I.         CALL TO ORDER:

 William Haas called the meeting to order at 6:06 p.m.  Mr. Haas made the decision to rearrange  the agenda to hear New Business before Old Business.  The other members in attendance  agreed.

II.       PUBLIC COMMENT:

 None.

III.     NEW BUSINESS:

A.    Discussion: Potential zone changes to allow a farm brewery to provide limited food

     Items.

Board member William Haas recognized Matt Richardson owner of the Titled Barn, One Hemsley Place, Exeter, RI. Mr. Richardson noted that he and his wife, Kara, are the owners of the Tilted Barn and that they have always had great relationships with their neighbors. That they continue to try and keep their original vision as a farm brewery. However, since they opened their new building, four years ago during the pandemic, they have noticed that their guests are looking for more than just a place to stop for a drink, that they are looking for the opportunity to stay longer and enjoy a meal. What they have noticed is that around 5 or 6 o’clock their customers are leaving them and going across the street to the Back 40 for a meal.

Matt Richardson indicated that they are hoping to expand their offerings to include food items and not just rely on the food trucks. Mr. Haas asked about their business in general. Matt Richardson noted that the months of May through September are their busiest, Thursday through Sunday and in the wintertime, they distribute kegs and canned beers to other local businesses. During the summer, they typically schedule 10 to 12 different food trucks and indicated that the food truck vendors are not always reliable and booking them is very time consuming. Mr. Richardson stated that he and his wife, Kara, would like to have more control with a limited, consistent menu to offer their guests.

Mr. Richardson noted that he had reached out to Hal Morgan, Zoning Official, about a year ago and was told that by adding food to their business model they would be considered a “tavern” which is not allowed in their zone. Gina Thurn asked if the building has an area for a dedicated kitchen space. Mr. Richardson indicated that they do not, but have looked into other similar business that are serving food. That they envision constructing an open pavilion which would allow for covered seating such as picnic tables, etc. and a place to house a pizza oven. Noting that a couple of breweries have open pavilions, which work for three out of the four seasons and then have drop down sides for the winter. He indicated that he has reached out to the State and learned that they are pushing this idea of a “brew pub” which includes food, preferring establishments that serve alcohol to also offer food.

Chairman Millar asked Planner DePasquale for his thoughts. The Planner noted that he is a big supporter of having some limited food service for the farm brewery and that the Department of Business Regulations (DBR) is also in support of food service. The Planner indicated that they would have to figure out how they could move this request forward.  He stated that the new law basically states that if something is not classified in the zoning ordinance, the zoning official can make a determination to what it closely matches. However, in this case, the Zoning Official indicated it would be called a “tavern” which is not allowed in their zone. The better solution would be to have a farm brewery with limited food service, and work with DBR on a definition of a brew pub. The Planner felt if he could find an appropriate definition of what is a limited food service, then the Board would be able have both a farm brewery or a farm brewery with limited service through a zone change, together with appropriate performance standards. He indicated that he would work with the Department of Business Regulations to resolve this.

Chairman Millar recommended to Matt Richardson that he propose a zone change through the Town Council, noting that it will require a public hearing. Gina Thurn asked if he has farm status? He indicated yes, and Ms. Thurn asked if he could apply for a “Farm Home Kitchen.” Mr. Richardson noted that he had looked into that option and learned how limited the food options are.

Chairman Millar offered the Richardson’s next steps, suggesting they research other businesses/ordinances/possibly the Newport Vinyard, which offers food, and then return to the Planning Board for future assistance.

IV.   OLD BUSINESS:

A.    Continued: Zoning Study

Chairman Millar noted that the Libra Planners (Municipal Planning Consultants) are slated to attend the Planning Board’s June Work Session.

Planner DePasquale indicated that he had a zoom meeting with the principals and together they have worked to solidify the zoning code. It was decided to get away from the list of prohibitive uses and to look at four or five rural communities that have better plans in terms of layout and categories. They agreed on the following suggestions as follows: Exeter Zoning Code, Use Categories: Residential; Agricultural; Institutional/Government; Recreational/Entertainment/Cultural; Professional/Personal Services; Retail; Restaurants/Fast Food; Automotive; Construction and General Contractor; Wholesales Sales; Storage--Mini Storage/Contractor Storage and Similar; Distribution/Warehouse; Utilities/Transportation; Manufacturing; Industrial; Industrial—Noxious; Solar; Wind Systems; Marijuana Related Facilities. 

