1.            Approval of minutes

a.    September 14, 2022 regular Planning Board meeting

2.            Correspondence

a.    None

3.            Continuances

a.    None

4.            Old Business

a.    Public Hearing - Application of Aquidneck Group LLC for Development Plan Review for construction of a new commercial building and associated site alterations on an existing commercial property, and including request for waivers from certain design standards of Section 521 of the Middletown Rules and Regulations Regarding the Subdivision and Development of Land.  Property located at 99 East Main Rd., Tax Assessors Plat 107SE, Lot 106.

                                          i.        Applicant was represented by attorney Dave Martland, project manager Kerry McCormack, architect Aksel Solberg, engineer Molly R. Titus, and traffic engineer John Shevlin.

                                         ii.        Motion by Ms. Owen, seconded by Mr. Weber to open the public hearing. Vote: 6-0-0.

                                        iii.        Mr. Martland introduced the site, its history, and spoke about the comments and concerns brought up during the concept review. He shared that the applicant met with the other tenants in the shopping center and received support from them. The application will have to go before the Zoning Board of Review for zoning relief for the expansion of the shopping center and proposed drive-thru. Mr. Martland also noted that the applicant addressed all the concerns brought up by the Tree Commission and Crossman Engineering. He then introduced Mr. McCormack.

                                       iv.        Mr. McCormack spoke about the application process and how Starbucks, the tenant for the new proposed building, is a great asset to the shopping center and community. He also reiterated how the applicant worked with the Tree Commission and Crossman Engineering to address all their comments by adding additional trees along East Main Road and other landscaping and closing a median strip by the East Main Road entrance/exit to help mediate traffic. He then introduced Mr. Solberg.

                                         v.        Mr. Solberg spoke about his work on other Starbucks locations and on this proposed design. He shared the design went through revisions to satisfy both the Town’s ordinance and Starbucks’ function and operation requirements. New England-style architectural elements were added to the design. Mr. Martland then introduced Ms. Titus.

                                       vi.        Ms. Titus went over the proposed site improvements which include a new parking lot configuration at the southern area where Christmas Tree Shop is, reconfigured drive-thrus, increase in landscaping and green space, new site lighting, new pavement, new underground service from East Main Road, relocation of 8” sewer main, grease trap, new water service from Commercial Street, and new stormwater underground filtration system. The landscape plan was also revised and approved by the Tree Commission.

                                      vii.        Mr. Nash asked about the easement which was addressed satisfactorily.

                                     viii.        Mr. Fenton asked whether there will be signage near the East Main Road entrance indicating the location of the new drive-thru which Ms. Titus confirmed there will be.

                                       ix.        Mr. Croce inquired about the possibility of adding landscaping to the western side of the property perpendicular to East Main Road, which Mr. Martland addressed that there is a retaining wall in that area and it has an incline. Mr. Martland and Ms. Titus added that 8,500 square feet of impervious area is reduced in the plans. Ms. Owen asked for confirmation that the applicant will implement the Tree Commission’s suggestions which Mr. Martland confirmed they will. Mr. McCormack shared that they changed some materials and added additional streets trees and other landscaping, which the Tree Commission was pleased with.

                                         x.        Mr. Shevlin spoke about the traffic assessment process and report. He shared that they investigated the alternative drive-thru configuration in the “Croce Sketch” and found that there would be a tight turn radius and it would also limit larger and longer vehicle usage. Mr. Shevlin shared they worked with Crossman Engineering, the peer reviewer and they did not oppose the current, proposed design. Mr. Shevlin stated that he found the proposed design is the safest traffic circulation for three tenants in the project area. The other tenants also do not oppose the site layout. He stated that he found no traffic safety impact and there will be an improvement in overall site circulation.

                                       xi.        Mr. Weber stated that he finds the current traffic circulation in the shopping center confusing. He expressed his concern of a third drive-thru in the area and in his experience, he stated that he does not believe it will improve the shopping center. Mr. Martland spoke about how currently Starbucks has a lot of traffic and it will be moving from its present location in the shopping center (north-eastern area) to the new proposed area, which currently has minimal traffic. The improvement to the Christmas Tree Shop parking lot will also help improve traffic conditions.

