reconsider. The motion then to reconsider.

Motion is made to reconsider the vote taken at the last meeting on the motion to recommend a position, a planning board position, a non-voting planning board position on MEDAC. Is there any discussion? All those in favor of reconsideration say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. The motion is reconsidered.

And so this matter will be placed, the matter of a recommendation of the planning to the council on a planning board representative to be back will be placed on a future planning board agenda. I talked with Paul earlier today, the town administrator, since your last meeting, the town administrator has submitted his own recommendation to the town council to appoint a member of the Planning Board to the Meet Act Committee, and the Council will be taking that up during their September 21st meeting. So I would suggest that your consideration for a recommendation for a member to appoint would come up after that September 21st meeting, assuming that the Council agrees with the Administrator's recommendation. So we'd be looking at putting this on the October agenda. Oh, okay. Yeah.

My understanding is that the council is the one that determines if the member we assign has a vote. Say that again? The council determines whether the member we provide will be a vote. Yeah, they have all the decisions.

The next item on the agenda is the approval of minutes. We have two sets of minutes from the regular meeting of July 8th and the special site visit meeting of July 31st. I have comments on one of them, so we'll take them one at a time. May I have a motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of July 8th? Motion made. Second. Motion is made and seconded. Any discussion? My comment on these minutes is on page four. And I'm just going to ask you, Ron, whether this is something that has to be documented or not. On the second item on page four, number five, relating to the sidewalk, right now it reads on one side of the cul-de-sac to meet the recommendation. Should it say one side of the cul-de-sac and the north side of the street? Yeah, I would. I would like to make that. So will the maker of the motion accept that modification?

Seconded?

OK. Is there any further discussion on these minutes? All those in favor of the amended motion to approve the minutes of July 8, say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Chair votes aye. Those minutes are approved. May I have a motion to approve the minutes from the special meeting of July 31st? I have a second. Motion is made and seconded to approve the minutes from the July 31st site visit. Is there any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Chair votes aye. Those minutes are approved. The next item on the agenda is correspondence for planning board consideration and action. A letter dated June 9th, 2026 from Gerard Galvin Esquire on behalf of SB Farm LLC requesting withdrawal without prejudice of the pending major land development project application. involving property at 913 Mitchells Lane and further identified as tax assessors plat 125 lot one.

May I have a motion to receive this correspondence? I vote.

Motion is made and seconded to receive this correspondence. Any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. Chair votes aye. Motion the correspondence is accepted. Oh, so okay. Thank you. So may I have a motion then to withdraw the application without prejudice? The motion is made and seconded to withdraw the subject application without prejudice. Is there any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. Chair votes aye. That application is withdrawn without prejudice. Agenda modifications. We will be continuing item 6B. We will take item 6A before 5A. And if time permits, we'll take 5B before 5A. With that, may I have a motion to continue item 6B? Motion made. Motion is made and seconded to continue item 6B to the September 10th meeting. Any discussion? All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, nay. Just to be clear for folks that might be here for that item, it's the Prescott Point application that's being continued to the September meeting.

