The time is 6 30.

I'd like to call the planning board into order.

Mr.

Secretary, if you'd like to take a roll call.

Sure.

Kevin Mishad.

Frederick Huntsbury.

Present.

Margaret Peloskey is absent.

Richard Cromwell's here.

Paul McGreevy.

Patricia Antonelli.

Yeah.

Jared Pimatel.

Here.

Jeff Brooks.

Here.

And Teresa Stokes.

Yeah.

You have a quorum.

Thank you.

Can I have approval of the August 4th meeting minutes?

Second.

It's moved and second.

Is there any discussion?

All is in favor say aye.

Aye.

The ayes have it.

Staff asked that we see if we can move communications to after the Broadway application just to kind of move things along.

And I also want to make note in case anyone's in the audience that the um the subdivision application for COGShell has asked to uh continue to the next meeting to the October meeting in case anybody's here explicitly for that.

Um may I have a motion to um move communications to after business.

So moved.

Second.

It's move and second.

Any discussion?

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Yeah, I have it.

Um all right.

Uh next on to business.

Uh we are continuing the public hearing that was open at the last meeting for the unified development plan review of uh and preliminary plan application for 525 Broadway Texas or Platte 6 lot one.

Mr.

Chin.

Yes.

I'd like to state for the record that I had reviewed all the materials and feel confident to move forward with this.

Thank you very much, Ms.

Stokes.

I'm so sorry.

Could you speak into the mic and just repeat that, please?

I'd just like to place into the record that I have reviewed all the materials from the last meeting and feel confident to move forward at this.

Thank you.

Um Mr.

Lease.

Uh good evening, Mr.

Chair, members of the board.

Matt Lee is representing the applicant 525 Broadway LLC.

Uh as indicated, this is a continued application for preliminary plan, uh development plan review and for unified development review.

Uh it was continued for lap from last month for rebuttal by the applicant and also for us to provide some updates from an August 13th technical review committee meeting, which we attended and which resulted in a positive recommendation from the TRC.

Uh we've submitted revised uh some revised materials, which you should have, and they're posted to the agenda.

Um set and renderings by Mr.

Monys, who uh which were a result of him working with uh Jill Chin, the historic planner, after the technical review committee meeting.

We also have an updated uh civil engineering set, which just adds a landscape wall along the front of the property on Broadway, which was uh a request of the technical review committee.

Uh we also have an updated landscape plan, which is a product of uh the landscape architect working with the tree warden Mr.

Wheeler during and after the technical review committee, and then we also have a traffic improvements memo and sketches, which uh were provided by Todd Brayton, the traffic engineer.

He had worked with your your city engineer and staff, uh including making a site visit and coming up with those traffic improvements.

And so I intend to call uh Ms.

Rogers, uh Mr.

Monies and Mr.

Brayton to address updates uh and to provide some rebuttal as well for updates from the TRC and provide some rebuttal.

Um Mr.

Brayton is in transit from Massachusetts right now.

I expect him to be here any time now.

I don't think it'll cause a delay, but I'll call him probably third.

Um thing I wanted to also mention it came up at the technical review committee meeting, which was suggested by staff was potentially using the Calvert property, the former Cranston Calvert School, some parking there for guest parking for this project.

Um, and my client who is the principal of both 525 Broadway LLC and the entity that owns the Calvert is agreeable uh to doing that.

He would provide five guest parking spaces uh at the Calvert.

We're also in discussions with and the church next door St.

Peter's Lutheran Church uh has agreed to provide five spaces at the church for guest parking as well.

Uh we just have to finalize the lease details uh on that, but I so ultimately my client would be willing to provide either the five spaces at the Calvert or uh the five spaces at the church property, uh whichever one works out to address the parking uh variants.

And then Ms.

Antonella, you had a question at the last hearing about financing, which I did not have an answer to at that time, but I've since talked to my client, and he has indicated that the Bristol County Savings Bank has provided him with a very competitive term sheet offering terms for a loan.

They're also the the lender on the Cranston Calvert project, and uh so they're obviously happy with that.

They're going to be a repeat lender.

So that's the financial piece on that.

So with that, um, unless there's any other questions preliminarily, I could call uh Pam Rogers to stand.

Uh yeah.

Go ahead.

Hi.

Raise your right hand.

Swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.

I do.

Thank you.

State your name, please, for the record.

Pamela Rogers, landscape architect.

And Ms.

Rogers, you attended the last meeting at which this matter was heard by the planning board, but for I did.

Then you attended the subsequent technical review committee meeting at which this matter was considered, correct?

Yes, I did.

And uh did you produce a revised landscape plan as a result of the prior planning board meeting and technical committee.

I did.

Is that the plan that's currently up on the screen right now?

Yes, it is.

And you and you also worked with tree ward and Mr.

Wheeler on these revisions, is that correct?

Yes, I did.

You just discussed uh the change plan that made it.

So Scott had requested that some of the variety of the trees um specifically along the uh Broadway uh be changed to um a hedge maple, which would be more appropriate because it's a smaller tree with a smaller canopy.

So if there's any overhead wires, they wouldn't conflict.

Um we also moved um the trees into the right of way between the sidewalk and the property line.

Um so we could put a um landscape wall um along uh Broadway.

Um so it would um sort of you know hide the parking a little bit more and look a little bit more aesthetically pleasing.

Um two of those trees were in conflict with um some of the site lines for the traffic.

So we moved those trees to the south side of the parking.

Um and then we we just changed up some of the varieties.

Um I worked with Scott to do that.

So um predominantly most of the trees are native, but he just had a request that we just switch one tree um to the back, um, which was the uh tupelo tree.

Um he had um an issue with some of the grading on the east side.

Um if we were going to save those trees, we wanted to make that grading um so it would be under the drip line of the trees and not kill the trees.

Um I think that's basically it.

Yeah.

And Mr.

Wheeler supports this landscape plan, is that correct?

Yes, he does.

I had um a couple of different conversations with him, and he supports it.

That's all I have is Rogers.

Um we it's it's been a month, so I've sorry if I've asked this last time, but what are some of the are you repl are you replacing all the specimens that are being removed?

Like are there are there species of trees that are being removed that are not being replaced?

I'm not entirely sure the type that are there, but it's come up in a lot of the public comment on particular um species of trees that are being removed from the site.

So the only one that we didn't recommend um because of the size uh would be the uh tupelo tree.

The other tree is it trees are consistent with the existing trees that are there.

Okay.

Um that's the only reason we didn't recommend that tree.

Okay.

Um how high is the retaining wall that you're putting up?

Two feet.

Okay.

Two feet high.

I'm sorry, so we you're who I ask about retaining walls.

Is that so yeah, I located it aesthetically on the plan, but Lynn would, as the engineer, you know, okay, would be the person that would recommend the height of that based on the grading.

Um any other questions for the landscape architect?

Guys, no.

Um, so that the plantings that you've chosen, what kind of what's what's the time scale to expect a lot of these trees to hit mature growth for explosively the ones that are in the public land uh up front on the Broadway section to have basically the the most available screening from the street of the buildings?

What the kind of timeline to expect uh so I I can't really say it really depends on you know exposure, you know, how you know different different plants grow in quicker in different conditions.

So um, but we we typically um along the street, especially um recommend a four-inch caliper tree because it tends to be of a good size and would create some screening, and then also within two or three years, you'll see you know, pretty significant growth.

It takes a little while for it to acclimate, but typically a tree would grow beyond that.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

I'm most at gas.

Thank you, Ms.

Shalise.

Call Jeff Modi is to the standard.

All right.

State your name.

Jeffrey Monas.

You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.

Yes, I do.

Thank you.

Mr.

Modens, you testified at the last hearing on this application and described your plans at that time, correct?

Correct.

And there were some concerns expressed at that last hearing about the aesthetics of the building.

Correct.

And after that planning board meeting, we went to the technical review committee meeting at which the aesthetics of the plan were again discussed, correct?

Correct.

You work with the historic planner Jill Chin to discuss some adjustments.

Correct.

Yes, I did.

Can you discuss the uh adjustments and the purpose of those, I guess?

Um, sure.

So um I think the general purpose was to sort of provide a bit of uh more seamless transition between sort of the commercial frontage of Broadway and the residences behind.

Uh there's also like a lot of typical sort of masonry detailing that you know we hadn't built into the last set of plans.

So we were talking through uh some of those items.

Um I can go through kind of everything that that we changed, but um originally we had proposed sort of large cement board panels on the vertical elements of the buildings.

Um those have been switched to a simple painted clapboard.

Um we also introduced some divided lights into the windows again to help with that sort of transition uh to make buildings feel a little bit more residential.

Um we kind of broke up that horizontal lower banding.

You know, one of the comments was like this line kind of wrapping all the way around the building needs needs to be addressed.

Uh so we introduced some uh you know, full height brick pilasters uh that break up the spanning.

We also took sections of the building and brought the materials kind of all the way to the ground uh so that band doesn't sort of continuously go all around and there's some breaking up and uh interest there.

Um we also worked through a variety of different uh overhang options uh for the the entry doors um at the lower level, you know, seeing that all of the uh all of the first floor units have their own dedicated entry.

Um so we work through you know three or four different uh scenarios with Jill and uh what's presented to you was uh the preferred option uh from the group.

Uh they're kind of smaller and more minimal, uh less of a sort of um uh eye-catching element.

They're sort of just there to serve their function and um simply structured to the building.

We also sort of looked at varying the color palettes between the buildings.

Um obviously we're trying to maintain the same sort of uh building footprint and floor plan throughout for uh sort of ease of construction and economics of scale.

Um, but we sort of varied the materials between the two buildings, varies colors between the two buildings, so the site just didn't seem um so homogenous.

Um and we'll sort of continue to work on those details as well.

Uh we also brought in some of like the typical brick reveal detailing that you would see on some of the kind of larger masonry buildings in town.

Uh so we've sort of introduced those into the facades.

Those are always hard things to see in the renderings, like the different ways where you turn the bricks and set the bricks back to uh help sort of carve up these masonry facades, but we have a lot of those details in the works right now.

And there were no changes to the footprint of the building though, correct?

Correct, yes.

And was the historic planner satisfied with the improvements?

Uh yes, she was and by the way at the TRC meeting, she was also she also an idea that she was uh satisfied with the size and massing of the building, is that correct?

Yes, and part of her job as historic planner in historic zoning matters to assess compatibility of projects with the surrounding area, correct?

Correct.

Now, by way of comparison, can you compare the size of these buildings we're proposing to the Sheffield Innovation Center, which is two doors down?

Um, sure.

So yes, these buildings are are much smaller in scale than the Sheffield building.

Um, these buildings are 4,250 uh square foot footprints, uh, each of them, and you know, Sheffield is over 13,000 square feet for the footprint.

So even combined, our total footprint here is way less than exists in the Sheffield building itself.

Um, we're asking to be at 33 feet for our height.

You know, I mentioned in the last hearing, like Sheffield's around 42 feet, and the same thing with Jesus Saviors next door.

So these will definitely not be the most prominent uh buildings in the neighborhood.

Um, there are you know, we we looked at the the new sort of three-story multifamily that's being renovated across the street, and they got their height variance to be at 33 feet.

So we're kind of in line with what's happening across the street as well as those buildings get uh renovated and changed.

Um our buildings set back from the sidewalk, you know.

Um, I know we talked about the landscape and the wall buffer, so that's going to help sort of that transition from the street side of Broadway to the buildings itself.

Um, and then also like because of how these buildings are oriented, we have actually a very small frontage of building on Broadway.

There's only 38 feet of building frontage that runs parallel with Broadway itself, as combined with you know, uh Sheffield School uh is 162 foot long facade.

Um so we're you know we're a quarter of what that actually is that's going to actually be fronting on Broadway because of our traffic pattern, how you go into it, the actual massing is sort of set back and consolidated into the middle of the site, especially as we move the buildings off that back property line to allow for the parking behind.

And one of the subjects came up at the last hearing was sort of the character of the Broadway area, and I just wanted to bring out a few facts so you are able to provide.

Um, did you count three-story buildings on Broadway from the North property to uh uh the county?

County street, yeah.

We basically looked at the street front on County Street, and uh 12 out of the 23 buildings all have some three-story element.

Um, I know a lot of these are set in dormers and pitched roofs and things, but you know, a lot of these buildings are over 30 feet tall and have usable space on their third floor.

Um, some have units dedicated up there as well.

And what are the very and how long is that stretch, by the way?

Um it's it's about a thousand uh feet, so it's it's under a quarter mile, it's like point two point two miles.

And what are the various uses of property in that stretch?

Uh so you have a whole mix.

Um, we counted uh nine uh multifamily buildings along the way, whether they're two or three families.

Uh there's two uh large church buildings, there's one very large office building that we've touched on, um, one sort of mixed commercial residential use that's been there for quite some time, and then one church administrative building.

