Feb. 12, 2025 - Planning Board Meeting
Middletown
Minutes · February 12, 2025
|
350 East Main Road, Middletown, RI 02842 (401) 849-4027 | MiddletownRI.com |
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
Regular Meeting
February 12, 2025, 6pm
Town Council Chambers – Town Hall
350 East Main Road
Middletown, RI 02842
Board members present:
Art Weber, Chair
Michael Fenton, Secretary
B.J. Owen
Leon Amarant
Joe Pierik
Paul Croce
Also present
Ron Wolanski, Town Planner
Michael Monti, Assistant Town Solicitor
Anita Guo, Principal Planner
Member absent
Charlie Vaillancourt
Mr. Weber called the meeting to order at 6:00pm. Mr. Weber shared that 4A will be continued to a future meeting and public comment on item 5A will not be taken and shared the Town’s opposition to proposed off-shore wind turbine development.
A. Motion by Ms. Owen, seconded by Mr. Fenton to approve the minutes. Vote: 5-0-1, with Mr. Croce abstaining.** **
A. Memo of the Town Planner dated January 8, 2025 regarding administrative subdivision application of Kevin and Kristen Perhamus & Ocean Watch LLC involving properties located at 629 & 639 Wolcott Ave., and further identified as Lots 96 & 97 on Assessor’s Plat 116SE.
1. Motion by Mr. Fenton, seconded by Ms. Owen to receive said correspondence. Vote: 6-0-0.
B. Letter of Harmony Conti Bodurtha of Orson and Brusini, LTD, dated January 10, 2025, re Bank Newport vs. CCE Development, LLC; C.A. No.: NC-2024-0502
1. Motion by Mr. Fenton, seconded by Ms. Owen to receive said correspondence. Vote: 6-0-0.
C. Email communication of Barbara Chapman of Green Oceans RI, dated January 18, 2025, re opposition to off-shore wind turbines.
1. Motion by Mr. Fenton, seconded by Mr. Amarant to receive said correspondence. Vote: 6-0-0.
D. Memo from Crossman Engineering dated January 28, 2025 regarding review of traffic report for the Seascape Holdings application for property at 985 Aquidneck Ave., Plat 113, Lot 208.
1. Motion by Mr. Fenton, seconded by Ms. Owen to receive said correspondence. Vote: 6-0-0.
A. Public Hearing – Petition of Middletown Commons Town Center, LLC requesting amendment to the Future Land Use Map, Map L-4 of the Middletown Comprehensive Community Plan to change the land use designation of property fronting on West Main Road and Coddington Highway, Assessor’s Plat 102, Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, from Institutional to General Business. Consider said petition for approval and recommendation to the Town Council. (This item is not expected to be heard on Feb. 12 th but may be continued to a future meeting.)
1. Mr. Wolanski shared that he communicated with attorney Girard Galvin and the proposed date for the hearing is scheduled for February 24, 2025, at 6pm.
2. Motion by Mr. Fenton, seconded by Ms. Owen to continue item 4A, 4B, and 4C to a special Planning Board meeting on February 24, 2025. Vote: 6-0-0.
B. Review and recommendation to the Town Council on a petition of Middletown Commons Town Center, LLC requesting amendment to the Middletown Zoning Map referenced in Town Code Chapter 152 to change the zoning district designation of property fronting on West Main Road and Coddington Highway, Assessor’s Plat 102, Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, from public, traffic sensitive (PA) to general business, traffic sensitive (GBA) (This item is not expected to be heard on Feb. 12 th but may be continued to a future meeting.)
C. Review and recommendation to the Town Council on a petition of Middletown Commons Town Center, LLC requesting amendment to the Middletown Zoning Ordinance, Town Code Chapter 152, to create the West Main/Coddington Overlay District. (This item is not expected to be heard on Feb. 12 th but may be continued to a future meeting.)
D. Public Hearing – Application of Seaview Inn LLC for Master and Preliminary Plan approval of a Major Land Development Project for the construction of a 12,000 sq. ft. hotel consisting of 72 units, with parking, utility, stormwater, and other site improvements. The application includes request for a special use permit per Sections 602 and 1401 of the Middletown Zoning Code to allow a hotel building in the office park (OP) zoning district. Requests for waivers from certain provisions of the commercial development design requirements of Section 521 of the Middletown Rules and Regulations Regarding the Subdivision and Development of Land as follows: Sections 521.1.B.2; 521.1.B.3; and 521.3.C.1. Property located at 240 Aquidneck Ave., Tax Assessor’s Plat 115, Lot 54. (This item is not expected to be heard on Feb. 12 th but may be continued to a future meeting.)