To the September 9th meeting, yeah. Okay, the next item that we will take up is item 6A. The public hearing application of 50 enterprise residences LLC for preliminary plan approval of a major land development project involving proposed construction of 7 office buildings totaling 9380 square feet of office space and including associated site work such as redesign of onsite parking stormwater management and landscaping. Application includes request for variances from zoning ordinance section 603 and 1304 to allow a re-yard setback of 47.5 feet where 50 feet is required. Building height of 40.5 feet where 35 feet is allowed and 138 parking spaces where 156 spaces are required. Property is located at 50 Enterprise Center and identified as lot 15F on Tax Assessors Plat 113. 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 aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Public hearing is open. Mr. Lynch.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Jay Lynch on behalf of the owner and applicant this evening. I'll just give you a brief rundown of the requested relief in the project. I do have Mr. Bisho from 50 Enterprise Residence LLC here to explain the project. I also have Molly Titus, who is an engineer at Duprete Engineering and is the attorney of record on this project. What we're talking about here is a request to build seven office buildings structures at 50 Enterprise Center right behind us. There will be three structures on the north side of the lot, three on the south side, and then one building on the west side of the subject property. We are requesting several variances. One is the rear yard setback, which is 47.5 feet, 50 feet required. And the reason for that is that the fire department on the plans submitted to you requested that we put in a fire lane along the south side of the property. which required us to push the building back to the north. So we're encroaching into the rear yard setback by two and a half feet as a result of that request. We're also seeking a variance from the height requirements of the ordinance. The proposed structures will be at 47, the highest point, 47.5 feet from the existing grade where 35 feet is required. The request for the variance is because of the slope, the topography of the land. We're going to have to put a lot of fill on the site. So unfortunately, from the zoning code, height is based upon existing grade. When we're done, when the finished grade is done, we're going to be probably no higher than 35 feet for the proposed structures. But we are required to request the relief because we have to go from the existing grade on the site. Also, we are requesting a variance from the parking requirements of the ordinance based upon the parking requirements for office space. 74 additional spaces are required. We already are allocating 82 spaces on the site because of the previously approved adaptive reuse for the main building. As everyone's aware, at some point, once we get a certificate of occupancy or a certificate of completion for the office building, we will file an application for adaptive reuse. And at that point, that's going to bring the parking requirements down from 74 spaces down to, I think, 14 spaces. So there will be a significant change in the required parking at the end result of this project. Just wanted to make some comments on some of the recommendations that the Conservation and Tree Commission had made and submitted to the board. Those commissions requested certain additional landscaping We've agreed that we're going to incorporate those recommendations into our final plan. If we're so lucky to get preliminary plan approval from you this evening, we're going to incorporate those recommendations into our final landscaping plan.

Including the removal of that tree near the generator? One of their recommendations was to remove a tree.

I don't recall that. I recall the additional landscaping that they wanted, and we were fine with the additional landscaping.

Those were in the comments from the tree commission, that one of the trees that you proposed actually be removed.

Well, that's fine.

It's the tree that lies between the generator and the nearest building. And the reason they're suggesting that it be removed is because that is the only pathway that a vehicle has to get into the center area if they need to.

That's fine. I apologize and misunderstood. I thought there was an existing tree that was going to be removed.

It's in the comments of the tree commission. Sure. We'll adopt that.

Also, I just wanted to briefly address Mr. Walansky's report and requested possible waivers from Section 521. The first is that pedestrian access from the proposed development was not provided. It will be provided. We will have Sorry, say that again, please. The sidewalk issue. We're not requesting a waiver on our plan. We will have a sidewalk from Enterprise Center Drive to the subject property. So that will be included on the final plan.

That's a condition for approval.

With respect, there was a question about HVAC screening and where it's going to be located. The HVAC systems will be located at ground level, and they will be screened by landscaping, and that will be reflected in the final plan as well with the landscaping plan.

A waiver is not needed for that.

And there was a question on bike racks not being provided. They will be provided and they will be submitted on the final plan. So I don't think we need any waiver for that. There was a question, I had this discussion with Mr. Walensky beforehand, whether or not there was any waiver requested for the flat roof requirements. Now the regulations do allow the board to approve a flat roof if the design is appropriate to the site. I would point out that this board previously approved almost the same type of structure on the Aquidneck Avenue properties. So I'd ask that the board not require a waiver, but permit them under the section allowing flat roofs if appropriate for the area. So with that, I can have Mr. Bisho kind of walk through this project, and then I can follow up with Molly Titus to see if you have any particular questions.

Just to be sure, I was at the site visit. So later, the existing buildings, you will come back probably with a request to move those into housing, affordable housing, the buildings we saw there.

Yes. It won't be affordable, but there will be housing.

Well, it'll be housing. Yeah. So that's for the future. Yes. Something else. And what you're doing is all new. Yes. Okay. Thank you.

I think the project's pretty self-explanatory. Chris Bichaud, 96 Diana Ave, Portsmouth, Rhode Island. I think Jay laid it out. Seven office buildings. Ultimately, we'll convert them into 21 residential units. Basically, carbon copies of what's developed at 819 Aquitin Gap. and it'll just be added to the 70.