Uh so there's definitely a wide range of uses as you go down mixing of commercial.

And how about uh brick buildings?

How many brick buildings are there?

Uh yeah, in that stress, there's nine brick buildings that includes Sheffield School and Jesus Saviors.

There's a handful of houses that are all brick, so brick is definitely a very common material, you know, through the neighborhood.

So on the subject of the character, the question at the last hearing about whether uh the character of the neighborhood is really about Broadway, or is it about the side streets?

And you've lived here for many years and worked in architecture here for many years.

So could you please uh discuss your observation there?

Sure.

I mean, we've always looked at this as an urban frontage, and I I think it really needs to be considered that because most of Broadway at the end of the day does have an urban commercial frontage for the residential areas behind.

I mean, a stones throw from this building to the north, we have an old gas station, Domino's Pizza, a motel to the south.

We have large churches, large office buildings, mixed administrative buildings, um, and multifamilies all over the place.

So it's very kind of typical, especially as you go down Broadway.

I mean, you go down another quarter mile and you're at you're at Bliss Road, and there's a mix of retail uses, commercial uses there with residential behind.

You go further, you have the hospital, there's residential uses behind.

You go further, you start getting into the restaurants and bars.

It's very typical that we have a commercial frontage on Broadway itself, and the residential neighborhoods fall behind.

So it's consistent with our project is consistent with that character.

Yes, I believe it is consistent with that character.

And our use sort of provides the transition because again, a lot of those commercial frontages aren't residential uses.

So all the questions I have for Mr.

Moses.

Um does the rest of the board have questions for the architect.

Anybody chair, I I have one question.

You characterize that part of Broadway as having a lot of tall buildings and multi-families, but when you're talking about multifamilies, you're talking about a couple of duplexes, with three.

Yeah, but from uh from a density standpoint, we are in line with the density of the neighborhood.

So even though you know there's no other 40,000 square foot lots that are part of that thing.

So we're really comparing to like a block of houses.

So it's a dense neighborhood, and our density for what we're doing is in line with the density of the surrounding neighborhood.

Right.

Newport's a pretty dense city.

Correct.

Um, I I think my question though is that you were talking about three-story houses that have apartments and multifamilies that are basically duplexes, and there may be one or two threeplexes there.

I'm not sure.

Um but they have a certain look.

It's residential.

It looks residential when you go through it.

And I guess I'm questioning, you know, does this actually fit with that?

Sure.

Well, I would say like if you look at Sheffield School, nobody thinks that's out of character with Sheffield's not.

Jesus Savior is not out of character with the neighborhood because it's a bigger building, right?

There are blocks of very dense multifamily buildings all the way down Broadway, the hospital, the retail spaces that are on Bliss, the corner of Liss.

So I mean it Broadway is a whole mix.

You know, it's been different levels of commercialized over the years, things have gotten torn down and changed uses, but there's always been commercial uses on that end of Broadway.

Um to kind of add to Sunny's my more and more and more I look at it and drive down, I drive up and down Broadway five, ten times a day.

Um is staff, can you put a site plan up there?

Is did you have you did you guys consider on the south on the southwest corner of the lot having like a single family, a duplex or a triplex built there?

On the southwest on the southwest corner of the lot.

So my thought process being is if you're on Broadway, you know, the the issue that you know, me not being an architect or a design thought is that going down the corridor of Broadway, you know, on on the right side, it's it's varying levels of scale and size of residential type, dense denser uses all the way down.

And yes, it is like a it's a mix of commercial, larger scale, smaller scale, like all the way down to a quality park, right?

That I have fully agree with you.

I was me looking at it was if there was a structure on that corner of the lot that it would actually break up the large-scale buildings you have looking this way and behind it that way to have a you know two two and a half story building there, and and that would help that would help shields the parking view from the the issue is the access, right?

Like we need from day one that we sat with the city, they said that the driveway access to the property has to be pushed as far southwest as possible to get away from the intersection.

So it's like we need to bring cars as far down Broadway as possible before we turn in.

So there's like essentially no way to put another structure there and still allow for vehicular access on that.

So that's that's been the whole thing.

That's been the having we can't, like we said, like um, you know, you can't access all the parking from the back.

We can't direct all of our traffic through the church.

So there is regardless of what happens to the site, that driveway is going to exist.

Like that is going to be the access point for the property.

All right.

Um, because the the wall, the wall with the tree plantings.

I like I like the the terrace and the how it starts to break up that visually.

Um that's certainly that's certainly helped from last month.

But I'm just kind of how do I how do I break up the the overall scale to bleed in a little bit more with more of that mixed that mixed scale going down Broadway?

Well, I think you've got like you've got space between like these are larger buildings on this side of the of the street, but there is more space in between these buildings.

I mean, like innovate Newport is a as a street in between it and Jesus Saviors, there is a actually a fair bit of space in between the church and innovate Newport because the church is pushed to the north side of its lot.

So like having some voids in the street front here, I don't think is out of character, especially as you go down.

Yeah, which is about a fifth of a mile down.

This is all commercial.

So it's all remember as we're coming through in Mile Corner.

We have a car rental, hotel, pizza place.

I mean, there's lots of commercial use.

Yeah, up West Main.

Where I'm I'm not talking about West Main.

I'm talking about Broadway.

Yeah, yeah, but I mean it's it's still a stone's throwaway.

It's all so I don't want to expand our lift already, but is like the the church is not involved, but they're on the side involved, right?

Because they're they they sold a lot.

They sold a lot.

They want they want things to happen here.

They're when they sold a lot under the premise that they they didn't want to see large single family houses there, right?

I think they really bought into how Connor sort of pitched his project and the kind of housing that he was trying to provide.

You know, talked about housing their future pastor in one of these units.

So there's that's so I guess my my question is is does the is the church intending on developing their lot after this project's developed.

Um they don't have no plans to go anywhere as far as okay, you know, part of their part of their selling this was to make themselves whole for the future, right?

Is to take this income they're gaining from the sale to shore up their finances.

They have a lot of renovation work that needs to happen to the buildings that they need funds for.

So this gives them the funds to sort of rehab their structure and go on for as many years as they want to be there.

Okay.

All right.

Um other questions for the architect.

Um I'm having trouble with your design just figuring out these uh I'll call them they're not dormers, but these over the doors.

The overhangs.

Yep.

Uh can you give me a little bit more description of what that's looking like?

So it's really like the the big comment was wanting them to sort of slim down and not be these big features, right?

So they're basically a really thin metal overhang that's only as deep as the landing, so they only come off the building three feet and they're about you know three and a half feet wide, and then they just have a simple cable structure back to the building that holds them up as opposed to sort of larger brackets.

Like those were the things we worked through with the historic planner.

We showed, you know, um uh sort of brick porble options, we showed larger metal bracket options underneath.

We showed gable roof options that came up over the belt course, um, and keeping them sort of minimal and minor and enabling them to have a small light in there that you know lights up so people can walk in and out was the desired approach.

Thank you.

You want sorry, Jeff.

I I just I don't know how to ask these questions.

So you building building code requires you to have an elevator and and new construction for buildings with third three floors or with for yeah for accessibility.

At the end of the day, the upper stories are open to the public, right?

Like if you have a visitor that's in a wheelchair, there's no reason why that person shouldn't be able to come visit you and have dinner with you at your house.

I just um has like in in your different options that you explored, like were there ways that you could stagger the buildings to have them have more of a multi multi-unit, multiple multi-unites.

Like a townhouse kind of configuration.

Yeah, yeah.

Or we actually we showed an option like that where we introduced sort of these peak roofs and vertical pieces of it, and nobody liked it at the TRC to be that beyond it.

I heard that I heard that story too.

I mean, no, I mean more on like the facade side of it where so there's more elevation.

We're really stuck with our parking widths, right?

In there, like this again, this whole thing was about trying to find that balance between building footprint, parking, and overall massing.

And I mean, we have the minimum amount of width required to get the two lanes of parking and the fire access we need.

So like we don't have we can't just start jogging the building, you know, 10, 12 feet in different directions.

Like then we lose parking, we lose access.

Um, so it really again, like we didn't want to come in here and ask for you know a 40% lot coverage, you know, add-on because we were doing all these architectural bumps and crazy like shapes of the building.

Uh so we tried to keep this very simple, straightforward.

Again, workforce housing, like we're not working with a six hundred dollar square foot budget like some other condo developments are.

You know, we're trying to be economic and smart as our approach to this.

Um, and again, find that medium without covering the whole site with still allowing the proper access, getting as much parking as we felt is needed for the project.

And I think this does that.

And if I could just clarify one thing for the record, maybe it's clear enough, but when uh Mr.

Monas referred to the the option, the peak roofed option that at the set of the TRC, that was sort of uh there was going to be an architectural detail basically placed on the front of the facades of these buildings that were that involved a peaked roof sort of image, but it was not agreeable uh the sort of fundamentally different type of building, it's correct.

Yeah, I'll I'll I'll take Jill's word for it.

Um anybody, everybody else is good.

Thank you.

All right, you're welcome.

Brooks, I don't know if you had any questions for Lynn Small.

She she is here.

I wasn't intending to call her because she just added a wall to her plan, but she's available to you.

Yeah, I know.

Um, because T TRC approved the um storm water is if I recall in the TRC report that they that they approved the stormwater plan.

Correct, yeah, with conditions, yeah.

With with conditions, so as long as all those conditions are in there for their stormwater plan.

I personally I'm okay if any board members have questions for the civil engineer.

No.

Um, that's fine.

So and she already answered the height of the wall is three and a half feet.

Two feet two feet.

Um is it a stone wall or a mason wall?

Three feet.

Sorry, three feet.

Three feet feet.

Yeah.

Um, maybe this was for the landscape.

Is it a st like a field stone wall or is it a masonry wall?

Stonewall, field stone wall.

Thank you.

Okay.

I think I'm I think I'm good then.

Thank you.

Uh in that case, I'd like to call Todd Brayton.

State your name.

Todd Brayton.

Swear to tell the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth?

I do.

Thank you.

Mr.

Brayton, you testified at the last planning board meeting regarding this matter.

Is that yes?

And since that last meeting, you attended the technical review committee meeting on this application.

Is that correct?

Yes.

At that TRC meeting, the city engineer Bill Borden was president, correct?

Yes, he was.

And subsequently, you and Mr.

Melville met with Mr.

Boardman and other city staff at the site.

Is that correct?

Yes, it is.

And you developed some sketches that you showed everyone at the site meeting, which address the ability to pass a car that might be stopped, seeking to take a left into the project site.

And the sketches also that address traffic safety improvements.

Is that correct?

That's correct.

And those schedules have been submitted to the planning board and are posted on the agenda.

Is that correct?

Yes.

So starting like to start with the question of the ability to pass a car that is stopped on the left.

Um stop to be looking to turn left.

Um can you discuss?

Can you state how far uh that car would be from one mile corner?

Yeah, so it's it's a little over 200 feet from one mile corner.

And what is the distance between the solid double yellow line that separates the northbound from the southbound traffic and the curve on the west side of the Broadway?

So it's just under 25 feet.

And how wide is the typical car?

Uh typically depends, of course, on the type of car, but between six and seven feet wide.

And what about larger passenger vehicles, such as a large pickup truck or an SUV or something like that?

So SUV is typical typically can be a little bit wider trucks, typically between seven and eight feet wide.

So, in other words, you'd have about 16 or 17 feet pass on the right.

The car was stopped, take a left in the project site.

Is that correct?

That's correct.

And how wide is cyclical travel.

Uh typically 11 to 12 feet wide.

And how many vehicles would be anticipated to be turning left during peak hour times?

So there'd be one in the AMP, four in the PM peak, and two in the Saturday peak.

And did you discuss your sketch and sketch with Mr.

Boardman and did he agree that there's enough space for passing on the right if the car was stopped to take left?

Yes.

And that's also reflected in the TRC memorandum, which states Mr.

Brayton's diagram and field observations demonstrated that there's sufficient room for a southbound vehicle to bypass the vehicle turning left off Broadway onto the project property, correct?

Correct.

And that's also true of box trucks and tractor trailers, correct?

Yes.

Now the decision to go around a car that stopped to go left would not happen right after the intersection, correct?

No, it does not.

Why is that?

Uh, because as mentioned before, it's a little over 200 feet um from one mile corner until you get to where a car could be stopped taking a left.

Um, so going at either the post-speed line or 28 miles an hour, which is was uh the the speed in our speed study, it would take over five seconds to get from one mile corner to that location.

So in other words, there's plenty of time to decide to go around stop car and plenty of room do it, correct?

Yes.

Now there was an exhibit submitted at the last hearing uh that was proposed to support an argument that there's not enough room to go around at that point and that you would run into a parked car in front of you try to do that.

Was that was that accurate?

Uh the exhibit was submitted, yes.

Okay.

Oh yeah.

Well why it was the exhibition.