                                      xii.        Mr. Pierik asked about pedestrian access and connectivity within the shopping center, delivery trucks, and traffic at the main entrance near East Main Road. Mr. McCormack addressed that pedestrians will be able to walk from the East Main Road sidewalk onto the crosswalk in the front parking lot. In addition, there is a crosswalk near the dumpster at the back of the building. Mr. McCormack also shared that there are two options for delivery trucks. Delivery trucks will deliver before the store opens and employees will be there to unload. They can either back up to the front of the building from East Main Road or unload at the back of the building near the dumpsters. Mr. McCormack pointed out that Starbucks approved the two options.

                                     xiii.        Ms. Owen asked the applicant to model how a patron in a car can navigate the site if they were visiting two businesses in the shopping center which Mr. McCormack addressed satisfactorily.

                                     xiv.        Mr. Nash stated that he recognizes Mr. Shevlin’s expertise and agreed that the proposed arrangement is the safest option but still felt it would be inconvenient. He suggested some options including shrinking the building size and adding concrete islands near Commercial Street. Mr. McCormack stated that they can investigate the possibility of adding the concrete islands to that area.

                                      xv.        Mr. Fenton asked about a direct entrance on East Main Road which Mr. Martland responded that the project is in a traffic sensitive area which limits the amount of curb cuts and there would be potential traffic backup onto the roadway.

                                     xvi.        There was more discussion about islands near Aquidneck Liquors. Mr. Martland stated that the traffic engineer found the proposal safe, and Crossman Engineering did not oppose it either. The proposal is dispersing the traffic to a less busy area of the center. He pointed out that the project is not creating congestion on public streets and the discussion is about what is occurring inside the shopping center.

                                    xvii.        Mr. Croce expressed his concern in the flow of traffic around the proposed building and pointed out that the consulting engineer deemed the traffic circulation safe but preferred the “Croce Sketch” drive-thru layout. He also was concerned with delivery truck access. Mr. Croce asked if the applicant will consider reexamining and making some changes to the plans to allow a different flow pattern. Mr. Martland responded that the applicant feels that they have worked diligently on the plan, they have done their due diligence in addressing and examining the issues raised, and they want to move forward with the process.

                                   xviii.        There were no members of the public wishing to speak.

                                     xix.        Motion by Ms. Owen, seconded by Mr. Nash to close the public hearing. Vote: 6-0-0

                                      xx.        Mr. Nash expressed that he wants to support the project but does not think the project satisfies one of the required findings: that the approval will not result in conditions inimical to the public health, safety, and welfare. 

                                     xxi.        Motion by Mr. Fenton, seconded by Mr. Pierik to make the five required findings of fact, grant certain waivers from the commercial development design requirements of Section 521 of the Middletown Rules and Regulations Regarding the Subdivision and Development of Land (Regulations), and forward a positive recommendation to the Zoning Board of Review, subject to the following recommended conditions of approval.

1.    Recommended conditions:

a.    Deliveries by truck to the proposed new building shall occur no later than 6am each day.

b.    Prior to permitting, the applicant shall revise the landscape plan to address any additional comments of the Middletown Tree Commission.

c.     Following excavation for utilities connections on Commercial Blvd., the street shall be repaved in accordance with Town requirements prior to certificate of occupancy, subject to the approval of the DPW Director.

d.    The sanitary sewer main within the shopping center shall be a minimum of 8-inch diameter, with services to each building a minimum of 6-inch diameter. Construction plans shall be revised as necessary prior to permitting.

e.    Prior to permitting, the owner shall provide written confirmation that required maintenance in conformance with the O&M plan for the existing stormwater management system for the shopping center is being performed, subject to the approval of the Town Engineer.

f.      Prior to permitting, the applicant shall evaluate the feasibility of installing a curbed traffic island in the location of the painted island proposed closest to Commercial Street at the southern end of the parking lot. If found to be feasible, the plans shall be revised to include construction of the island.

g.    Prior to permitting, the applicant shall revise the site plans to clearly identify the proposed pedestrian circulation into and through the site.