That's not part of this application.

No, it's not. But just to give a reference point, the structures and what they look like will be the same. And as we're aware, we have, at the end of result, we'll end up with 98 total housing units on the property. Unless there are any questions.

Questions, comments from planning board members?

Was the comment from Melissa Welch addressed? Get to that. Or is that we're getting to that? We can ask that question.

We'll go ahead and work with Mini Golf, who obviously is not our property. They would have to agree to this. So we'll talk to Derek Savas, who owns that, and see what we can do.

but you are agreeable to addressing that.

Yes. Yes. We'll, we'll, we'll talk to Derek.

It's a good idea. I mean, I think just in general, you know, obviously up to you guys and if you can work with the property owners, the more you can connect people with walking, even to that, you know, the, the plaza, the RK plaza, people are going to walk. It's like, yeah, it's like a hundred feet instead of five. They go all the way around.

Yeah. We agree.

Yeah. That's good. Thank you. Yeah.

The comments. I have some comments. It looks like we will not need any of the waiver requests based on what we heard this evening. I'm glad you're willing to address the pathway to the recreational area. That's a good idea, I think. Could you go over the reason why, again, why you had to exceed the height limit?

Yeah, it's the grade of the property.

Well, could you put up the profile, Ron?

So what you have, Chairman, is we have to meet a handicap accessibility.

Oh, sure. Yeah. Okay. The drawing is up. Use the mic that's on the desk, Chris, and go to the... You can pick it up.

So I think what you're looking at here is a finished grade.

The property actually is somewhere down here. Yeah, there's another drawing, Ron, that shows the elevation, shows ground level on it, the existing ground level. Oh, no. Drawing A2.0, that's the one. Yes, okay.

So this is the finished elevation.

So the existing elevation is down here.

And our problem is we have to meet the ADA, handicap accessibility, so we cannot have more than a 2% grade. So we have to raise the land up. So the existing grade, if you go from the existing grade to the top of the building, we exceed the height. Once we put the fill in and get it to the 2% grade for handicap accessibility, which is required by law, then we will be less than 35 feet. So we meet the height requirement at the finished grade. It's just that the way the calculation works is you make your calculation from the grade today. And we just can't meet the ADA requirements

physically because the grade is you know eight percent and we can't get a wheelchair down there if we stay at existing grade okay thank you so um rossman engineering had some comments on the traffic and that was redone satisfactorily so that's taken care of um You already mentioned that you will address the comments of the Conservation Commission, as well as the Tree Commission, including removal of a tree.

Well, the tree's not there yet. We just won't put it there. You don't hear that. It's actually not there, so that's easy. Remove it from your landscape. That's right. Yes, correct.

There are... conditions that the TRC put on this application. Yes. And you will meet those, I'm assuming. There's one other thing that I would like you to do, and that is when I read through what you call a narrative which fits the description of the development impact statement, there are errors in there, and I would like that redone correctly. You can submit it to the town planner for approval. I'd like to put that as a condition for approval. No worries. Okay. Joe, go ahead.

No, I do have one question. And Chris, it's probably better directed to Dupree Engineering. It's just if I could get just a quick summary of the existing stormwater and what's proposed. And just so I can wrap my head around that.

Reading the report, it's a little daunting. Yeah. Molly can help you out with that.

And I know you've got slope over there and there's a lot of impervious pavement and I'm just trying to understand it a little bit better. Sure.

Good evening. Molly Titus from Duprete Engineering. So to answer your question, we are adding a sand filter in line from the existing drainage system. It serves two purposes. It treats 100% of the new roofs, and then it treats the water quality volume of the existing pavement. So if you look at the figure, the purple lines are the drainage. We're utilizing the existing drainage network, but then rerouting low flows into that oval in the bottom left corner, which is the new sand filter. And then all the roofs are piped into there. And then the existing drainage system high flow would be the existing purple line that runs into the main basin. So the existing basin is infiltration and detention, doesn't have pretreatment or water quality. So we're adding that for the existing network and the proposed under this condition. It has been reviewed and approved by DEM under RIPTI's permit for this project.