Okay, yeah, so uh so it's it's not um it's not accurate because the proposed driveway is actually a little further north than what was shown in that exhibit.

Um so a car waiting to turn left at the driveway and any cars going around.

Um a car waiting to take left is is further north of that location.

Um there's also actually a driveway um that's still to the south of that that location as well.

Um so there is sufficient space for for a car to go around.

And that's all shown on your sketch as you maybe compare.

Yes.

And so your sketch shows there's a safe distance to pass without getting a parked bar in front of it.

Yes.

And your sketch truly and accurately represents the field conditions, correct?

Yes.

And one of the sketches, you also submitted a sketch which has proposed safety improvements in the area.

Is that correct?

Yes.

Yes.

Okay.

That's it.

Um, so there were basically three things that that we were able to do.

Uh the first um is that the improvements include adding a speed limit sign with a speed feedback sign on Broadway just after the one mile corner intersection, uh, which is a traffic calming measure um that has been shown to reduce vehicular speed, which in turn would improve safety.

Uh the second thing is that signs and pavement markings are recommended to be added to more clearly clearly delineate the lane drop merge, um, which will provide um improved guidance to motors that are driving in that area.

And the third thing is is uh shifting the edge line slightly and removing the crosswalk uh the cross hatch striping to provide increased space and an improved visual to motorists, so it is more obvious that you can go around any waiting left-turning vehicles.

And that's the cross-hatching that's on the sort of west side.

On the west west side, yes.

So it's more clear that you can say exactly um.

And Mr.

Boardman was satisfied with those proposed improvements?

Yes.

And that is also expressed in the TRC memo, correct, which expresses the staff as no opposition.

Yes.

And you agree that you'd continue to work with Mr.

Boardman on the details of the improvements uh that are proposed.

Yes, that's correct.

Stay set up.

Yes.

Um now to confirm in your professional opinion, the reasonable reaction 30, there would be no traffic hazard and no traffic congestion caused by this project for a proof of inconstructing correct.

And your opinion is that there'd be no backup from a car turning left post drive, right?

Yes.

That's all I have for spraying it to me, this with the room that's on the southbound lane.

Is there room to actually put a left-hand turning lane?

Um, not an exclusive left turning lane because you have the two lanes that are coming down to add a third lane, you'd actually either be taking away space from the northbound or trying to widen the road, which really isn't feasible there because of the especially on the west side with the buildings and the property so close to the back of sidewalk.

Okay, so it's it's still two lanes.

It's still the it's it's now two lanes, it hasn't merged yet.

Right.

Well, yeah, but just to clarify there, the southbound lane where the entrance into the property is is still considered two lanes going southbound.

It's it's going it's transitioning from two to one in that in that location.

Okay.

But it is in the gray area.

I'm sorry.

We're in the gray area.

We're not creating you.

You're not telling me that there's an extra lane being created by somebody passing, right?

They're still by somebody passing that car, they're making a legal maneuver to go around that legal bigger life.

Okay.

Thanks.

Yes, not illegal.

Yes.

Yeah, Frederick.

Um first of all, thank you for revisiting this.

I think there's some really good ideas in here and that you've shared with us.

And um I just wanted to get into some level of detail here to understand, for example.

Uh it looks like the lane reduction arrow is being moved further south.

Is that right?

So actually, where there's one that's there, um yep, right there.

That's just south of the intersection.

We're actually proposing to add a second one.

A second one, yes.

Okay.

And then the second one is uh how close to that left turn.

Where where is approximately the left turn?

Where would you turn in there?

Is it after the uh um I don't know if we have anything on here then?

So it's it's kind of um like the on the west side, like the I think it's a concrete driveway with the it looks like it's two cars sitting there.

Yes, yes.

So it's pretty much just north of that.

South south.

The driveway starts just north of that.

If you look at the third rendering, scroll down look at the third rendering, it shows as an overlay.

You're right, and that gives you a good positioning.

That's a good point.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Right.

Um so uh and then with respect to the uh speed limit uh feedback sign.

I thought that was an interesting idea.

Um we have one now on third street, so there's a new one on there, and yes, there's a psychology to it.

Yes, when you see it, and plus you get the strobe light that's that's looking at you, right?

Um is there so is there a like uh rule of thumb with respect to where that sign should be posted relative to where you want people really then to drive 25?

Um it's typically you you want to put it close to where you want that that reduction to happen, so you don't want to put it too far away, or if you put it too far away from where you want, obviously they'll they won't see it until so it's you want it right before where and that's where we propose it, is pretty much when you're coming through the intersection.

It's it's right there.

So if like like you said, if it's gonna have this road bite and it's gonna tell you that you're driving too fast if you are going too fast, and and it's kind of right before you come to this merge and and where the driveway is and and ultimately down further south when when the parking and and more uh even dense out.

Yeah, I was coming at it from the perspective of wanting to make sure that when the sign tells somebody to go 25, that they still have time to react to somebody being the left lane wanting to make a turn.

Yeah, so there's it's still uh I don't know the exact distance, but it's probably um probably at least 100, maybe over 100 feet from where the where a car would be way into turn left.

Right.

People smarter than me have looked looked at this and figured this out.

Okay, good.

All right.

Well, I'm I'm fine then.

Thank you.

Thanks, Frederick.

Any other questions?

Um I have a concern.

I when you're driving down you're coming from off of Badmill Calapus onto Broadway between five and seven p.m.

on Monday and Friday, which I do every day.

There's a real bottleneck there as they're coming in, and right as that lane is ending, we're now gonna put a left-hand turn where it's already a bottleneck because then you have the people go a hundred yard 100 feet later are trying to turn into innovative newport and a little ways after that they're trying to get into Vernon Avenue.

So I'm concerned that we're gonna be multiplying that effect.

Particularly during peak hours.

Well uh one again, I think I mentioned earlier one of the key points is that there's there's gonna be very few cars that are gonna be turning in to this driveway.

I think it was one in the morning, four in the PM, and then two on a Saturday.

So it's it's really gonna be infrequent that anyone would be stop there.

But don't you have 38 units there?

Um Pardon?

In the back.

Yeah, but they would enter from the church, the church driveway.

So there's two.

So you're gonna direct people to go through the church to get there.

Two entrance points.

One is service of 29 spots through a new uh driveway, which is over 200 feet from that intersection.

That's another important thing.

Remember, it's not right at then the you mentioned the innovative nukeboard driveway, which is next to the existing church driveway.

Well, service ball cars would be very um is another 250 feet beyond that.

So it's 45.

So it's being pretty good.

So that's quite a distance.

It's not you turn make that turn, and then there you are.

It's thank you.

Uh can I just uh this it's actually a follow-up question to the chair's question the last time about uh would it be possible to get a uh a uh some site type of shelter at the bus station there, figuring that now more people may be taking advantage of the bus.

Yes, that's we've talked about that with staff twice the time and like clients would be quite.

Thank you.

Yeah, thank you for reiterating Frederick.

I had that in my notes.

Um I guess so I just kind of wanted to walk through a scenario.

Well, I'm sorry.

Well, first the removal of the crosshatch.

I I appreciate where you're coming from with that, but wouldn't that kind of pose a danger for that owner for those owners on that those first three driveways for their parking?

I I I wouldn't I wouldn't call it a hazard.

It's it's I think the cross hatching is is probably mostly there to prevent parking.

Uh it's just to prevent parking.

Okay.

And that and any any kind of uh no parking would be designated with uh no parking signs, which uh the police department's indicated is is a better means of of doing that anyway, because they can actually enforce it and you can see it when there's snow on the grounds and that sort of thing.

Okay.

Um so to to kind of expand on uh Sunny's comment with the bottleneck.

So if I I walk through the scenario of somebody's coming home at five o'clock and they're taking a left there and it's pretty busy.

Knowing um, you know, I don't I don't have the numbers in front of me, sorry, Todd, but knowing the volume of traffic going northbound, volume of traffic going southbound, it takes that car a full 30 seconds to take a left waiting for northbound traffic to open up for them.

What how many cars would back up behind that car going left, knowing what the southbound traffic is?

So I I couldn't give a specific number, but our analysis actually shows that the delay to take a left turn into the driveway is actually less than 10 seconds.

Less than 10 seconds.

Yeah, there's gonna be enough gaps in northbound traffic to get take the left into the driveway.

Um that's yeah, and that's not from the past.

And and and again, there is enough room to go around.

So theoretically, there should be no one stop behind that car.

Okay.

Um they could they can go around, so they they shouldn't queue up towards the intersection.

Yeah, I'm not necessarily thinking a queue up towards the intersection, more just a queue up to where you couldn't go around, right?

So if there's two cars, you know, that's that's all.

I I understand you can just drive right around.

Yeah, so if there were actually were cars that were behind it, there's actually still gonna be there's still enough room to go around any cars that might be there all the way up to the intersection if it is wide enough for two two lanes of traffic all the way up.

Okay.

All right.

Um there other questions for the traffic guy.

I would just I would just add, you know, that it happens every day that we have cars in front of us when you want to make a left turn and you can't because of traffic.

So it's not necessarily an unusual situation.

It's painful, granted.

No, no question.

But I think we see, in fact, I think even that left turn up at uh uh Yantanomi uh Avenue.

There's there is actually no left uh signal, I believe, there.

If you try to left signal, is there a left signal?

Okay, no, but somewhere on that intersection, not all of them have a left turn signal.

Not all of them, no.

Um so I asked you in the last meeting if you knew what for an office building of the size of Sheffield, if what the kind of coming and going traffic count looks like where you did you preview your homework.

I I I apologize, I I did not.

It's okay, man.

I should have made that a point.

I apologize.

Because basic basically my point is is that an office building of that size has equal or greater arguable traffic count of turning left, or same with Vernon turning left, same with Elliot Place turning left, or Sunday morning going to church, the volume of people coming to church at that explicit hour going left.

Um we don't have you know, I don't see it.

Uh you know, it's Broadway traffic, but I mean it's not like those back up all the way to two mile corner, those that doesn't back up to where nobody can move and maneuver around that end of Broadway.

So to me, to me, that left turn is as annoying and a hassle of a left turn as anywhere else in town would possibly be.

And it doesn't necessarily impact the use and enjoyment of that road for everyone else driving on the road.

Um especially with what Todd's presented.

But that's just my take on it from the scale of other projects and uh the access to other streets in the neighborhood around the area.

Um anybody else?

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Graham.

And I would just like to add also that one of the can proposed conditions that's in your staff report is that the applicant continue to work with the city engineer on the details of these plans and that ultimately uh the city engineer uh approve of the proposed improvements.

That's something that we're able to do.

Thank you, Mr.

Lee.

Um those are all the witnesses that I that I had.

Um I can I'd like to make a summation when it's appropriate time to do that.

Uh yeah, yeah, that sounds great.

True thing.

Thank you.

Um so again, this this is the same public hearing that we had last time.

Any any public comment?

Please reference amended changes that were today.

We had um lengthy public comment in last meeting.

Um we we just asked that just like the stat like the applicant came up with their experts to discuss amended changes from last month.

Any public comment needs to reference amended changes from last month's meeting.

Um we're limited to three minutes uh per person.

You guys have uh list a sign-up sheet, right?

Yes, so the first person we have on our sign-up sheet is Rich Gilman of one Roland Road.

And uh when you come up to speak, if you could please um acknowledge if you received a letter as and a butter, uh so that we can have that on the record.

It would be much appreciated.

One letter six months ago when the first one went out.

I cut that letter and buttoned up this one.

Uh make please speak into the microphone so we can make sure we hear you.

And I do have a letter that I'm gonna submit.

Great.

Thank you.

So please uh state your name and your address.

My name is Richard Gilman.

My address is one rolling road.

Thank you.

And uh, like I said, as in a butter, I got the first letter, but none more.

Um I was here last meeting, and I was shocked at uh how little interest there seemed to be by the planning board uh with this project.

Everybody just seemed to sit there and not ask any grilling, not asking any substantive uh questions.

So here we are tonight, and all I'm hearing is cosmetic questions and cosmetic solutions to a bigger problem.

Um I don't care how many lines you draw on the road, how many signs you put up on pole at intersection, it's not gonna fix it.

It's not a slap another sign up, and people will go, oh, slow right down.

These people are coming in here and especially in the summertime, are pretty much nuts when it comes out of intersection.

There's always a jockey in to get ahead of the crowd, right in the same area with a proposed input and output of Broadway.

So um that is a dangerous scenario.

And if you start changing things that dump that traffic onto hopping road freeborne, those roads weren't made for this type of uh traffic addition.

Um then I heard the uh comments about how uh there's so much uh business on this highway this wouldn't add anything to it.

Uh but he's referencing Cranston Calvert stool, uh, which is a mile away.

It has nothing to do with this intersection whatsoever.

Uh neither does Ship.