2.    Waivers considered:

a.    Section 521.2.B. 1 & 2 – Windows must make up 20% – 60% of each façade and be of true or simulated divided-light design. The applicant has provided calculations indicating that the north and east facing facades will provide the required amount of windows, while the west façade, also visible from the public street will not. Proposed windows not divided light.

b.    Section 521.2.C – Building exteriors and roofs must be constructed of traditional materials such as wooden clapboards, shingles, patterned shingles, brick or stone. The applicant has indicated that Hardie Plank or similar product is proposed for the building siding.

c.     Section 521.3.C – Landscape screening elements along property lines. Not provided.

d.    Section 521.3.D.1- Landscape buffer, 10’ wide along all property lines. Not provided.

e.    Section 521.3.D.3 - Landscape buffer, 10’ wide between the building and parking/driveways. Not provided.

f.      Section 521.3.F. 1 & 2 – Street trees and parking lot trees. Additional trees proposed to be provided in the shopping center to improve the existing conditions, but does not meet all planting requirement for the project area.

3.    Vote: 2-4-0, with Mr. Fenton and Mr. Pierik voting in favor, and Mr. Croce, Mr. Nash, Ms. Owen, and Mr. Weber voting against. Motion fails.

5.            New Business  

a.    Public Hearing - Request of CGRI Middletown, LLC for Development Plan Review for a project consisting of proposed alterations to existing commercial buildings, proposed new commercial buildings, and associated site work, and including requests for waivers from certain requirements of section 521 of the Middletown Rules and Regulations Regarding the Subdivision and Development of Land. Property located at 1400 West Main Rd., Assessor’s Plat 106, Lot 53A.

                                          i.        Mr. Pierik recused himself from discussion of this item.

                                         ii.        The applicant was represented by attorney Dave Martland, project manager Dave Taglianetti, civil engineer Renee Codega, traffic engineer Bob Clinton, architect Spencer McComb, and architect Jamie Hughes.  

                                        iii.        Motion by Ms. Owen, seconded by Mr. Nash to open the public hearing. Vote: 5-0-0.

                                       iv.        Mr. Martland introduced the project and shared that the applicant proposes a plan that decreases the amount of impervious surface, adds additional landscaping, and provides an overall update to the site. He then introduced Mr. Taglianetti.

                                         v.        Mr. Taglianetti talked about the timeline and process of the project. He shared that they will be renovating the three existing buildings, which are identified in the plans as Building B, C, and D. A medical office, restaurant, and other small retail/commercial tenants will occupy Building B. The current building supplies tenant will occupy Building C, D, and new building E. Buildings D and E are in the western portion of the site and they will be a commercial storefront and a warehouse. One new building A will be constructed in the southeastern area of the site and will be a small bank with a drive-thru. Mr. Taglianetti shared new improvements include all new pavement, landscaping, more interior site trees, site lighting, and updates to the stormwater management system.  

                                       vi.        Mr. Weber asked about the current detention basin which Mr. Taglianetti stated that the basin will be reshaped to increase volume capacity and reduce peak rates of runoff. There is also a reduction in impervious surface.

                                      vii.        Mr. Croce expressed a support for the proposal. There was also discussion about traffic light changes, increased water and sewage use, stormwater runoff, and visibility of mechanical equipment which were all addressed satisfactorily by the applicant.

                                     viii.        Ms. Codega then talked about the stormwater management plan. The current stormwater management system will be updated to enhance the quality of runoff and to increase volume capacity and infiltration of the basin. There are also improvements to site circulation, landscaping, and utilities.

                                       ix.        Mr. Weber asked about whether the new stormwater management system will help the abutting shopping center’s stormwater discharge. Mr. Martland addressed that the entire shopping center will be improved as there is an existing drainage easement for that property.

                                         x.        Mr. Nash asked about the parking-related waiver requests. Mr. Martland and Mr. Taglianetti stated that the current parking proposal with the waivers, is the most efficient layout. It maximizes the number of available parking spots, improves traffic flow, and allows the addition of landscaping. Mr. Nash then asked about adding landscaping at the southeastern area of the site which Mr. Taglianetti stated that they are adding trees and fence to that area and can investigate changing the materials.

                                       xi.        Ms. Owen inquired about the bicycle racks and trash receptacle waivers. Mr. Martland stated that trash receptacles were added to the plans so no waiver is needed. He shared that they do need the bicycle waiver because they are providing fourteen bicycle spaces, where forty-five spaces are required. The racks will be near Building A and Building B. They found fourteen spaces sufficient which Mr. Nash agreed with.

                                      xii.        Mr. Weber stated he agreed that the traffic lights needed to be synchronized with other developments in Town which Mr. Martland stated that it is a coordinated system with RIDOT.   