1. Mr. Amarant recused from this item.
2. Mr. Wolanski shared that the applicant submitted revised plans which eliminated the need for additional zoning relief. Since TRC need to complete their review, attorney Dave Martland requested a continuance to the March 12, 2025 regular meeting.
3. Motion by Mr. Fenton, seconded by Ms. Owen to continue this item to the March 12, 2025 regular meeting. Vote: 5-0-0.
E. Public Hearing - Application of Seascape Holdings, LLC for combined preliminary and final plan approval for a minor land development project for construction of a new 2,442 square foot commercial building. The application includes requests for waivers from certain provisions of the commercial development design requirements of Section 521 of the Middletown Rules and Regulations Regarding the Subdivision and Development of Land, including sections 521.2.D.2 regarding roof pitch; 521.3.D.1 regarding landscaped buffer along property line; and 521.3.D.3 regarding landscaped buffer between parking lot and building. Requests for variance include from section 603 of the Middletown zoning ordinance, Town Code Chapter 152 to allow a side setback (easterly property line) of 5.1 feet where 18.7 feet is required, and a rear setback (northerly property line) of 43.9 feet where 47.6 feet is required. Property located at 985 Aquidneck Ave., Tax Assessors Plat 113, Lot 208.
1. Motion by Mr. Fenton, seconded by Ms. Owen to open the public hearing. Vote: 6-0-0.
2. Attorney Josh Parks represented the applicant. Attorney Matt Leys represented the abutters Michael and Karen Miller.
3. Mr. Parks noted a letter of support from an abutter was submitted to the Planning Board received.
4. Mr. Parks introduced applicant Greg Coe and went over the property history, use, and surrounding area. There was discussion about the previous application which received zoning relief approval, but the land development project was denied. The applicant revised the plans which resulted in less waiver requests. The proposed building is around 2,400 square feet and would need relief for the north and east setback. Mr. Coe stated the use is not changing, he is building a new structure to store his equipment, and there is little to no customer interaction on site. There was discussion about the building size based on its current use and need. The building cannot be relocated due to the turning radius and existing conditions. The improvements include a paved parking lot, increased landscaping, dumpster, and bike racks. The two waiver requests are for the landscape buffer along the property line and the buffer between parking lot and building. The applicant also worked with the Tree Commission on the proposed landscaping.
5. Mr. Leys cross-examined Mr. Coe and asked about site history use, proposed use, and landscape buffers.
6. Mr. Parks introduced engineer Lyn Small. Ms. Small went over the development impact statement, utility plan, stormwater management plan, and parking. Ms. Small shared the applicant will comply with the two TRC recommended conditions. Mr. Leys asked about existing parking spots on survey plan and proposed parking lots. There was discussion over whether the existing parking spaces extended over the property line and the legality of those spaces. Mr. Parks asked about the nonconforming parking spaces on the southerly side and Ms. Small testified those parking spaces were used as parking for decades.
7. Mr. Parks introduced appraiser James Houle. Mr. Houle reviewed the requested waivers and found that the waivers and variances are minimal requests. The use is legal and conforming and noted the substandard lot size and shape. There is hardship due to the existing conditions of the lot and the use will not alter surroundings of area. The improvement of the site is a benefit.
8. Mr. Parks introduced traffic engineer Emily Buck. Ms. Buck went over her professional experience and the traffic study performed on the subject site and Trimble Road, and the intersection of Trimble Road and Aquidneck Ave. The study found that Trimble Road is a low volume road, there are no reported crashes at the intersection in the past 5 years or in the surrounding 200 feet radius area. Based on low volume and no crash history, there are no current existing safety concerns with access.
9. Mr. Leys introduced exhibit 1 of an aerial photograph of O’Neill Road. There was discussion about the distance between the parking spot and the roadway and how the spots are right on Trimble Road.
10. Mr. Pierik noted based on testimony, those parking spots were used by prior owner for decades.
11. Mr. Leys introduced exhibit 2 of communication from the Roads and Utilities Committee which found the 5 proposed parking spaces too dense and had concerns with safety issues. Mr. Leys then introduced abutter Michael Miller. There was discussion about how Trimble Road is the only vehicular access for Mr. Miller’s property. There was discussion on the subject parking on Trimble. Mr. Miller stated that there has been significant change as that area was initially used as access to Aquidneck and the parking use was minimal. The parking striping were put down by an individual without permission; therefore, Mr. Miller questioned the legality of those parking spaces.
12. Mr. Leys introduced exhibit 3, copy of the Town’s ordinance prohibiting off-street parking closer than 10 feet to street line since 1981.
13. Mr. Leys introduced exhibit 4, a purchase and sales agreement in 2021 which mentioned an agreement to remove those parking spaces on that corner of Trimble Road and Aquidneck Ave.