Uh in the church there, that it's brick church, blah blah blah, it fits in that church's been there a long time, and uh you can't uh see my glasses.

Yeah, so why parking space is it?

Clarence and Calvert to be used by residents of this project.

Is that what I'm hearing?

Yes, yes, farming.

Who's gonna park a mile away and walk back up to the impressive fence in short terms of it?

That's ridiculous.

Who in here could have sprout here?

Nobody up here lives in the neighborhood.

So I I don't know.

You do, thank God we got one.

Um but the two main things here that this should not be allowed is the traffic, it's a nightmare, and somebody's gonna get hurt.

And the other thing is that the neighborhood is a generation after generation of people live in this neighborhood.

And you're you're putting this thing in the middle of it, it doesn't belong there.

Um thank you, sir.

I wish I got 10 or 15 minutes.

Yeah, well let me let's uh thank you.

Yeah, just to note for the record uh staff has taken the letter from Mr.

Gilman, our next speaker.

I was gonna say that's that's the letter that was in uh on the agenda, right?

I mean No, this is a new letter.

That's a different letter.

Yes, okay.

Um the next speaker signed up is Joshua Gootman or Cutman of 90 Bliss Road.

Hi.

Hello.

I live on uh the intersection of Freebone and Bliss.

It's already a nightmare.

I mean, people are tooting at each other and yelling out the windows at each other like in the night, especially like when people are getting out of the bars and stuff, it's busy, it's already busy there.

Uh the proposed housing development at 525 Broadway is nothing.

Mr.

Lee's I'm sorry, but why are you?

No, no, no, no.

So we'll start his time.

He but uh but it's it's a public it's a public hearing.

We we recognize that he's not Sir, sir, sir, sir, Mr.

Lee, you too, please sit down.

This is this is a public hearing.

He's allowed to sir.

Please.

Let's all let's be gentlemen, okay.

I just won't have three minutes.

Of course, and we're giving you three minutes.

Let's let's be gentlemen, okay?

And Mr.

Lee's is a public hearing.

He is not in a butter, but he still has an opportunity to speak.

Sardis, three minutes over, please.

Thank you.

Uh the proposed housing development at 5-2 Broadway is nothing short of reckless urban planning disguises progress on a nearly 41,000 square foot vacant lot zone for 13 housing units and 76 parking spaces.

Developers are now pushing for 38 tramp units, each about 500 square feet, with fewer than half of the required parking spaces, only 41.

This is not smart growth.

This is a math problem with the disastrous consequences for Broadway neighborhood and those living at the Newport Middletown border.

Residents see it for what it is.

The 54 written comments submitted, only three supported the proposal.

The overwhelming opposition is rooted in a very real concerns.

Unsafe traffic congestion, increased density, an already strained corridor, and a dangerous left-hand turn from southbound Broadway into Admiral Cowfir's Road, a turn that is already witnessed more than its share of accidents to add dozens of new vehicles without sufficient parking or traffic flow mitigation is to invite chaos, injury, and traffic.

And I did hear a few comments like to try and mitigate that.

Newport absolutely needs more affordable housing.

No one disputes that.

But affordable housing shouldn't come at the expense of safety, community well-being, or common sense.

Hacking more than twice the allowed density onto its lot while ignoring zoning and parking requirements is not a solution.

It's a shortcut that will harm the residents it claims to serve.

I mean, it's crazy.

This proposal is scheduled for further discussion.

Uh, between now and then, it's vital for the community to make its voice heard.

I urge my fellow residents to contact the Newport City Council and demand that the ill-conceived plan be stopped in its tracks.

Newport deserves affordable housing, but not at the price of reckless development that endangers our neighborhoods.

I mean, basically, it is already chaos there, and it's gonna get worse.

And I'm super upset.

I live right near there, it's already busy, it's getting busier.

Can't you just build less houses?

I mean, do we have to have like I know we have a housing crisis, but they're happy that I was gonna speak.

Thank you.

Thank you.

For the record, um, staff is receiving letter from Joshua Gutman of nine Bliss Road.

The next speaker we have signed up is Paul Donovan of 530 Broadway.

Uh on the traffic, I'm a little confused hearing different numbers.

When I measured the uh intersection down to where the merge lane ends, it was 135 feet from that point to where the car stops to turn in the driveway was roughly another 40 feet, which puts the driveway approximately 175 feet in from the intersection, which was also stated on some of the documents I saw.

So I don't know where the whole 200 can feet.

That's more than um so the big problem I have with the traffic car report is along with thousands of cars daily.

There's waste management, garbage trucks, delivery trucks, dump trucks, sewing equipment trailers, um, tractor trailer trucks.

These vehicles have an extra long length more than any car SUV, etc.

And when they go to a round turn, they can't cut right back and they've got to go well beyond that car turn in.

And that's when I previously stated the four pocket slots up ahead.

And they're not 400 feet away, they're about 100 feet from that turn.

So that being said, um, we're putting an additional 1800 vehicles a week into that already congested area where people are trying to merge with the report from the 256 vehicles per day coming and going out of that property.

That's about 1800 a week.

Okay, on top of the district traffic.

Um in addition uh to that, the uh criteria for the um permit for that requires that no traffic will be um less than or you know, degrade.

Well, when you have these large trucks and all that coming down and stopping, they're gonna stop that southbound traffic from smoothly going down and around that car down Broadway.

That's an interruption.

So that does not qualify for the special permit right here.

Next the parking.

Um, I agree with this gentleman.

Parking spaces on a Calvin ridiculous, so I'm not even saying that.

But if the church decides to give them five, we're still 30 parking spaces short.

So even if we met in the middle somewhere, five doesn't do it.

41 and 5, that's 46.

We're talking supposed to have seven.

So between 46 and 76, it should be more than five more should be at least half difference between to make up for visitors that aren't accounted for, yes, etc.

etc.

Um, I would urge this board to scale back this project from 38 apartments to 20, and then you accomplish a more reasonable uh project fair to the neighborhood.

Okay.

I understand the uh planning board is trying to push in all these uh houses because they have to be the quota, but not at our expense.

It's not fair and it shouldn't be allowed.

Thank you.

Okay, the next speaker is Jennifer Churchill of a Admiral Calvinus Road.

Hi, Jennifer Churchill, Admiral Calput's road.

Uh I strongly oppose this project as it stands with this many units.

Um despite the findings that the traffic expert has presented.

Anyone who lives in our neighborhood and has experienced traffic patterns for many years understands that resulting traffic would increase safety risk for both drivers and pedestrians.

During red lights, vehicles on Broadway are typically backed up to the closed entrance.

Um I personally experience many close calls when attempting to turn from Broadway down Canonkis, or when using the crosswalk in front of Innovate Newport, as impatient drivers attempt to pass the car, which has stopped to allow for me to turn or cross the street on the seventh opt-in, unfortunately.

Uh the bottlenecking Teresa mentioned is also a concern.

Is cars speed around the corner from Admiral Calpus onto Broadway?

Uh, there's little visibility at this turn.

If cars are backed up on Broadway even further as the cars leading to turn left into the development, there's very little time for the cars turning from Admiral Calvin's to Broadway to react and respond to these stacked up cars.

It's just unfortunately people speed around that corner when there's a green light, they don't wait.

And I can already envision accidents happening.

I've seen many living on this corner for many years.

So thank you.

Thank you.

The next sign up is Dana Sylvia of 522 Broadway.

Hello, I'm Dana Sylvia.

Look at 522 Broadway directly across from this uh development, supposed development.

I strongly oppose everything I've heard on the traffic expert.

No, you've got to live there to experience this and the amount of traffic.

What it takes me to get out of my driveway safely.

Um daily basis when I try to pull in my driveway.

The swearing I get the the people yelling at me.

Um, my sister went to go back out the other night out of my driveway and erupted a bus, which came out of nowhere, doing at least 40 miles an hour.

Almost white caraff.

She had to floor it to get back in my driveway.

He was not there at the time that she backed out.

That's how fast they come on you.

I oppose all of it.

Um I'm nervous for everyone that drives through that intersection.

Thank you.

And the last speaker setup we have is Sue Pashko of 27 Hoppin Road.

Sorry, these remarks always have to be impromptu.

Um, we don't have time to respond in a reasonable amount of time.

But first off, the developer made a bad site decision.

I think everyone here who lives near there will agree.

So, why should the neighborhood suffer the consequences?

Or get the mutters going through that intersection, suffer the consequences.

Um there are other sites.

Would you speak into the speaker, please?

Sorry, thank you.

There are other sites available.

They could use um, he could be given up a lot at the Navy hospital site.

There's a lot near CCRI.

There are other open spaces that are not virgin land that have previously been developed that could be redeveloped and beautified instead of being ruined or abandoned property.

Um the antinome road is narrow.

It's a very narrow two-lane road.

There's no way of possibly putting a left turn signal onto Broadway from my antinome because it's too narrow.

There's no room for two lanes.

Um the state is currently doing a traffic study for one mile corner.

Why not wait for the results of the state's traffic study before proceeding or giving any kind of approval to anything on that site?

Um, as far as stormwater runoff goes, the tulip poplar that's there has a dimension of 169 inches.

It takes care of 5,000 gallons of water runoff per year.

A red maple, which is what they're putting in with a four-inch trunk, would take care of less than 27 gallons of runoff in a year.

Even over the course of 20 years, the tula poplar will handle 103 gallons of runoff.

A red maple, only five 5600 gallons of runoff.

This is from Eye Tree, which is a site for professional arborists.

Um, it's a virgin piece of land.

You're going to be um ruining something that gives oxygen and benefit to the neighborhood and Newport as a whole.

It's a lovely site, and it's gonna have two barracks-style apartments for warehousing people at $2,000 a month, maybe or more.

Um I think you should really seriously reconsider anything that you're thinking about because it's just a really bad idea.

Thank you.

Thank you.

There are no more people signed up at this time.

Anyone that's not signed up to speak, or did you have to sign up?

Yeah.

Yeah, you're welcome.

Yeah, please.

Yeah, yes.

Sorry, I didn't found every second right now.

We just need your name and address.

Sure.

Heather Holstrout, I live at Nine Collins Terrace in Middletown, which is off of my antinome.

Um, there were just a few things that I heard tonight that are very concerning to me.

Um, one is the church driveway as another driveway, um, is a little confusing to me because unless there is a permanent agreement with the church, and that nothing else is going to happen to that property.

That's not really a plan.

Also, the neighbors to the east of this property um aren't really being talked about very much in this plan.

There's a whole lot of single family houses right behind there.

Um, the parking in the plan is not a solution.

Um, parking a mile, gas parking a mile away.

I think we can all agree is not going to happen.

And then the five spots in the church as a solution.

Again, what happens if that church gets sold off?

Is that a permanent plan?

If not, it's not a plan.

I really think it needs to be considered to significantly downsize this.

We do need housing, but this is not a good plan.

Um, Heather, just so you're aware, it is deeded and recorded.

So no matter be it five years, 100 years from now, whomever is the new owner is, will have to will have to honor that access to this lot.

And the parking?

Yep.

Um, that's that uh that's a condition on the staff report and uh part of the discussion we're gonna have.

Uh any other members of the public wish to speak this application.

Hi, Olivia and Aegel at 553 Belleview.

Can you get access to data on how many accidents have happened at one mile corner?

Yeah, that's they actually provided a report for that.

They who the traffic expert.

And where is that?

As part of the uh agenda that was published and available to the public.

Are you gonna pull it up, guys?

In the last five years, a little over five years, there was a total of 67 uh reported collisions.

That includes both with vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians, if I'm reading this table correctly.

Five years, not six years, correct?

Um 2025.

I don't know, is my math wrong?

That could be is that six years and I'm an idiot.

Five and a half.

Okay, thank you.

And how many cars go through that intersection?

Daily, weekly, high season, low season.

That's on there.

That's in the other report.

So this report is from who?

It's from the state or from somebody else.

It's from it's from Brian Associates, which collects data on site and then references uh national uh traffic studies that are updated every other year.

So they work for I mean it.

The traffic expert, you know what, Mr.

Lee's, if you want to answer that for me.

I'm trying to understand where that data came from.

That's what I'm trying to understand.

From the from the from the police department and from the ground.

Like from but it's been repackaged.

Yeah, the the associate that they hired to collect the data that's available.

I don't want to see it right.

It was the the raw data was made public.

Uh it it is attached to the application that is on the agenda.

And all that would review by our city engineer.

And it was our city engineer, police and fire departments.

But I can get the raw data from the police.

Absolutely.

Okay, thank you.

Are there any members of the public that would wish to speak to this?

I'm gonna close the public comment period.

Um Mr.

Lees, you wanted to give closing statements ahead of board deliberation.

Uh Mr.

Chair, members of the board, thank you very much for listening to all the testimony and reviewing the evidence tonight prior hearing.

The city has a workforce housing crisis.

We all know it.