I have a couple couple more questions in the narrative statement there, there was a statement to the effect that a sewer pump station was going to be. included, but I couldn't find it on the drawing.

There is in the bottom left corner, um, just shown on a green line, um, where the station will be.

And, um, could you go to this, go to this screen and use the mic that's on the table and show us where it is.

It's not on the sheet.

Which sheet do you need?

Go forward. There we go.

Which sheet is that?

This is sheet nine.

Where is it?

So the sewer force main is going to be located in this bottom left corner just off the back of the fire department route and then it's going to pump out to the existing onsite manhole and utilize gravity to the street and as part of the Dr see we reviewed with dpw that they will review and approve that prior to construction.

My other question is what is Brett grass pave.

It looks like what you would hold a six pack of soda together with the plastic it looks like a waffle cone like the waffle plastic structure and it's placed below grass, so it stabilizes it to be driven on, but it looks like long.

grass grows through it and it looks like okay, thank you, thank you. So what questions I have any other comments.

I had a comment. It's a comment, and I want to make it known that I don't think we could take action or make this a condition. But I would just like to say that I am a mechanical engineer, and I think it's pervy that I give you an opinion from somebody who has graduated more recently in the sense of HVAC. You guys plan on using a natural gas system to my understanding. Is that correct? So the reason I bring this up is that the Providence Journal recently put out a exciting and well-put article about the increasing cost of gas in New England. And this is your decision to make. I just would like you to give my free opinion on this. So i'm going to quote directly from the article the increase in supply rates won't be the only charge Rhode islander energy bills coming in the next few months. In November, the company filed an application to public utilities Commission to increase what customers pay to get energy delivered to their homes and businesses. It's the first proposal to raise distribution charges since 2017. The impact would be a 5% increase in the electric bills and a 21% increase in natural gas bills. This is a charge that is coming not just to this property, but to all other natural gas users, including my own home. So... Just consider it. Consider the environmental impacts of replacing a unit down the line. We have a 2050 carbon neutrality goal, and it's probably going to cost you double to put in an HVAC system with natural gas and an air conditioning system. If you combine it into a heat pump, you're probably going to save money up front, middle, and long term. Can't make it a condition, just a personal opinion. Thank you.

Any other comments? Ron, do we have to deal with the zoning vote first?

Yeah, so you've got variance requests. So there are three variances being requested. You can vote on those as a single motion, or if there's a concern with one or more of those, you could take them individually. That would be your first action is to vote on.

The variance is billing for setback, height, and flat.

And parking. Parking. And parking. So again, if you're comfortable, if the board is comfortable with those requests, you can vote on them in a single motion. And if you do that, please include the required findings as well as the conditions. Regarding the conditions, as of right now, I have six. so are we voting for preliminary plan approval right from the start that will be after you go to the zone okay so the conditions we would apply to the zoning really right public comment first thank you mr solicitor um just be before we get into that just so everyone's clear on what the conditions you're you'll be considering um there are six City Council Chambers, Number one being final review of the stormwater management plan by the town engineer, the second one on my memo has been satisfied, so that will not be a condition regarding crossman the crossman comments on the traffic that's been addressed. City Council Chambers, Second condition would be. City Council Chambers, addressing the comments from the tree Commission and the conservation Commission. next three conditions are the three um what might have been waiver requests oh okay um but are not the applicant has agreed to address these including the um public pedestrian access to the site screening of the hvac and showing that on the plan and the requirement for bike racks and those the applicant indicated would be addressed at the final plan stage And then the sixth condition would be at the chairman's request to revise and update the development impact statement.

My apologies to the public. Is there anyone in the public who wishes to speak?

Anyone online?

No one online.

Anyone? Anyone? Anyone wish to speak?

Public hearing?

I'm sorry.

Motion is made and seconded to close the public hearing. Is there any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. Chair votes aye. The public hearing is closed.

May I have a...

Excuse me. You have a motion to approve the zoning request that includes all of the conditions that Ron mentioned. Findings. And the required findings, yeah. No waivers, no waiver requests, yeah. May I have that motion, please?