Planner DePasquale noted the importance of this list is that each special use permit will be required to have its own set of standards that the Board will need to apply, which is not completed yet. Once this framework is complete, then we will be able to populate the list with the individual uses. 

Board member Michael Viveiros asked about distribution warehouses and suggested the need to have categories indicating small, medium and large. The Planner agreed.           

The Planner noted an important change regarding the use table is that any use not listed, used to be “specifically prohibited” no longer applies. Now (as of January 2024), if it is not listed, it is automatically allowed. The Planner also shared that the legislature just passed, to go into effect as of October 2025, that all Planning and Zoning applications will be required to be submitted electronically. He has a concern that this will be very difficult for the Town to achieve.

B.     Discussion: Rural Residential Compounds, Private Roads and Road Standards

Chairman Millar began this continued discussion on rural residential compounds with updated changes to the Exeter Land Development and Subdivision Regulations: Draft Revised Rural Residential Compound 5-13-2024, with a copy being distributed to each Board member. He noted that when the rural residential compound ordinance was passed, the intent was to provide flexibility for landowners to allow them to do a simple subdivision on a private road that might discourage them from maxing out the development potential of their property. The Chair stated that this was why Exeter adopted the 10-acre zoning density for a private road. Mr. Millar shared that one is located on Edie’s Lane, off Hopkins Hill Road and another off Liberty Road.

                   Chairman Millar revised the density from ten acres, suggesting setting the density to what

Charlestown has done, which would be 50 percent of the number of lots that would be allowed. Meaning that a four-acre zone, instead of a 10-acre density would drop down to six acres and a five-acre zone, instead of 10 acres would drop down to 7.5 acres. He indicated that this would be considered a private road. He stated that this would be the only type of development that would be eligible for a private road, that the current ordinance allows a conservation development and a rural residential compound. He feels that if the Town keeps the private road in a conservation development, then no one would ever build a rural residential compound, and that it would become obsolete.

Town Planner William DePasquale interjected that if the standards were different, that would not be the case.  He stated if the standard beyond whether it is private or public was just ownership, the standard for the conservation subdivision would be more costly than a lower gravel standard for the rural residential compound. Mr. Millar felt that you would then be giving up a number of lots. Stating that the density would be 50 percent of the number of lots that would be allowed under conventional subdivision. The lot size is changing. The Planner felt they should do an exercise, taking a lot and look at both a conservation development versus a rural residential compound. This discussion continued.

Board member Bill Haas stated that the problem with a private road, is that at some point the road will possibly be given to the Town. Mr. Haas noted the need to make sure that a private road is built to standards the Town can except. If the Town takes it over, and it is a junk road, then the Town will have to rebuild the entire road. The Planner recognized that indeed this could happen, but the minimum standard for a private roadway is more about the width and drainage, etc. Mike Viveiros indicated the number of houses allowed becomes an important question. Chairman Millar felt that most of these rural residential compounds would likely be 5 lots or less. Mr. Millar noted that in this ordinance he felt the Town should require that the remaining open space remain with one landowner, as opposed to a homeowner’s association. The Planner felt that sometimes it is more important to have more than just one individual be responsible. Discussion continued around ownership and land trusts.

Chairman Millar proposed three options for the Town, if you wanted to develop a residential subdivision: a Conventional Subdivision (Minor, Major); Conservation Development (Minor, Major); all of which would have public roads. The only option for a private road would be to choose a Rural Residential Compound, which would provide an incentive not to maximize the development potential of the property. Each landowner would choose which option was in their best interest. Town Planner DePasquale indicated the need to make a change to the Land Development ordinance that has Conservation Subdivisions deemed public or private in addition to the proposed changes.    

Chairman Millar asked if the concept of only allowing a private road on a rural residential compound makes sense? Planner DePasquale stated he would object to this idea and that there is a middle ground with a conservation subdivision. He stated that this would hurt the support for a conservation subdivision if you keep the private option out.  He offered three versions, the Town version, which would be the most expensive, the rural version and something in between. Chairman Millar pushed back on these options. Discussion continued around private roads vs town roads.