We heard statistics about the loss of housing and the need for this type of housing that were shocking last hearing.

We're not only not building workforce housing, we're eliminating housing units at a remarkable rate.

You've heard the daunting number of housing units that must be added in Newport and elsewhere to address this housing crisis, and your comprehensive plan calls for it.

As a city, we've paid many thousands of dollars for consultants and reports that all come to the same conclusion.

We need more workforce housing.

This project provides the workforce housing that the city so desperately needs, namely one bedroom units averaging about 500 square feet each.

It will attract the demographic that Newport is trying to retain and who can't find housing now.

The backbone and future of this community.

At the last hearing, you heard the rental agent for Cranston Calvert describe receiving a flood of applications for exactly this type of unit in a matter of hours when it was listed.

And in fact, I'm informed that there's a wait list that's generally around 65 people to get into the Cranston Calvert building.

And the people who are living there and applying to live there are overwhelmingly people who work in the community or who are moving here to work in the community.

Teachers, nurses, military personnel.

These and other workers are the types of people we need to keep in this community.

So we're here for preliminary plan, development plan review, and unified development review for zoning relief.

In particular, the variance is requested are from the density requirements, the parking requirements, slight height variances, a small lot coverage variants for parking that's not entirely on the side or rear of the building and a driveway width for an existing driveway.

Also, the special use permit is requested for the multifamily use.

Your staff report prepared by your professional planning staff does an excellent job of walking through all the standards for the variances, the special use permit and development plan review and finds that those standards have been met.

So we certainly would refer you to the staff report for those findings, but I'll also sum up on a few of those issues here.

Many of the variants that we're requesting are minimal or they're basically existing conditions.

So for example, the height variance is minor, and it was justified by Mr.

Monas, who explained that to get three floors of workforce housing to accommodate energy efficient, dedicated mechanicals for each unit.

We needed to go slightly over the height limit of 30 feet to 33 feet.

But it's not uncommon in the areas he testified to.

Also, going to about 33 feet allows us to cover less of the site with buildings.

Lock coverage, we've requested 24.7%, or 20% is allowed.

Problem is that when you it's driven by the fact that the property is bisected by the Newport Middletown line, and you're only looking at lock coverage, the Newport part.

But certainly when you look at lock coverage from the standpoint of the whole lot, it's virtually conforming.

It's 20.8% for the whole lot.

So it'll have the appearance from lock coverage standpoint of conforming lot.

The question of the, you know, the not all the parking is uh some of the parking is arguably in front of the building.

Uh the provision that that we're seeking that variance from is not violated as to its intention, which is to kind of prevent the strip mall situation where you have an ocean of cars in front of a front of a strip mall.

This parking design isn't like that, has cars that go perpendicular into the site and is a very limited frontage of parking.

Uh, it's also been mitigated by the landscape wall that was requested by the TRC as discussed earlier.

And also putting all that parking on the sides and rear would essentially bring the entire park property with parking and be more impactful, we think.

And then the driveway width is an existing condition, 17 feet.

Um, that's the existing church ride, which we do have.

There is a an easement.

We have an agreement for an easement for that, so that will be permanent.

That's not something that goes away if the property, the church property were to get sold.

Um, and Mr.

Braden testified that it's not a safety concern because that's very low moving traffic in that area on the driveway.

So that leaves the issue of the density variance to allow 38 one bedroom units where 13 are allowed, and a parking variance to allow 41 parking spaces where 76 would be required.

So this property is uniquely suited to provide workforce housing because of its size, it's oversized, very oversized for the R10, and the project as designed naturally fits on this site from a variety of dimensional standpoints.

It meets all the setback requirements.

The other dimensional requirements you talked about are very close.

However, the code bases the standard for density on the number of units and not the number of bedrooms.

But we would urge you to look at this project from the standpoint of the number of bedrooms.

They're all one bedroom units.

As laid out in your staff report, the bedroom per square feet proposed by this project not only aligns with the neighborhood, but also as shown by the chart prepared by the staff and presented at the last hearing.

Uh, it also aligns with other sort of similar-sized multifamily dwelling projects around town.

So, for example, in that area of Broadway, the report, staff report shows that the density for bedrooms per square feet ranges from one per 678 square feet to one per 1,307 square feet.

We're at one bedroom per 1,074 square feet.

So we're right in the middle of that area.

Uh, for other similar size multifamily dwellings around town, you've got the Calvert is one bedroom per 791 square feet.

Mumford School is one bedroom per 1,294 square feet.

Clark School Apartments is one bedroom per 565 square feet.

76 Broadway is one bedroom per 653 square feet.

So again, we're at the density right in the middle of those, actually on the low side of one bedroom per 1,074 square feet.

And even looked at from a unit density, we're in the middle.

If you look at the chart that was presented at the last hearing by the staff.

So we're squarely in the middle in terms of density and reasonable in terms of density by any means.

But we've also noted that you could have as many or more bedrooms and occupants in a conforming 13 unit development as with the 31, 38 one bedroom units proposed.

Problem is that with a 13 unit development, that would be a lot, that would necessarily be a luxury three bedroom condo development, which not it which is not what Newport needs more of.

As we all know, it's extremely difficult to control rental activity with individually owned condos.

All too often those units are rented to Salvay students in the winter and out-of-towners in the summer.

With our model, they'll all be year-long leases and there'll be no sublets.

With regard to parking, we've demonstrated that one parking space per bedroom is more than adequate, both on statistics as testified type two by Mr.

Brayton and shown by his uh report, and local experience with the Cranston Calvert School right down the street, where the utilization rate was just 41 cars parked for 46 bedrooms.

However, the suburban parking standards ask you to base that we have in Newport basically ask you to cover the entire site with unnecessary parking.

These units will overwhelmingly be occupied by single people, and even young couples is testified to by Mr.

Money's personal experience often share a car, especially if they work locally.

As mentioned, we're also able to offer the five guest parking spaces at the Calvert or the five lease spaces at the church.

Um, and this is something that the five spaces at the spaces at the Calvert was something that was suggested by staff uh and which they have uh experience with and other other projects around town.

So the parking is adequate, which is uh as your staff concluded in the staff report.

So for a variance, you also have to show you have to show that there's a hardship amounting to more than a mere inconvenience, which means that the relief is minimal to a reasonable enjoyment of the permitted use.

Well, a reasonable enjoyment of this permitted use, indeed, the one that your comprehensive land use plan calls for is to provide workforce housing.

And this relief that we're requesting is minimal to meeting that goal.

The project has already been reduced from 440 units to 38.

We can't go less than that and keep the workforce housing model.

The lot coverage on the site overall has been reduced from 23.3 to 20.8%, and the buildings have been pulled away from the rear boundary line.

So this is the minimal relief necessary for a reasonable enjoyment of the permitted use.

Another one of the variant standards asks will the granting of the relief alter the general character of the surrounding area.

As your planning staff well described in the staff report, it will not.

First, this is Broadway.

It is an urban street with a wide variety of uses, including various residential uses, the Sheffield Innovation Center, institutional uses, and commercial uses.

Often those uses are housed in large brick or masonry structures.

As mentioned, the Sheffield terms of relative scale and massing.

The Sheffield Innovation Center is a much larger building than our building will be, even our two buildings will be even combined.

Our combined footprint is 8,500 square feet.

Innovate Newport is over 13,000.

Our height is about 33 feet.

Innovate Newport is about 42.

So this will be way smaller in terms of than that.

There were concerns expressed about the aesthetics of the building at the last meeting.

Um, as you've heard the applicant's architect work with the historic planner to soften some aspects of the design, and the historic planner, even though this isn't in the historic district, has expressed her satisfaction from an aesthetic standpoint.

And her job, as testified to to my Mr.

Mo is to assess compatibility of projects with the surrounding area.

So there's quite a discussion about with this project about you know what really is the character of the area.

Uh, is it the streets that are running off Broadway, which have more single family residential uh houses, or is it the more urban area of Broadway?

And as I believe the staff report recognize uh and the fact that this is called the the Broadway neighborhood in your comprehensive plan, it's characterized by an urban road with a rich mix of uses with residential streets running off it.

So the Sheffield Innovation Center didn't change the character of the area because it was different than what was going on on Hoppen Road, and you have that same concept applies all the way down Broadway.

Um you have residential streets that run off the main road.

The project is consistent with that overall character.

Maybe you wouldn't build this way down on Cananicus or Harvard Street or somewhere of that nature.

That's not what we're proposing.

Uh, this is not a threat to those neighborhoods, it complements those neighborhoods just the way Broadway does now.

This project is also uniquely situated to benefit from the multimodal transportation opportunities on Broadway, walkable streets, there's sideways sidewalks up and down Broadway, bus lines, uh, bike lanes, scooters, and this is a demographic that will occupy this property that is likely to take advantage of it.

Also, know you've got a landscape plan that replaces trees taken down at a two for one ratio and provides an abundance of green screening.

It's the landscape plans supported by your tree warden, Mr.

Wheeler.

You won't see the project really until you're next next to it.

It'll be nestled in greenery.

I mean, there was obviously a lot of concern expressed about the landscape, but this landscape, I have to say, is going to be changing one way or another.

And we have a great plan and a great local landscape architect.

I thought it was actually interesting, one of the people that uh one of the few people that will actually be looking at this project all the time at the last meeting, who lives, I believe, at 522 Broadway across the street, didn't express an objection to the buildings.

She was concerned about park, I mean, excuse me, traffic, which is fair.

Um, and on that point of traffic safety, um, you know, there's I think there's a disconnect between the public perception and the data, the reality.

You have the testimony of the traffic engineer, Mr.

Brayton, who based his testimony and report on his knowledge, training, expertise in the field of traffic engineering on data compiled by engineers uh around the country and also on his actual data collection and observations at the site.

But you don't have to just take his word for it, because we received a positive recommendation from your TRC, including, and it says it right in there, including a positive recommendation regarding parking conditions and traffic safety.

You have the opinion of your city engineer who has been out to the site and reviewed the data and stated in the staff and has stated in the staff report has no opposition to the project.

He agrees, for example, that there will be no backup resulting from this project from a vehicle turning left because there's plenty of time to make a decision to go around a vehicle that's stopped, and plenty of room to do it.

It's a mathematical fact, and it will be improved by the features that Mr.

Braden described.

And I have to say it also as they continue to work on the on the details as the staff suggested in the staff report as one of the conditions.

Um, so there'll be no negative impact on the level of service, no increase in traffic congestion, and no traffic hazard from this project.

And that's a very important thing to remember is that's what you're dealing with.

Is are there going to be traffic hazards resulting from this project?

Is there gonna be traffic congestion that results from this project?

We all know this traffic at one mile corner.

We all know that people swear at each other on as they pass through one mile corner sometimes, but none of those things are gonna be the result of this project, which is what's before you tonight.

As Mr.

Brayton testified, the residential use at the last hearing, residential uses are less impactful than any other uses.

Uh, in this case, there's gonna be an increase as showed by his report, but one point in traffic of 1.5% at most in cars during the course of the day.

And that's de minimis, and with multimodal transportation opportunities, the impact will likely be even less.

Actually, many of the people who will end up renting here most likely already commuted to town, so you could be reducing in some respects traffic.

I'd also urge you to consider the Cranston Calvert experience, which has 46 bedrooms and 340 units right about on Broadway.

The sky has not fallen because of that project.

I go by there, we all go by there, I'm sure a fair amount.

I have almost never seen a car driving in or out of that property, even though there's always cars in the parking lot, and the property is occupied to capacity.

The reality is that a residential use such as this, despite all the fears expressed, is a very low impact use.

When this project is done, it'll fit in like it's always been there.

Probably seem pretty sleepy.

And you should also, as brought up, we should you should consider that there's going to be a driveway here one way or the other.

Um, the property is going to be developed one way or the other.

The city has the opportunity to decide who will be making that left turn.

The left turn could be the 13 condo units with salvay students in the winter and summer rentals in the summer, or it can be workforce housing for people who are already working in town and looking for a place to live.

So who's it going to be?

You get to make that choice.

Another one of the standards for zoning relief is will it impair the purpose or intent of the zoning ordinance or the comprehensive plan upon which it is based?

It's hard to imagine a project that's more in line with your comprehensive plan than this project.

Citations are in the application, and they're also recited in the staff report.

I won't repeat them all, but consistent with what we've heard in recent years, it screams out your comprehensive plan screams out for the development of workforce housing, including infill housing such as this, including in this area on Broadway.

It calls out for taking advantage of multimodal transportation for stormwater mitigation, for energy efficiency, and for providing for Newport's diverse housing needs.

This project squarely does all of that.

I won't run through all the other legal standards, but I think you can see in the staff report and the other reports prepared by in the staff by your professional planning staff that they've all been met.

So you've heard from both supporters and detractors of the project.

The detractors have largely focused on traffic and parking, and we know that overblown arguments about traffic and parking have been used throughout the country to defeat housing projects like this for years.