I'll make that motion. Second that.

Thank you. Motion is made and seconded to approve the zoning request subject to all the conditions and findings.

Any discussion?

Favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Chair votes aye. Motion passes. I have a motion for the preliminary plan approval subject, again, to all these conditions, waiver requests, et cetera.

No waiver requests. No waiver requests. Conditions and required findings.

The conditions and required findings.

Second. Is made? Second. Made and seconded.

Is there any discussion?

Those in favor say aye.

Aye. Opposed nay. Chair votes aye. Motion passes. Congratulations. at that point i'd like to move to item six i'm sorry item five five b five b a request of the town council for review and recommendation on a draft ordinance to add new section 9408 complete streets to town code chapter 94. ron circulated the policy statement that that was given to him by the solicitor's office. Does anyone have any comments?

Mr. Chairman, I do have Emily here from the Bike and Pedestrian Commission to speak if she would like to, if we have any questions.

Sorry, say that again.

I think we have a member of the Bike and Pedestrian Committee here to speak if we have any questions.

Well, let's hear some discussion and see if there are any questions. Yes, sir. Any comments? I have some questions on the draft. On the second page, the item 2B, it's under definitions it says all uses means all persons walking rolling bicycling taking public transportation driving or being transported by motorized vehicles or transportation freight or commercial goods what does that mean but uh So can you tell me what it should say? Are you saying insert the word vehicles after goods?

No, in place.

So vehicles instead of goods. OK, thank you. My next question is on item E, the last paragraph under item E. When it says, when evaluating these considerations, the intent should be for improvements that are consistent with the following green and complete street principles. First one says, ensure safety and maximize the choice, convenience, and mobility of all users, regardless of age, ability, or mode of transportation. How is Middletown going to ensure safety?

Okay.

I'm looking at the last paragraph of item E, just before F. Where it's one, two, and three. The number one says you're going to ensure safety and maximize the choice, et cetera. And my question is, how is Middletown going to ensure safety?

So this is the ordinance, which was yeah i'm solicitor look at that other agreements ordinances as a policy statement so as a statement of policy now number this ordinance safety but what does that mean

I mean, don't you think you should define what safety means? I mean, are you talking about is the town going to ensure no deaths or no injuries or no accidents or no fear of accidents?

Maybe the word is hand safety.

Well, this is my point. I mean, what you're saying is the town is going to ensure safety.

Well, I'm not saying that. The town solicitor put this graph.

Aren't you representing the solicitor?

Well, I'm with the solicitor's office, but I did not personally draft this ordinance.

Yeah, okay, all right. But you see the problem I have.

Yeah, it's a challenging thing to put together such a far-reaching policy statement, and perhaps the word enhanced safety... Well, let me go on, because I also have a problem with the second part where it says maximize the choice.

I mean, to maximize things... means you spare no expense to provide services or equipments. The town can't do that. So here's my suggestion. My suggestion is to eliminate number one and for what is the current number three, just add for all users at the end and just have the two items. Because the third one says, provide adequate, safe, and comfortable access to public transportation. And I think that's adequate to say that.

I don't object to that. That item just addresses public transportation, whereas number one talks about all modes of transportation.

Well, we can modify to say all modes of transportation. My problem is with ensuring and maximizing That's my problem. So those are the two questions I had. Does anyone else have any comments? Would the member of the committee like to address Planning Board?

Hello, Emily Sullivan, 29 King Road. I'm also the chair of the Middletown Bicycle Pedestrian Committee. We're very excited to see this move forward. It's a recommendation that we brought to the council a couple of years ago, and we appreciate the board's review and the solicitor's office in the time that they've taken to draft this together. I will say I've circulated the draft of the latest one, but we have not met as a committee to look at the final draft that has gone around. But I did note that a number of our suggestions were taken into consideration and added. So we do appreciate that. And the goal that we had when we put this ordinance forward to the Council was to ensure that as roadways or intersections or segments of roadways were reconstructed as part of development projects or town projects that, you know, they were designed and built to be safe and accessible for all users and environmentally sustainable and resilient to help work towards goals outlined in the comp plan. I know one of the items that we talked a lot about was the exclusions. That was one section where we felt that if the exclusions were too broad, it could kind of undermine the effectiveness of the ordinance. We did have the recommendation to add, you know, if there was going to be an exclusion that it was documented and the reason why. City Council Chambers, For that exclusion was put into record, I did know that that one was taken out that was kind of the one that I know we had a lot of discussion about. City Council Chambers, And it's something that the new port green and complete streets ordinance has in place, but otherwise again we really appreciate the time the board has taken to review this and we're excited to see him move forward.