14. Mr. Miller stated in his opinion, there is a potentially safety issue on Trimble Road due to the parking situation.
15. Mr. Leys introduced exhibit 5, photograph of parking on Trimble Road.
16. Mr. Leys introduced exhibit 6, aerial photographs from October 2021 and August 2024 showing parking and site layout and stated that the applicant created the access issue on Trimble Road.
17. Mr. Leys introduced exhibit 7, email correspondence between Mr. Coe and Stephen Kirby. Mr. Leys argued Mr. Coe created his own hardship.
18. Recess at 7:43pm and reconvened at 7:48pm.
19. Mr. Leys introduced exhibit 8, email correspondence between Mr. Coe and Mr. Miller. Mr. Leys argued that Mr. Coe’s intention was to have only one building on the property.
20. Mr. Miller shared in his opinion, the proposed project is intensifying the use of the property and that traffic on Trimble Road has become more problematic. There is more traffic during the spring and summer months. Mr. Miller shared his concerns with the application, which includes the intense use of the property and use of Trimble Road, the impacts on Trimble Road and his own use to get to his driveway, and his opposition to those parking spaces.
21. Mr. Fenton asked the solicitor about the legality of the deed restrictions on the purchaser of the property and whether they would supersede the zoning and design requirements in the town ordinances. The solicitor said that they could in some cases.
22. Mr. Parks introduced exhibit A, the 2021 Planning Board decision of development project for the first building on the property.
23. Mr. Parks introduced exhibit B, a recorded confirmatory deed for the subject site and argued that there are no restrictions on general contractor use and no restrictions on a second building.
24. Mr. Leys introduced certified planner and land use expert Doug McClean. Mr. McClean shared his prepared report and found that there is no need for a larger structure for the proposed use, the parking plan is problematic, there is intensification of use, the proposed project does not meet the plans for a Limited Business zone, that the applicant created his own hardship, and the application does not meet standards for granting waivers. .
25. There was discussion that the Zoning Official confirmed that the parking spots in the bays can be counted as parking. There was discussion of parking spots along Trimble whether they are legal, nonconforming spaces. Mr. Amarant found them to be nonconforming as there was no prior zoning enforcement issues for those spots.
26. No members of the public wished to speak.
27. Mr. Leys provided his closing statement that the proposal is intensifying the use of the property, the applicant failed to meet the findings for a variance request, there are other options to meet needs without variance or waivers, the variances are excessive, the applicant created his own hardship, the proposal does not comply with the comprehensive plan, there is no evidence that the hardship is unique to the subject property, thinks that the application creates new parking spaces that violates the code, and application does not meet standards for wavier requests. Mr. Leys requested the Planning Board to deny the application.
28. Mr. Parks provided his closing statement and shared that the opposition comes down to “rules for he but not for me.” He shared that the abutters do not like the plan but the testimony is clear that the applicant’s proposed use is not restricted on the property, the only competent traffic expert is the testimony from Emily Buck, the subject parking spots were okay when the abutter’s family owned it, the hardship is due to the unique character of the site and not because of prior actions of the applicant, the entrance is off Trimble Road, the property abuts similar businesses and conforms to the general character of the area, the applicant is not changing the use of the site but want to use it better, the two variances are small, the proposal aligns with the comprehensive plan and will improve the lot.
29. Motion by Mr. Fenton, seconded by Ms. Owen to close the public hearing. Vote: 6-0-0.
30. Mr. Fenton shared based on the testimony, there is no intensification of the property use and that applicant did his due diligence and minimized the number of waivers. The traffic study showed no increase in accidents or traffic in area since the applicant has been there. The design will minimize runoff and is a permitted use, so he expressed his support for this application.
31. Ms. Owen expressed her support for this application.
32. Mr. Croce expressed he understands that the Zoning Official ruled on parking spots but he has issues with the parking on Trimble Road and inside the garage bays. Mr. Croce stated he does not want to set the precedence and that Mr. McClean is a credible expert. Mr. Croce stated he is against the application.
33. Mr. Amarant stated the real concerns are with parking and traffic. The Zoning Official already weighed in on the parking and the parking spots on Trimble are concerning but is an existing condition. Mr. Amarant expressed his support for the application but encouraged applicant to alleviate the concerns.
34. Mr. Pierik echoed other members’ thoughts and stated that traffic expert Emily Buck’s report is relevant and that traffic is light on Trimble. He expressed he understands the concerns with parking at the corner but given the nature of the business, he does not see any problems with the use. Mr. Pierik also noted the applicant reduced the number of waiver requests, addressed the concerns of the TRC, and expressed his support of the application. He found that the project tis consistent with the comprehensive plan and the character of the site created challenges in developing the property.