But I urge you to listen to the data to the experts, including your own city engineer, your own professional staff, and the actual experience from projects like Cranston Calver, not fear, emotion, NIMBYism, and speculation from neighbors.

People hate and are scared of change, but the data shows, and the reality is that there's going to be no impact from traffic, traffic safety, or parking standpoint from this project.

The increased traffic in Newport that people have experienced in recent years, we all have comes from things like tourism and other factors, but we've demonstrated beyond a doubt that it won't come from this project.

Stormwater was a concern that was raised at various times that will actually be improved with this project.

The project will have a large underground storage facilities that will result in less runoff than if it were left the way it is now.

Uh, it will be an improvement for the neighborhood.

One of the neighbors who spoke in favor of the project at the last meeting actually thanked the applicant for improving stormwater runoff conditions because right now it affects his property on Hoppin Road.

And let's not forget the people who spoke in favor of the project.

There were people who got up and spoke very passionate about the need for workforce housing.

We said, yes, this will fit in here.

We said parking is not going to be an issue.

People who live in the neighborhood, direct abutter, Mr.

Dufault spoke in favor and who spoke about how his fire marshal for the city.

Uh for 14 years, he reviewed countless hotels and short-term rental conversions, but very little new housing.

As a direct abutter, he and his 19-year-old son, who's in college, uh both recognize that this is the opportunity that the city needs to take.

As far as public comment goes, there's been a lot of it, but I would urge you to consider that there are 33 different names on the abutters list of owners within 200 feet, plus the city of Newport and the town of Middletown.

Three of those abutters wrote letters of support, five wrote letters of objection, and one wrote a letter of concern.

So out of 33 names, 25 of them are either in support or they stated no objection to the project.

So the vast majority of neighbors within 200 feet are not objecting to this.

There were also comments, as we know, received from city citywide from people outside the 200 foot radius.

There were supporters from outside 200 feet.

I would ask you to consider that there must be well over a thousand people who just live in this Broadway neighborhood.

And more importantly, there's about 25,000 people who live in this city.

So the number of letters you've received, despite what we believe were efforts on social media to drum up opposition, does not reflect the desires of this community.

What reflects the desires of this community are your comprehensive land use plan and the constant refrain in recent years to hear from all over that we need housing.

So I would ask you to please take into consideration the needs and desires of the whole community and not the fear and negativity of a relative few and a small minority of neighbors.

And of course, at the end of the day, your decision must be based on the actual evidence, on the data, and on the legal standards, which your professional planning staff has found have been satisfied.

Mr.

Money's testified that he's been looking for four, they've been looking for four years to find a location to build workforce housing without success.

And this is the only lot where it could be found.

If workforce housing isn't approved here, then where?

We can't afford to wait to put it off into the future, and maybe someday we can convince the hotel developer who owns Newport Grand to build workforce housing.

There are no signs of that happening.

Nor should we point to condo developments that might happen somewhere that can become summer and student rentals, no controls.

Nor can we point to other places and say put it in Middletown, put it in ports.

Those people will end up just driving to Newport anyway.

And Newport itself needs to add this housing.

It's not only important for housing statistics, it's important to the fabric and future of this community.

We provide housing for the people that work here.

In fact, I can't help but relate this project to other things that are going on in the community right now.

There was recently a rally to save the birthing center at Newport Hospital.

Where are the people that work at the hospital going to live?

Kids just started in the new high school last week.

Where are the teachers going to live?

We certainly are building plenty of hotels.

Where are all the people in the hospitality industry going to live?

There's plenty of luxury housing and plenty of luxury condos, but no places are being built for those people to live.

So this is a forward-looking important project.

That presents an opportunity to address the needs of today.

It's not going to solve the housing crisis on its own, but it's a step in the right direction.

We respectfully ask that you grant the zoning leaf requested in the preliminary plan approval for development plan review.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um I'd like to call a five-minute recess uh ahead of board deliberation and discussion.

Uh so see you back at 811.

Uh may I have a motion recess?

Second.

Move and second.

All is in favor saying it's going to be okay.

Great.

That's very good organization.

Okay.

Anyone can really simple.

A few months ago.

The kids get the stomach back.

So then my wife back out.

Of course, we got a same exact time.

So I was reaching out to my mother and my brother.

Janet and I can barely stand up.

Yeah.

And my mother and brother were like, yeah, we don't want to get stayed.

That was the end of it.

There's just no reinforcements were coming.

Janik and I look at each other.

There's just nastiness everywhere.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Basically, everyone just like blocked in different areas of the living room sipping on PD light for 24 hours.

That's like college.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

There's a lot of that.

Uh the t the time is 8.12.

I'd like to call the session back into order, please.

So we have um quite a quite a bit to discuss here.

Um, so we have staff's report.

Uh the everybody has the updated and amended staff report.

Um, so we have the updated amended staff report.

And we're gonna go through and the we have to discuss and deliberate all the variances, and then after we discuss and deliberate all the variances, discuss special use permit, and after we get through all of that, we're gonna close out any discussions of um in motion for variance of special use permit, and then from there, depending on that outcome, proceed to development plan review, in which we discuss the the entire project um as a whole for development plan.

Uh so may I begin by may I have a motion to accept the staff report as findings of fact?

So moved.

Second, it's moved in second.

Is there any discussion?

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

The ayes have it.

So the variances.

So the the variances being sought.

There are six total of which staff mentioned.

Sorry, there's there's a lot here, so it might take me some time.

That the uh parking location they felt was met um by the adding of the wall and by the adding of the stone wall and essentially separating it out from outside of our front setbacks.

Um before we proceed with everything else, I would just want to kind of get a general um consensus from the rest of the board that they agree with the staff's position that the parking location relief, which is when you need when you seek a special use permit of this type, it asks for the parking to be set to the side or the rear, not front of the building.

So staff feels that with the latest addition to that sewn wall and that in the trees they put in, that it essentially kind of separated the positioning of the parking.

Is everybody essentially in in consensus with staff there?

Yeah, all right, great.

Good.

All right.

So uh the first I just kind of want to generally discuss them because it'll we'll be here for days if we need to go through all of them like that.

But so the four standards that need to be met for uh dimensional variance is that hardship from which the applicant seeks relief is due to the unique characteristics of the subject land or structure and not to the general characteristics of the surrounding area, and it is not due to physical or economic disability of the applicant, accepting those physical disability uh disabilities addressed in GLRI 452430.

The second standard is the hardship is not a result of any prior action of the applicant.

The third is the granting of the requested variants will not alter the general character of the surrounding area or impair the intent or purpose of the zoning ordinance or the comprehensive plan upon which the ordinance is based.

And the fourth is required that evidence is entered to the record for the proceeding uh proceeding showing that and granting the dimensional variance that the hardship suffered by the owner of the subject property of the dimensional variance is not granted amounts to more than the mere inconvenience, meaning that relief sought is minimal to the reasonable enjoyment of the permitted use to which the property is proposed to be devoted.

Um with those in mind, let's first discuss the first variance.

Um if it's okay with everyone, where I want to just walk through all of them, right?

Because again, it's kind of a lot.

So we're gonna walk through all of them and just discuss in in whole uh with each other, uh each individual variance that they're seeking, uh, discuss as a whole the four standards, whether being met or not, and what we need to be what needs to be done in order for them to be met.

And then after all that, if we're in some general consensus, we'll just make a motion and move ahead on it.

Um but if there's any in particular that we have a real contention on, we'll we'll pull it out and discuss separately.

Uh so first is density is to permit 38 dwelling units where 13 is allowed.

Um the four standards for this.

So for me, for me, the the hardship, firstly, the the hardship that is being sought is the housing crisis that the city is acknowledging, and that for us to to address it by providing actual housing units for workforce by providing actual housing units for the middle class, is we need to have the opportunities to develop the lots, privately held lots of this nature, and that showed up in our housing uh comp chapter as a method to get there.

Um and that's that's the more than the mere inconvenience um and the minimal of reasonable enjoyment is essentially for the general public on needing that relief.

Um I think another hardship that you're uh was brought up was the bedroom versus square footage issue.

Um the hardship is that a lot of the the density thing is driven by having multiple bedrooms uh units, and so it it requires you know less dense situation.

We're talking about a much smaller unit situation.

I thought that that was aptly uh pointed out.

And so that the actual ruling is a hardship here and is making it difficult to accomplish what we're trying to accomplish.

Uh thanks.

Thanks, Rick.

I I actually appreciate that.

Um I think that's actually good for I actually think that's actually uh hits the first standard, the hardship from which the applicant seeks relief.

Uh unique characteristics of the subject land and structure and not the general characteristics of the surrounding area.

And basically that it is a substantially sized lot where they yes per the zoning code and R10, it states, well, it's only 13 units because it's X number of units per thousand square feet.

But the applicant's presenting that it's with a bedroom count for that unit, there's they're they're not seeking nearly as steep of a density to R 10 for the area uh when considering the rest of the Broadway corridor.

uh unique characteristics of the subject land and structure and not the general characteristics of the surrounding area and basically that it it is a substantially sized lot where they yes per the zoning code and R10 it states well it's only 13 units because it's X number of units per thousand square feet but the applicants presenting that it's with a bedroom count for that unit there's they're they're not seeking nearly as steep of a density to R 10 for the area uh when considering the rest of the Broadway corridor um has been my interpretation of it um any other members want to want to speak to I actually kind of like what staff put in here in the amended with the uh bedroom count with by um surrounding properties if you see in the red and and number of beds per square feet compared to this project touches on it um see so my the the thing for me though is that for the the the hardship to be met it's to meet our need for workforce housing so I want I want a condition of where the units need to be leased on an annual basis to ensure that it's leased to residents and it's not leased on um a seasonal aspect a monthly a seasonal and I think that having that condition to the density in the dwelling units is where we can actually meet that hardship being met um and I think they brought up well they brought that up and also that they they won't sublet and they won't sublet I thought that that was there those are those are condition those are important conditions to meet our goal.

So um does uh board generally accept that condition for for the project to be met that the uh the applicant to restrict leases to a minimum of a 12 month period and prohibit sub leasing pieces to a minimum of 12 month periods and to restrict subleasing restrictive prohibit thank you thank you um did you guys want to discuss the four standards for the density any further on that variance any other uh concerns or comments on the density I just want to state that it number three the three eyes yeah that the granting of requested variants will not alter the general character of the surrounding area or impair impair the intent or purpose of the zoning ordinance of the comprehensive plan upon which the ordinance is based it does we don't have anything like these are apartment houses we do not have apartment houses so it is changing the general character of the area I just want that to be stated for the record.

I understand that we have to have workboard house workforce housing that's going to lead us into doing apartment houses but let's recognize we are changing the neighborhood so but I I just we do have apartment buildings.

You go right down at the corner what do you what do you define as the neighborhood the general I would say one mile corner to Jesus Savior Church is the smaller part of it.

Oh that's that's less than a fifth of a mile.

That's a that's a single block.

Expand it then where's the next one so you have to go all the way down to Cranston Calverton.

No I mean at uh at uh uh bliss uh bliss bliss road there's a map there's a substantial apartment building right there in Bliss at the on Broadway across from Bliss Road off the top of my head at the corner of Rhode Island Ave and Broadway there's another fairly large apartment building right there and then you know you have the the hospital which again is isn't isn't an apartment building but that's a massive well even closer to that 435 will I guess it's 437 will have an apartment building the old triplet school the old the old triplet school is is a large apartment building um and then there's a a multitude of you know three unit four unit buildings up and down the corridor of Broadway.

Yes but I define an apartment house as being more than 10 units.

Three three to five is that's a house that was broken up.

Well have 26 units one bedrooms I still don't think that the design and the way it fits in that neighborhood is going to change the characteristics of it it's just gonna it's it's not altering the character of the neighborhood just based on the looks itself yeah on on the looks on the looks yeah and I don't think there is a ton of apartments between there and on we you know you named a bunch I don't think that uh I just don't agree with that that's yeah there's three there's there's a handful of seven seven unit buildings which you don't don't look like seven or seven or nine unit buildings but on Broadway from Rhode Island to have to the hospital up past Bliss Road there's quite quite a few that I've just come across professionally they're disguised as old single family houses as well single family homes yeah

I don't think that uh I just don't agree with that.

That's yeah, there's three there's there's a handful of seven seven unit buildings, which you don't don't look like seven or seven or nine unit buildings, but on Broadway from Rhode Island to have to the hospital up past Bliss Road.

There's quite quite a few that I've just come across especially.

They're disguised as old single family houses.

Large apartments.

That's proves my point.

There it's larger single family homes, it's not apartment complexes, basically what this is.

Uh so okay.

I I like where you're going.

Again, we're we're we're simply we're simply discussing density, we're not discussing aesthetics, right?

Yes, that's right.