Well, thank you. And thank you for your efforts on this. Much appreciated. I have to say that I'm glad this is being implemented as a policy rather than a hard ordinance. But I think it's a good policy for the town. So any other comments? So would those changes agree to that we would move from three to two items under that at the end of item E?

I think that you're giving a recommendation to the town council. Make whatever motion you want. But the motion could be that you're sending forward this draft with a positive recommendation subject to the revisions that you've requested. That recommendation goes to the council. In the meantime, the solicitor could choose to make those tweaks or not and let the council decide whether to make those changes.

Do we have to hold a public hearing on this?

No. Just a recommendation to the town council.

Okay. So may I have that motion then to forward this as a recommendation to the town council subject to the modifications that we discussed for their approval? Moved.

Second.

Motion is made and seconded to make a recommendation to the town council to approve this policy subject to the modifications that were discussed. Opposed in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. Chair votes aye. Motion passes. The next item is Item 6C, consideration of proposed amendments to Section 510 of the Middletown Rules and Regulations regarding the subdivision and development of land regarding sidewalks. Ron, would you like to introduce this, please?

I'm sure this is a public hearing, so you might want to open the hearing.

Yes. May I have that motion to open the public hearing, please?

Motion made. Second.

Motion is made and seconded to open the public hearing. Any discussion? All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, nay. Public hearing is open.

So this is a proposed revision to the town's subdivision and land development regulations. The planning board has the power to revise those regulations subject to council ratification after you hold the public hearing. So that's what we are doing tonight is holding this public hearing. The proposed revisions, which you can see were brought forward following discussion on a recent application where it was um recognize that the current language in the regulations is not as um we are perhaps uh in terms of the desire to have sidewalks installed as part of new subdivisions where road new roadways are being created it is leaves more discretion to the planning board to consider whether or not a sidewalk should be installed the suggestion was to tighten that language to make it clear that The sidewalk installation is required anytime a new roadway is constructed or a roadway is extended as part of a subdivision application or other development for that matter. So that's the language you have before you is to strengthen that language.

And it's important to note, I think, that this is consistent with both the current and the future comprehensive plan. So any comments on this revision?

Matt, Mr. Chairman, I think this is a honestly good amendment to the code and is a smart idea for the town to implement. More sidewalks, the better.

Yeah.

I've reviewed it, and while I agree with others on the board here, my concern is mandating that where it's going to add additional cost and may have some potentially negative impacts on subdivision development insofar as it takes land that could be used for the development of residential properties and kind of squeezes it, constricts it a little bit. So finding a balance point there is, I think, very important.

Is it correct that an applicant could request a variance from this if they chose?

It would be a waiver. So as with the commercial design standards that are also contained in the development regulations, it would be a waiver request. Yeah.

So I think let them ask for the waiver. Yeah. I agree. Yeah. Any other comments, discussion?

So may I have a motion to, any comments from the public? Apologies again. Comments from the public? No. Nobody online?

Nobody online. Okay, may I have a motion to close the public hearing?

Second. Motion is made and seconded to close the public hearing. Any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. Public hearing is closed.

May I have a motion to?

Adopt. This does not have to go to the town council. It would be adoption subject to town council ratification.

Okay, so may I have a motion to adopt this proposed amendment subject to town council approval regarding sidewalks and new developments?

Motion made. Second.

A motion is made and seconded.

Are there any further discussions?