                                     xiii.        Architect Spencer McComb shared that Building B’s exterior will be renovated and New-England style architectural features will be added. The existing Building C will be expanded and Building D will have changes to the exterior. Building B’s HVAC equipment will be built into the roof and shielded. Mr. Nash asked for clarification on the building materials. Mr. Taglianetti stated that the plan is to reuse the existing metal structure but if it is deemed unusable, the buildings will be framed in wood.

                                     xiv.        Jamie Hughes, architect for Building A talked about the proposed design and materials. Mr. Croce asked clarifying questions about the trim materials which were addressed satisfactorily.

                                      xv.        Mr. Croce asked about the 4” caliper tree waiver request. Mr. Taglianetti talked about the landscape architect’s concern of the viability of 4” caliper trees and the difficulty in acquiring larger trees. He stated that they will acquire and utilize as many 4” caliper trees as possible but reaffirmed their need for a waiver. Mr. Croce stated that that is acceptable but noted that the experts on the Tree Commission prefers the larger caliper tree.

                                     xvi.        There were no members of the public wishing to speak.

                                    xvii.        Motion by Mr. Weber, seconded by Ms. Owen to close the public hearing. Vote: 5-0-0.

                                   xviii.        Mr. Nash, Ms. Owen, and Mr. Croce expressed their support for the project.

                                     xix.        Motion by Mr. Nash, seconded by Mr. Weber to make the five required findings of fact, grant certain waivers from the commercial development design requirements of Section 521 of the Middletown Rules and Regulations Regarding the Subdivision and Development of Land (Regulations), and forward a positive recommendation to the Zoning Board of Review, subject to the following recommended conditions of approval.

1.    Recommended conditions:

a.    Ongoing inspections and maintenance of the stormwater management system shall be conducted in accordance with the approved operations & maintenance plan. Prior to permitting, a stormwater facilities maintenance easement, subject to the approval of the Town Solicitor, shall be recorded which will obligate the owner to properly maintain the stormwater system, and provide for, but not obligate the Town to access the easement area to perform necessary maintenance at the owner’s expense, should the owner fail to do so.

b.    Prior to permitting, the stormwater management system operation and maintenance plan shall be revised to include measures needed to maintain design infiltration rates, subject to the approval of the Town Engineer.

c.     Prior to permitting, the stormwater management report shall be revised to reflect and take credit for anticipated groundwater recharge on the site, subject to the approval of the Town Engineer.

d.    Prior to permitting, the applicant shall investigate the possibility of further reducing the rate and volume of stormwater discharge from the site. Any such revisions to the stormwater management plan are subject to review and approval by the Town Engineer.

e.    The applicant shall coordinate with the Town Engineer on the evaluation of the potential need for an easement benefiting the Town, to allow for off-site stormwater flows to be transmitted though the applicant’s stormwater management system.

f.      Prior to permitting, the applicant shall coordinate with the Fire Department to select acceptable emergency vehicle access to the gated portion of the property.

g.    Prior to permitting, the applicant shall coordinate with the Fire Department on required fire hydrant specifications.

h.    Prior to permitting, comments from the Tree Commission contained in their correspondence to the Planning Board on September 30, 2022 shall be addressed.

i.      Prior to permitting, site plans and/or landscape plans shall be revised to include replacement of the existing fence surrounding the detention basin at the front of the property with a new black vinyl-clad chain link or other decorative fencing, subject to review and approval by the Town Planner and Town Engineer.

2.    Waivers considered:

a.    Section 521.1.B.1 – Parking to be located to side or rear of buildings. Proposed parking does not comply. This is an existing site condition due to location of the existing former Benny’s building, which will be retained.

b.    Section 521.1.B.2 – Parking to be separated into lots of not more than 50 spaces each, with lots separated by landscaped strip at least 10 feet wide. Proposed parking does not comply.

c.     Section 521.1.E.4 – Bike racks to accommodate at least 1 bike for every 5 auto parking spaces must be provided. Required number of bicycle spaces not provided.

d.    Section 521.2.C – Building exteriors and roofs must be constructed of traditional materials such as wooden clapboards, shingles, patterned shingles, brick or stone. The applicant proposes use or Hardie Plank or similar product, metal, and other products for building siding.

e.    Section 521.2.C – Traditional roof form required, with minimum 4:12 pitch. Roofs for buildings at the rear of the site do not comply.

f.      Section 521.3.D.1- Landscape buffer, 10’ wide along all property lines. Not provided in all areas.

g.    Section 521.3.D.3 - Landscape buffer, 10’ wide between the building and parking/driveways. Not provided in all areas.

h.    Section 521.3.F. 2 – Parking lot trees. Proposed parking lot trees do not meet the minimum size of 4-inch caliper. Applicant agreed to purchase 4” caliper trees if they are available.