Yeah, we're discussing density and in this in this variance on that on that point of general character of surrounding area.

So if if it you're but you're you're not hung up on the density of the project to the surrounding area, you're hung up on the aesthetics of the project.

Oh well, right.

The density I already stated my case about what it's gonna do causing traffic, etc.

You want to think it's just the aesthetics?

Well, that's that's what I'm saying.

Yeah, the it we should to the the aesthetics we're gonna discuss the the aesthetics, I would like to discuss under development plan review because I feel that's where we actually have leverage to discuss aesthetics on on the project.

Um that's where as as a board we have that norm.

Um, but again, if we're we're strictly discussing density in this conversation on there, I I don't I don't think we're altering the general character of the surrounding area knowing knowing the multitude of multifamilies up and down the corridor of Broadway.

But okay.

That's I'm I I truly appreciate you speaking up, Sonny.

Thank you.

Um anyone else like to speak to the four standards for uh density being met.

Um for me, um, it does not impair the intent or purpose of the zoning ordinance or the comp plan for which the ordinance is based for having this density, because again, the comp plan and doesn't isn't necessarily referencing full acre lots being developed on a corridor like Broadway, the way R 10 is discussed as being in neighborhood settings.

Um and that's and having having the density met to meet our hardship need for actual housing units for our middle class and uh workforce housing.

I think this is this is how you meet it.

Um if we're good discussing that one, the next variants being discussed is parking.

Um which I have I have to agree, offering nearby parking at Calvert is is laughable.

Like just parking the street.

There's there's 15 blocks between us and Calvert to park at before you'd before you'd park there.

Uh, but I do want to have a condition of at least five parking spaces deeded on the um sorry on the church lot.

Thank you.

The budding church lot to the south.

Um again, anyone want to speak to the four standards?

Um for the parking requirement.

Um I I don't see why if they if you can get five spots from Calvert and the five spots from the church, you should take them.

Should be obligated to do both because somebody that lives in that building that may have a guest, so maybe they make arrangements to use the Calvert or bring their guests down there to park, or that person that lives in the unit brings their car down to Calvert and takes one of the spots for the weekend and puts their guests in their own spot.

I mean, if he's got five spaces in Calvert and five spaces from the church, take it because you know, I mean it's twice as many spaces as they're supposed to have.

So another ten spaces versus another five, I think is beneficial.

Okay.

Okay.

It might not be such a big deal, but yeah.

It's not downside.

Sure.

Yeah, yeah.

You know what?

Okay.

I misunderstood.

I thought it was either or situation.

It is saying no.

You know, you obligated to do both.

And I frankly, them them being able to offer five spaces at Cranston Calvert really drives home that the zoning that the zoning that we have in place for two parking spaces per dwelling unit is is too it's too much for just in general.

It's a hard job.

And check check number one.

Exactly.

Exactly.

The the the way the zoning is is the hardship that the applicant is being met by delivering one bedroom of units that are only 500 square feet.

They're not gonna have five people living in them, then at best two very much in love people um to be able to live with each other in that space.

Then I can so I I you know I I feel that the parking is is absolutely being met um across the four standards.

And but Patty, I I actually agree with you.

You know what?

They're gonna offer it, take it.

I mean, I've been down that back street behind it, and it's quiet, but there's cars there, even on a Tuesday on the that aren't in the driveways that are of all the houses that are so yeah.

Yep.

Um let me think.

Uh anyone else want to speak to the explicitly to the parking variants being sought in the four standards that are asked for dimensional variants.

Okay.

Um the the next variance being requested is on the building height uh from 33 um 33 and 33 and a half feet where 30 feet is allowed.

Uh I think the the applicant made a good presentation on uh how it's essentially just the pronouncing the word the paraphrase.

The roof line parapets.

Thank you, Trish.

Um, which are there essentially for for aesthetic reasons and to cover any of the mechanicals that are up in the roof um for sight lines and to allow for uh appropriate mechanical use within the units themselves.

Um I don't think this uh of the four app of the four requirements.

I do feel that this is not more granted than uh more than a mere inconvenience.

He could have been seeking a four-unit, I mean uh like a five-story building or something of that nature.

And he's not.

Uh anyone else want to speak to the building height?

But it's in keeping with the neighborhood, as was pointed out in the presentation that a lot of the other buildings are around the neighborhood or similar heights or higher.

Yeah, there's there are a handful.

Um specifically um Sheffield School.

Um to permit coverage of 24.7% where 20% is allowed.

When when you allocate for the land that is also in Middletown that is considered part of this lot, it's it's negligible at best at 20 point.

Where is it?

20 20.8% coverage.

Um, so they're only they're only asking for 0.8% coverage over the uh expected the expected allowance for total lot coverage, which you could attribute 0.8% to uh um stairways, honestly.

Elevator elevator.

Um a comment to the four uh standards for dimensional variants.

I think it's such a small variance that it's really you know, it's just it's just sort of a minor.

It it's in the grand scheme of things, it's not that big a deal.

No, it is not granted amounts to more than a mere inconvenience and is sought as a minimal to the reasonable enjoyment for the permitted use that that I have to agree.

Um next is access driveway to allow for access driveway for a two-way traffic of 17 feet where 24 feet is required.

Please keep in mind that this isn't this isn't for the new driveway being installed that um is closest to the intersection.

This is for the church driveway that is used as access to the rear parking units.

So it's an existing condition it's it's an existing condition.

So that's that's outside of prior action of the applicant um it is there's definitely due to the unique characteristics of the subject land um and it does not alter general character of the surrounding area where it is um and it is uh minimal to the reasonable enjoyment permitted use frankly they're they're only using this so that way they can access and meet uh and try to provide more uh parking um let's see um okay um parking location we already removed um i actually wanted to touch back on parking i had in my notes that um that land that is in the middle town section that's part of the um that that that's part of the lot itself i wanted to see if the applicant could ask middletown to provide more parking on that land on that lot um so i didn't want to make the you know all of it subject to middle town giving approval for parking on that lot but i wanted the applicant to go to middle town and say you know we we recognize that um we're you know we're we're meeting the the minimum requirement of parking for our project um the neighborhood is asked to have a higher parking requirement will you assist with having the higher parking requirement um so i wanted to ask the applicant to make reasonable efforts uh make reasonable efforts to have middle town accommodate accommodate expanded parking options to the middle town section on the parcel does that sound good for everyone yes yeah I think that's a reasonable request yeah um Mr Lee contemplating us making an application to Middletown to allow parking we didn't that would be something probably that would be subject to their development plan review process or or their uh we just process I mean my my thought process on it was you know we we feel the hardship for the parking uh variants is being is being met with it being limited to one bedroom units here and with the zoning that we have requiring two parking but to to alleviate the neighborhood concerns having a little extra parking couldn't couldn't hurt so if you can go to middle town and ask for additional parking spaces on the lot that they said you guys couldn't build on we're we're we're simply asking that you that you revisit with Middletown for the project and if middle town still pushes back and says no then middle town is telling us no we that they're they're not willing to cooperate to to add additional parking yeah they that would probably like I say that would involve an application and going through their prior it wouldn't be I don't think an allowed use in Middletown um they already denied a use variance for us in Middletown to have part of this project in Middletown it would be possibly a futility to go back to middle town but was sorry wasn't the original project it was that middle town didn't accept the larger scale project it was yeah it wasn't this wouldn't be the same thing and part of the multifamily was on the middle town lot right that's correct yeah it was the same application but it so it's I want I want middle town to say no to us asking for parking like I want I I I want us to go to Middletown and say listen like we're we're playing ball we're we are meeting our standards we're meeting our hardships the neighborhood has asked for more parking options will you grant will you grant relief for more parking options and we're asking to make reasonable effort to ask middle town for that accommodation.

Also because Middletown will benefit from that because Middletown will benefit from it if the concern is that and and the way the site plan is I mean it you it literally you if you extended out the site plan you could add another you know we asked for five parking spaces on guest parking on um the church we asked for five guest parking at Cranston we could get six more um guest parking spaces and by just extending out that lot maybe how many spots you could fit there it looks like a yeah but I I don't want to take the whole lot obviously because I like the tree coverage but I don't I could see five more maybe right behind the building itself because we're not we're not asking Middletown for us to have more units or anything we're asking middle town to help maybe we add a little parrot to this and just say you know if you do accomplish that and you want to um uh not have the the parking at the Cranston Calvert or something you can move it to there or something I don't know I'm just throwing this out yeah I'm

But I don't I could see five more, maybe right behind the building itself.

Because we're not we're not asking Middletown for us to have more units or anything.

We're asking Middletown to help.

Maybe we add a little parrot to this and just say, you know, if you do accomplish that and you want to um uh not have the the parking at the Cranston Calvert or something, you can move it to there or something.

I don't know.

I'm just throwing this out.

Yeah.

I'm kind of with Patty, they offered it and taking it.

Yeah, I'm just like carrot thing.

Yeah, you know, just you can I don't know.

I you know, I'm I don't mean to put too much of a burden.

It's just you know, they they continually reject cooperation, and I I think that it's very fair where many of the abutters that came here and objected to the project were in Middletown to say, well, we're if you'd like to help make the project have a little of an alleviate their concern, then give us some parking on the middle town side of the lot.

Yeah, I get we can see how it goes, I suppose.

But uh yeah, we were hoping that just the the parking on the church property on the caliber would be would be adequate.

I think we showed the parking already is adequate, but with the additional 10 spaces that we talked about again.

I feel I feel the the hardship is met.

Um with again the 41 parking spaces just just simply on how our zoning code is is written.

Um would the if you added five more parking spaces back there, what's gonna happen to landscaping?

Are you gonna knock down any existing trees by doing that?

Um you might have the building.

No, no, they might they might take one or two trees here.

But I mean all right.

My clients indicating it's like yeah, we're asking you to ask.

That's all.

Yeah, I mean, yeah.

Whatever.

It's 6400 square feet.

It's just grass.

That's it.

Yeah, that's part of open space.

Yeah.

Um, so we've we uh deliberated the variances.

Um for dimensional variances uh and the conditions uh stated for the variances to be met, or an applicant to restrict leases to a minimum of 12 month periods and to prohibit subleasing at least five parking spaces deeded for guest parking use at the abutting church to the south, church lot to the south, deed five spaces at the Cranston Calvert School for use as guest parking.

Reasonable efforts to have Middletown accommodate expanding expanded parking options on the middle town section of the parcel.

Um any other comments, discussion, guys.

All right, may I have a motion to find the applicant has addressed the applicable standards to grant approval?

Um sorry.

Sorry.

Um I have a motion that the applicant has addressed each of the applicable standards for the approval of the requested variances as listed in the petition.

And the approval is can is um my reading this wrong.

The approval is contingent on the review of positive recommendation of the TRC staff approval and of final development plan review.

So moved.

Second second.

Um this approval again is subject to the discussed and approved conditions.

Um all those in favor say aye.

I oppose the ayes have it.

Uh next we move on to the special use permit.

So the special use permit.

It's a category one special use permit, and it has essentially has eight standards of review, but essentially seven standards of review.

Uh let's go through these standards again.

Many of these standards are met by uh our discussion already on the uh dimensional relief that they sought.

So uh and the special use permit they are seeking is for a multifamily dwelling unit in an R 10 residential zone.

Uh the first standard is parking and loading standards for the proposed use.

Um the the parking standard was the one what you know, not loading standards for this use, but the parking standard.

Uh any discussion on that.

Uh second is performance standards uh designated, which is essentially what the TRC reviews and they've reviewed indeed that accept acceptable.

Uh development standards for multifamily dwellings.

Um staff, what are some examples of development standards?

Yeah, so in that little sheet also on the screen behind you, uh there's a few different standards.

They differ based on if it's new construction or reusing um an existing building or what zone it is.

So for new construction in the R10 zone, it would be if you look at three A and B.

Uh new lots of buildings shall be in accordance with the precisions of the zoning code.

Um, and for new construction, all utilities shall be installed underground.

Okay.

So essentially TRC and staff approve those standards.

Thank you.

Uh the fourth condition is uh for new construction and alteration exceeding 50% of any building dimension, provision of minimum of two bicycle parking spaces located on site within 100 feet of the entrance of the primary building.

Um on the site plan, they do actually have bike racks on there.

Um and they have storage down in the basement too for every individual unit, if I recall.

So um, they can actually store their bikes inside the building too, which is great.

Uh for new construction and alterations exceeding 50% of building dimension, provision of sidewalks connecting the parking areas and building entrance and sidewalks connecting public sidewalks and bicycle scooter parking within 200 feet of property lines.

Uh, we saw that in the site plan and landscaping plan that they have actually plenty of sidewalks, including sidewalks that walk down to the Broadway sidewalk with with stairs.

Um that standard.

Um the next is no net increase in stormwater runoff from the site.

Again, they have they have massive stormwater um systems that are going to be in place underneath the parking lot to help catch a stormwater.