All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Chair votes aye. The motion passes. Next item on the agenda is item 6D, review and provide recommendation to the town council on proposed amendments to the town code chapter 152 zoning ordinance section 2714 regarding sewage and waste.

uh ron could you give some background on this one well this actually comes from the solicitor's office i don't know if michael has anything to add is it looks to me like it's simply a reference within the town's ordinance to a city of newport ordinance regarding their requirements for pre-treatment um in the sewers uh strictly a regular you know reference to a separate regulation in the city of newport

Thank you.

Does anybody have any comments on this?

I have no comments either, so may I have a motion to request the Town Council to make this amendment to the Zoning Ordinance Town Code, Chapter 152, Section 2714.

Motion made. Hold on. So you'd be making a positive recommendation of the council subject to the findings? Subject to the findings. I didn't see any findings. Yeah, you have to make certain findings on a zoning amendment. Subject to the findings. Thank you.

Motion made. Second.

Motion is made and seconded to make this recommendation to the town council subject to the findings.

Are there any further discussions?

All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Chair votes aye. Motion passes. The next, how are we doing? Got some time. The next item, i i have a number of comments on the state laws so i i'm going to suggest that we just go move uh to updates and we continue i have a i have a lot of comments to that too yeah okay so uh at this point uh i'd like to uh make a motion to continue items 5a and 6e may i have that motion please Have a second second motion is made to continue items five a and six e to the September 10th and the 10th meeting any discussion. All those in favor say aye aye opposed nay.

items are continued to the September 10th meeting.

The last item on the agenda is the project status report. Does anyone have any comments on the status report, project status report?

I have some comments.

On number one, the comprehensive plan update, do I understand what you've said here correctly, that the planning board reviews the document that is being prepared before we hold the public hearing?

I think it would make sense for you to review it because it's going to contain some revisions based on the state comments we've received. if you an opportunity to look at those before and decide whether or not you want to proceed with those revisions wholeheartedly agree and and then once once you have a document that you're comfortable with then hold the public hearing very good thank you

mr chairman yes um on that regard question torch ron um is there going to be a you know a little bit of notation showing which parts have changed on the document so it makes it easier for us to read yeah certainly with the state comments you'll you'll be able to see that that'll be red line um because they've got

It's pretty specific items that they wanted us to address.

I think what they're preparing is going to be an excellent comparison between... Oh, I don't doubt it.

I want to just make all our lives easier.

Well, it will do that, I think, very much so.

All right, thank you. I think they're doing a terrific job.

Okay, on number three, Ron, regarding airport zoning... This says that as a result of ryak reviewing the proposed COMP plan they want us to take up this. This issue of. Coming up with a plan but aren't we waiting for some information from them in order to do that, but what we.

What we had been waiting for, we had been working on actually drafting an ordinance. To implement what what they were requesting in terms of an overlay district. What they've submitted now, so again, our draft comp plan went to all the state agencies and responded. So this is about the complaint, not about an ordinance. They want the comp plan to specify on a map where the overlay district will be. And then, of course, include language as the town will proceed with adopting the overlay districts.

And we don't need the information we're waiting for to not to amend the comp plan, but I think we'd still be.

assuming the complaint is adopted we're still in the same situation where the solicitor's office has advised us that there's some concerns property rights takings concerns with the ordinance the way it was originally drafted and wanting to get a better handle on what the town actually needs to do comply with state law versus perhaps what RIAC is wishing we would do.

So what should we do with this?

Well, as far as the comp plan goes, I think Rudy's working on it. We're going to provide you with the revised draft that's going to address the state comments.

It will address their concerns.

Ultimately, it'll be up to you as to how you want to proceed, if you're comfortable with the way that we've dealt with it. want to proceed with a plan that does stipulate or call for the town adopting an overlay district, if you're comfortable with that, then the plan proceeds. If you're not comfortable with that, then there has to be a discussion of whether you wish to address that request from a state agency or not.

They will cross that bridge when it comes.

What about the westerly ordinance? Has that been looked at? It says here, planning board subcommittee asked staff to create a draft ordinance based on the west. Yeah, that goes back.

Yeah, Joe worked on that subcommittee. So that's a while back. We looked at that. Years ago.

That's ancient history. Yeah.

That doesn't have a whole lot to do with this item.