Board member Michael DeFrancesco noted that he agrees with the Planner on the overall concept of having the conventional subdivision and then the conservation subdivision which has already proven itself. He noted that from the developer’s side, they will gravitate to the lower cost alternative. He stated that road costs are significant, and that standards are key.

Chairman Millar responded to Mike DeFrancesco’s comments stating that the most expensive, from a road perspective, is conventional, and not many people are doing that. The next is conservation development, assuming staying with a Town road; and the least would be a rural residential compound, because it is a private road with standards that would be reduced but with standards that would need to be followed. Mr. DeFrancesco felt the standards should be the same regardless of whether it is conservation or rural residential.

Board member Donna Di Donato wanted to note for the record, that she would not recommend homeowner’s associations being responsible for roadways, that they go defunct. She stated that if you want to build in Exeter, it should be a Town owned road or you must meet Town specifications.

Discussion ensued regarding base standards being the same for all roadways, public or private.

Board member Gian Thurn asked to clarify that the difference is the width and length of the roadway versus the quality of the base of the road.  Planner DePasquale then explained roadway materials/standards – public versus private. Oliva DeFrancesco, Council Liaison, stated how important it is to have clear standards, noting that since she has been on the Council they have had a lot of issues regarding roads.

Michael Viveiros suggested the Town have a third-party civil engineer (possibly Crossman Engineering) offer their expert advice on road standards, based on three homes on a road and the number of cars; to 9 homes on a road and the number of cars. The Board agreed to send information to Crossman from the Town of Hopkinton as a starting point and ask them to provide an estimate with three options for road standards.

Chairman Millar asked the Board if they wanted to continue with Rural Residential Compounds? If it is yes, he will continue to work on this ordinance. Ownership is still to be determined.     

V.     ADMINISTRATIVE:

A.      Approval of Minutes: April 9, 2024 and April 23, 2024

April 9, 2024 Minutes:

Scott Millar made a motion to approve the minutes of April 9, 2024 as submitted; Seconded by Bill Haas. The vote was all in favor (6-0); the motion passed. (Scott Millar, Michael DeFrancesco, William Haas, Gina Thurn, Michael Viveiros and Donna Di Donato).

April 23, 2024 Minutes:

Scott Millar made a motion to approve the minutes of April 23, 2024 as submitted; Seconded by Michael DeFrancesco.  The vote was all in favor (6-0); the motion passed. (Scott Millar, Michael DeFrancesco, William Haas, Gina Thurn, Michael Viveiros and Donna Di Donato).

B.     Land Development and Subdivision Regulations; and Zoning – Municode Supplement No. 28, Appendix A and B

The Planning Clerk asked the Board members who have the official code of ordinance books and do they update them with the current supplements.

William Haas stated he has his and he does keep it updated with the supplements.  The Clerk gave Mr. Haas a copy of supplements 28, Appendix A and B.  The other Board members indicated that while they have the book most have not been updated.

The Chairman noted that they use to get a hard copy of the Land Development and Subdivision regulations, and stated it would be very helpful for Board members to have a current hard copy of the updated regulations. Bill DePasquale stated he would inquire about obtaining updated Zoning and Land Development regulations binders from Municode for the Board.

Michael DeFrancesco inquired about a copy of the Assessor’s Plat Maps and asked if we have a current copy, could we bring to the Planning Board meetings going forward.  The Planner and the Clerk stated that we have an updated copy and will bring to the meetings going forward.

C.    Future Meeting: Planning Board Regular Meeting – Tuesday, May 28, 2024; items on the agenda will include the Continued Preliminary RI Grows application and the continued discussion of Rural Residential Compounds and Road Standards – time permitting.

VI.    ADJOURNMENT:

Motion to adjourn made by Bill Haas, seconded by Gina Thurn; voted all in favor.  Motion passed. The meeting adjourned at 8:05 p.m. (Scott Millar, Michael DeFrancesco, William Haas, Gina Thurn, Michael Viveiros and Donna Di Donato).

Respectfully submitted,

Rebecca M. Lukowicz and M. Dixie Foisy, Planning Board Clerk