35. Mr. Weber stated he found the applicant did his job and expressed his support for the project.
36. Motion by Mr. Fenton, seconded by Mr. Amarant to approve the variance requests to allow a side setback (easterly property line) of 5.1 feet where 18.7 feet is required, and a rear setback (northerly property line) of 43.9 feet where 47.6 feet is required, and to make required findings of fact. Vote: 5-1-0, with Mr. Croce in opposition.
37. Motion by Mr. Fenton, seconded by Ms. Owen to approve the combined preliminary and final plan approval for a minor land development project, grant the requested waivers, and make the required findings of fact.
1. **Requested waivers: **
a. Section 521.3.D.1 – A landscaped buffer at least 10” is provided along all property lines. **Buffer along easterly property line is only 5” wide. **
b. Section 521.3.D.3 – A landscaped buffer at least 5’ wide shall be provided between buildings and parking lots/driveways. The buffer shall defined by curbing. **No buffer is provided between the front of the building and parking lot. **
2. Vote: 5-1-0, with Mr. Croce in opposition.
38. Motion by Mr. Fenton, seconded by Ms. Owen to vacate the prior decision and approve the combined preliminary and final plan approval for a minor land development project, grant the requested waivers, and make the required findings of fact, subject to the following conditions of approval.
1. **Requested waivers: **
a. Section 521.3.D.1 – A landscaped buffer at least 10” is provided along all property lines. **Buffer along easterly property line is only 5” wide. **
b. Section 521.3.D.3 – A landscaped buffer at least 5’ wide shall be provided between buildings and parking lots/driveways. The buffer shall defined by curbing. **No buffer is provided between the front of the building and parking lot. **
2. **Conditions: **
a. The applicant’s engineer must confirm that the bottom of the proposed sand filter which is part of the stormwater management system will not intercept the ground water table.
b. The sanitary sewer stub for the existing building which is proposed to be abandoned must be capped at the building foundation and inspected, subject to approval of the DPW director.
3. Vote: 5-1-0, with Mr. Croce in opposition.
A. Discussion of possible recommendation the Town Council regarding off-shore wind turbine development.
1. There was discussion about the Town’s position and opposition to one proposed project, SouthCoast Wind. Mr. Weber shared Town already shared its position and has no other comments on the matter.
2. Mr. Amarant expressed disappointment with the tardiness of Town Council action on this matter and encouraged Town to host a public forum to allow for discussion. Mr. Amarant spoke about concerns with impact on seascape, cables up the Sakonnet River, and changing landscape of the beaches. Mr. Weber suggested that the Town Council to have a dialogue on wind turbines and expressed concerns with rising temperatures. Mr. Pierik suggested creating a committee to educate the public on wind turbines and future strategies.
3. Mr. Weber opened the floor for public input.
4. A member of the public spoke about the importance of including neighboring communities in the discussion.
5. President of Green Ocean offered herself as resource.
6. Karen McGovern, Middletown, stated that there is lots of misinformation on the topic, and spoke about needing to hear all sides and need environmental experts to speak on the topic.
7. A member of the public from Newport representing the energy council offered their support as a resource.
B. Request of the Town Council for recommendation on a proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance Town Code Chapter 152, Article 12 - Signs, Section 1209 regarding window signs.
1. Mr. Wolanski shared proposed amendment to is increase allowable window sign area from 15% to 25%.
2. Motion by Amarant, seconded by Ms. Owen to continue items 5A, 5B, and 5C to the March 12, 2025 regular meeting. Vote: 6-0-0.
C. Request of the Town Council for recommendation on a proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance Town Code Chapter 152, Section 602 - SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS - USES AND DISTRICTS, regarding allowing warehousing in the office business (OB) zoning district.
A. Status Report on Planning Board action items.
1. No comments.
B. Committee reports
1. Comprehensive Plan Update Committee – Meeting scheduled for February 13th.
2. Tree Commission – Ms. Owen shared Tree Commission is reviewing the landscape plan for the middle/high school application.
3. Open Space and Fields Committee – No updates.
4. Conservation Commission – No updates.
C. Upcoming meetings:
1. February 13, 2025, 6pm – CPUC regular meeting.
2. February 26, 2025. 6pm – Special Planning Board meeting: Preliminary Plan review for middle/high school project
3. March 12, 2025, 6pm – Regular Planning Board meeting.
4. March 13, 2025, 6pm – CPUC meeting.
Motion by Ms. Owen, seconded by Mr. Amarant to adjourn at 10:05pm. Vote: 6-0-0.
Respectfully submitted,
Mike Fenton, Secretary