3.    Vote: 5-0-0.

b.    Public Hearing - Request of Derek Savas for Development Plan Review for a project consisting of a proposed miniature golf course with associated parking and other site improvements, and including requests for waivers from certain requirements of section 521 of the Middletown Rules and Regulations Regarding the Subdivision and Development of Land. Property fronting on Valley Road, Assessor’s Plat 107NE, Lot 402A.

                                          i.        Mr. Pierik rejoined the meeting.

                                         ii.        Mr. Monti recused and Ms. Marisa Desautel sat as conflict solicitor.

                                        iii.        The applicant Derek Savas and engineer Lyn Small were present.

                                       iv.        Motion by Mr. Weber, seconded by Ms. Owen to open the public hearing. Vote: 6-0-0.

                                         v.        Mr. Savas gave an overview of the proposed project and site. The proposal is to build a miniature golf course and a 600 square feet commercial building.

                                       vi.        Mr. Croce asked for clarification on the plans submitted which Ms. Small addressed that one is the site plans and the other is the mini-golf plans.

                                      vii.        Ms. Small talked about the existing conditions, utilities, and stormwater management plan. She shared that this project will require a special use permit from the Zoning Board of Review. The applicant said they also addressed the comments from the TRC and find the conditions acceptable. Ms. Small shared that they are not requesting any waivers because they have revised the plans to address the windows, landscaping, street trees, and parking lot trees requirements. There was discussion about the landscaping calculations for the project area.

                                     viii.        Ms. Owen asked whether the applicant is subdividing the property which Ms. Small stated that they are not proposing a subdivision, but they are only utilizing half of the property.

                                       ix.        Mr. Weber asked about operating hours and lighting which Mr. Savas addressed satisfactorily.

                                         x.        Mr. Pierik commented on the parking space calculations.

                                       xi.        Mr. Fenton expressed concern about the possibility of the golf balls going offsite which Mr. Savas stated that they do not anticipate that happening since they are only providing putters.

                                      xii.        Mr. Croce asked about screening along the property line that abuts residential properties. Ms. Small stated that the applicant is negotiating with the property owner to add a row of trees along that property line. With those trees and the slope, Ms. Small stated that it will be properly screened and the plan will adhere to the Ordinance’s Section 521 screening requirement. Mr. Croce also asked about the landscape maintenance plan which Ms. Small stated that they will provide the plan and will incorporate the Tree Commission’s comments.

                                     xiii.        Mr. Croce commented on the water usage calculations and requested that the calculation should be updated to reflect the pond and restroom water usage. Ms. Small agreed to the request. Mr. Croce also asked for clarification on the sewage connection to an existing private sewer line, which Ms. Small stated that they have a sewage easement with the abutting property owner.

                                     xiv.        There were no members of the public wishing to speak.

                                      xv.        Motion by Mr. Weber, seconded by Ms. Owen to close the public hearing. Vote: 6-0-0.

                                     xvi.        Motion by Mr. Weber, seconded by Mr. Nash to make the five required findings of fact and forward a positive recommendation to the Zoning Board of Review, subject to the following recommended conditions of approval.

1.    Recommended conditions:

a.    Ongoing inspections and maintenance of the stormwater management system shall be conducted in accordance with the approved operations & maintenance plan. A stormwater facilities maintenance easement, subject to the approval of the Town Solicitor, shall be recorded which will obligate the owner to properly maintain the stormwater system, and provide for, but not obligate the Town to access the easement area to perform necessary maintenance at the owner’s expense, should the owner fail to do so.

b.    Due to the proposed water features, a minimum 4-foot-tall fence with gated access surrounding the golf course is required. Prior to permitting, the detail drawings for the fence must be provided for review and approval by the Building Inspector.

c.     A sewer manhole must be installed at the connection point with the private sewer main located on abutting property. A sewer maintenance agreement between the two property owners is required, subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works.

d.    Prior to permitting, the lighting plan for the golf course shall be revised to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of Zoning Ordinance Article 27B – Outdoor Lighting.

6.            Updates