Any other comments on this item? My next comment is on number four, the use table review. This says we're waiting for comments from the solicitor. Is that accurate?

I will, just as I on the green and complete street ordinance to get it on this agenda so we can take action.

That would be great, because this has been around for a long time now. And I think we proposed some good changes, and it would be nice to see them adopted, I think. OK, so that addresses my comments. Anybody else have any other comments on the project update? If not, I have five minutes. Can you summarize Sean's proposal on committees, boards, and commissions?

Well, there are several that involve the planning board in one way or another. The first one that I'll mention is what we talked about earlier, the Economic Development Committee, where the planning board has talked about and the administrator has sort of beat you to the punch in suggesting to the town council that there be a planning board representative on the MEDAC. And he's recommending that it would be a non-voting representative. Ex officio non voting member that would not count towards the quorum. So that's his recommendation on that one for the Conservation Commission. I believe currently that member is a voting member and counts towards the quorum. His recommendation is to make that member non-voting ex officio that would not count towards the quorum. I know there have been quorum issues with that committee.

That's the only concern. And I don't, you know, it doesn't matter to me whether I vote or not. It's more of the fact that we would like to have a quorum over not. And we're working on getting members.

Non-voting, not quorum.

I know. Did I ask you that? I think I did about the quorum issue. I think this is up to the council's discretion. Correct me if I'm wrong. Maybe this shouldn't just be for the Conservation Commission, but an advisory member maybe we is there wording like the zoning board where they can have seconds and we can you know the the non-voting member becomes voting only if it meets a quorum but they have alternates that's yeah alternate that's a regulatory board so it's different yeah it's just the idea we can give it some thought so this all of these not just these but there are

A long list of committees.

All of them, Sean is recommending that council and board members be non-voting.

And staff members. So, for example, I am a voting member on the Economic Development Committee, and his recommendation is to make me ex officio, which I think makes sense, too. But in any event.

He's doing it across the board.

Council's going to discuss all of this on September 21st, or at least start the discussion on September 21st. I don't know how far through it they will get, but there's time to talk about it. Go ahead, Art.

What's the philosophy of having a member of the planning board on a board and not be able to vote? What are they frightened of?

Well, the concern is that that board member would be voting on an application that's also coming before the planning board, and there's the potential for a conflict there.

Holy cow, you know. See, that's the thing I object to. If we're going to put somebody on there, they need to be equal with everybody else and have the ability to vote. So next time you see Mr. Brown, send him my regards and tell him I think we should be able to vote.

I think Mr. Brown's proposal has already gone to the town council.

So just quick to them. So the next one is the Comprehensive Plan Update Committee. The recommendation is to sunset that committee since its task has been completed. affordable housing committee, similarly appoint a planning board member as an ex-officio non-voting member.

He also said to change the name to the housing committee, right? Right.

Yeah, which I think, I don't want to name names, but I think there's some support on the committee, the affordable housing committee for that name change.

So that's his recommendation anyway.

That's his recommendation. And then finally, at least on the planning board related, committee recommendations open space and fields committee um would be again appointing a planning board member as an ex-officio non-voting member i don't i don't know if our representative is a voting member now but in any event that's the recommendation i was a little surprised roads and utilities isn't in there said nothing about that but that's okay

So thank you for that summary, Ron. For committee activity, Tree Commission, BJ's not here. Open Space and Fields, Charlie's not here. Conservation Commission.

We met last few weeks ago and we actually had the opportunity to have some members from the Aquatic Land Trust do a presentation for us. That was actually incredibly informative. They were very enthusiastic about some of the changes and, you know, Middletown's moving forward with our clean water and things like that. And they have grant money to recommend ideas before the committee, which will hopefully make it here eventually. So it was a good productive meeting.

Good. I hope you get some numbers.

I hope so, too, Paul.

I think Melissa, she's thrown up some people. Anything that anyone wishes to bring up before we adjourn? I may have a motion to adjourn. Second. Motion is made and second to adjourn the meeting. Any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Meeting is adjourned.

I appreciate your kindness.

I hope you will. Yeah. I will. Thank you.