I did appreciate that one member of the public that spoke of um the tree's ability to treat stormwater.

Uh thank you very much for that.

Uh the the applicant is installing uh many new trees, and I I do appreciate that trees do take time to grow, but the amount of uh systems that the applicant is installing to uh carry stormwater will greatly reduce runoff of that lot.

Um anyone want to comment to that?

Yes, and I think someone some member of the public mentioned that it it would be correcting some runoff problem.

Yeah, that exists.

Yeah, uh Mr.

Dufault mentioned that.

Um the seventh is all proposed lighting is dark sky compliant, which staff um has indicated they have met the dark sky compliance, and eight, that parking lot shall be located to the rear inside of the property.

Uh we discussed that earlier with the variants being met with the addition of the field stone wall uh and green screening, keeping the parking lot out of the front uh front setback of the property.

And this is not unified development review.

So right, this this is this is unified development plan review.

So this uh granting the special use permit is conditional upon the final uh development plan review.

Yes, okay.

All right.

So um we need to include that motion.

God damn it.

And any further discussion on the special use permit approval, guys.

Um the the housing chapter update called explicitly out to allow for this type of use uh across cross town, including in R 10 zones to allow for special use permits and denser uh housing options.

Uh may I have a motion to find the applicant has addressed the applicable standards and grant this approval for the special use permit category one and uh studies uh uh address each of the applicable standards for approval and the approval is contingent upon the review and positive recommendation of TRC and staff repeat approval for the final development plan.

So move so moved.

Second it's been moved and seconded.

Is there any discussion?

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

The ayes have it.

Okay, we are moving to development plan review.

And Mr.

Chair, as you proceed into development plan review, if you'd like to close the public hearing.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um I'm going to close the public hearing portion of the application, which included the uh the variance is a special use permit, or moving on to development plan review, which has the four standards to be met.

And here guys, these these standards is when we can discuss um statics aesthetics within the comp plan and and basically subjectively how it's actually um meeting meeting the goals of the comp plan uh for the city.

So the first is granting approval will not result in conditions in inemical to public health safety and welfare.

Uh we've had uh multitude of traffic studies.

Obviously, the the public safety is the concern with this um with this standard being met, and I I have to rely on those traffic studies that as much as it might seem counterintuitive.

I I don't think it's gonna increase traffic as much as we think it is.

It's at peak, it's four cars taking a left that's at peak hours during the week during commuter times.

That's not that's not a lot of cars.

That's this is not every single person getting out of their car and driving to Raytheon and then moving and then punching out at five o'clock and then coming back and coming home at the exact same time.

That's not that is not reality with these places.

This is this is as uh nearly as many units that's on Elliott Place.

So it's the number of people taking a left to turn down Elliott Place less than a fifth of a mile, less than a tenth of a mile from this project.

Um so to me, I don't think that this increases any uh issue for public safety, especially with the additional conditions that staff laid out uh that the applicant agreed to and TRC requested for uh the city's engineer to address uh traffic concerns on Broadway and increased uh improvements elements of safety action plan and traffic calming elements.

Anyone want to comment to that?

Speak to that.

I do.

I think in the first uh meeting we had on this, I kind of put a lot of emphasis on the more on the safety and what is going on in that intersection.

And I don't think we it would be fair to the applicant to hold that terrible intersection as it is completely against them.

Um I think they've done their due diligence meeting with the TRC to make some safety changes and then continue to work with the city to make the changes.

Oh uh I'm satisfied with that.

And then when Mr.

Lee brought up the point um with the Cranston property, and I drive by there all the time, and I too have still have not seen anybody take a left into that parking lot either.

So and that's right at the split with quality park.

So you and then terrible people coming in Cranston, going left here, right here, and yeah, it's all right there.

The speed bump with the speed bump, yeah, the ramp.

Exactly.

Yeah, the ramp.

Yeah.

So all right.

Thanks, Kevin.

Yes, just ahead.

The problem exists prior to this project and will exist whether this project happens or not.

So how do we how do we ensure because it's not a condition that could go on the applicant?

It's a condition that has to go on the city.

How do we ensure that that continues when this is uh project is done that there is a review of what the conditions are, and that the city takes whatever action they need to take.

I I I don't I don't know how in this form we do it because we can't put it as a condition on the applicant.

Yep.

It's a city problem.

Yeah, so if that question is directed at staff, um, so that intersection is a state owned and maintained road that transitions into Broadway, which is city maintained.

So staff have put together um as part of the STIP process, which is how municipalities are able to get the state to work with them to update state-owned roads within the municipality.

As part of the STIP process, that intersection is included for safety improvements for all road users.

The exact details of that project staff would be happy to go into at another time with it actually directly in front of us, and the status of the granting of the STIP.

Uh I'm not sure exactly the timeline on that, but it is applied for.

So with state-owned roads, municipalities are limited in what they can do, but staff has made every effort to work with the state to adjust appropriately that general area.

Well, eventually I will.

I mean, they recently didn't didn't the city recently um impose new restrictions on Animal Calvis that are just just just now come into play, including uh directing heavier vehicle traffic on Cottington Highway.

Yeah.

Yes, it hasn't happened yet.

That road is nuts.

Yeah, that yes, yes, that's that's what she's got on that state control.

But this from my understanding, the city is petitioning the state to remove to limit weight capacity on the on the road.

We all get together and request that they put the week.

We rebuttoned that problem to be different by not saying we can only divert them if you strict on requirements.

So all ads have been brought up.

They are going to supposedly have the town and bought me at the end of the month and describes the data on this uh survey as just regional button.

Okay.

Okay.

So all right, that hasn't been implemented.

Thank you, Mr.

Dunovan.

Okay.

Um, but things things are a motion for it.

They they did install the camera to reduce speeding.

So I guess my real question is is this process you're talking about to be state in view of the one mile pointer intersection.

Do we have a responsibility to have something reported back to us?

Is that in our charter?

Or in our capacity?

No, I don't believe so.

Um it's certainly not on the applicant.

No.

The intersection is not the applicant's responsibility.

Yeah, it's not no.

Um I mean, so the the uh what is it?

The traff the traffic calming elements and improved safety action plan, like these those elements that are on the applicant.

How is that enforced?

Is the T is that enforced from the city?

How does the city enforce that?

So you can put a condition that it meets all movement standards in the staff, and they have worked with the city engineer and they have the two maintenance ones that are already in play on the future ones that are done in the case.

And so essentially I can expand on the condition you guys have in here, right?

Yes.

That states uh and few future.

Um that condition that might yeah, that's on the applicant.

This is not the applicant's problem.

Yes.

It's the city's problem.

Yeah.

So maybe I think what you would uh Rebecca had said is maybe it's uh a report out to the planning board.

What what is happening with this intersection?

We can have warned about any improvements that those there, any potential work all of the roadways that it's supposed to be on the STIMP will require some level of development as happening, so there'll be a lot of public as well.

Yeah, it's just an idea right now, and we need improvements that we're gonna be done in sections of Broadway.

We want to need on the list to get line, so we know that we want to identify that, except what those look like if we don't want to look at this design.

But need that extent.

Should I um we don't want to sidetrack yes?

That's uh the need that would should I'm we don't want to sidetrack yes, and we don't want to sidetrack too much, but I but I but Paul, I like is this something we should we should add to the bicycle pedestrian advisory commission, like as part of a liaison?

No, Trish, sorry.

Uh there are more generalized things, but uh I do go to those meetings, so I will not become bringing up bringing up in liaison's report, Paul.

Uh thank you.

Does anyone else want to speak to the first condition of uh development plan review being met?

Um the second condition is granting the approval will not substantially or permanently injure the appropriate use of the property in the surrounding area or zoning district.

Um anyone want to comment to this the appropriate use is residential and it's zoned residential, it's just that's the density issue with that as well.

Um thank you, Kevin.

I mean, I I have to echo uh the applicant uh Mr.

Monas.

It's broad Broadway's a corridor, and the neighborhoods off Broadway or the neighborhoods off Broadway.

This the project within the setting of the corridor of Broadway, it does it does meet and it does not permanently injure the or the appropriate use of the surrounding area in that zoning district when you're when you're walking or driving down Broadway, it is a much more urban setting with between of mixed uses, larger buildings, three units, two units, the Sheffield School, churches, uh, and and intersections.

It feels more urban on the Broadway setting.

And to me, a project of this scale and size, it does not substantially or permanently injure that appropriate use of the corridor of Broadway.

Sonny.

No good.

No comment.

Uh anyone else.

Um the plans for the develop of the third standard is the plans for the development comply with the requirements of the zoning ordinance and subdivision regulations, titles 12, 15, 12, 13, and 15 of the codified ordinance of the city of Newport governing public services, streets, sidewalks, and public places, parking buildings, and construction, as well as laws, ordinance, rules, regulations governing stormwater management.

An applicant may seek waivers, modifications, requirements of the subdivision regulations and variances, requirements of the zoning ordinance, pursuant to provisions and authorizations authorizing the same.

Um essentially, essentially, they went to TRC and had all of the different departments weigh in, have their have their say, have their requests, have their requirements metween parks and open space, between fire, police, zoning, building.

Um they have all had their say.

Yeah, actually, that's that's thank you, Patty.

I goal T1 right here.

Let's let's make sure we bring that up.

Okay.

You know what?

Go with it.

Okay, so we're gonna talk about the um transportation, the transportation goals.

Yep.

So if you have a bus stop that's out there and the the developer provides that additional cover that um expands the you know services that the developers go with the city to provide, and that enhances transportation.

Um yeah, for the mo for multimodal transportation system by providing better use of our public uh transportation that we have, and there's a multitude of studies that just shelter uh bus stop and uh then the amount of use out of a sheltered bus stop versus not a non-sheltered bus stop is uh substantial.

Uh so my question is is there's northbound and southbound, right?

And Frederick brought this up, great point the other day.

So if it we we asked for him to build a shelter stop for the northbound, is there enough public space for there to be a sheltered stop for southbound on this?

So the way that this should be structured is that they should make every reasonable effort or landscape so that they can iron out and not um okay.

Where this is where the bus stop is essentially on it is adjacent to their to their lot, we can make a condition where on if on their lot they provide a shelter.

Uh would it be on their uh experience and conditions being applied to the applicant property difficult on the church as well?

Impossible to voluntary conditions and buy the property experience standpoint uh did not be happy and on behalf of uh build what shelters uh based in um locations and it is not a state because of the way that you want to do the roads sidewalks sort of the reasons very very complete and within your back against uh the uh you are absolutely reasonable to do it.

I just uh basically guarantee it in the sense that if they don't perform the project can't go public.

It's gonna fall a little bit short of that, right?

That's a reality that stays with me.

It's the same thing as the traffic problem.

It stands to reason though that it will be in a benefit to all parties.

The applicant, because it's in the applicant's interest for the tenants to use the bus as opposed to the car because it it deals then also with the traffic issues that we've been talking about, right?

And of course also the neighborhood who don't have a shelter today, and then to have to have one going forward, which then should also aid the relationship with the neighborhood a little bit.

So I just like we is there is there a sharper tooth than reasonable effort?

Um the applicant to make reasonable efforts to work with Ripta to provide bus shelters, both southbound and northbound adjacent to the project.

Um just because I spend some time in Nenovate Newport, the Sheffield School, they have a they have a fixed crosswalk there.

The logical place for a southbound uh shelter is across from them and not across from the property because it's a marked area to go across people have to stop.

I mean it's it's we hope they're but the bus stop is further south anyhow.

I think it's not right.

Yeah, I mean the bus the bus stop is at the corner of Canada, so it's like eighty feet north of that crosswalk you're talking about.

But yeah.

But the logical place is to have it down there because then it's safe to go across the road.

Yeah.

No, I agree.

Um but there may not be room, and then as Dylan was saying, there's there's a lot of hurdles that you gotta run into.

About the applicant to make reasonable effort to work with Ripta to provide bus shelters at the applicant's cost.

Options for shelters.

Options for shelters.

Sure, because again, options for shelters for shelters at the applicant's c cost.

Both southbound and northbound adjacent to the project.

Everyone?

Okay.

You have written that they have to work with Ripta, right?

You can't just build a bus stop like there, like it's all ADA.

You have to widen the sidewalk.

It's uh yeah, we did it at the airport, it costs like 20 grands.

Yeah, but I'm sure.

Um applicant to make a reasonable effort to work with Ripta to provide bus options for shelters at the applicant's cost, both southbound and northbound and chasing to the property is is a way to enhance the T1 goal um for a multimodal transportation system for all users.

Probably options or less shelters.

Can we add language that says encourage use?

Like that would encourage use by residents as well.

If the idea is that we're trying to respond to some of the public comment about traffic, yeah.

If we can encourage through the like bus shelters being on site, we can encourage some of the residents at this.

Do we think we're going a little bit past our remit here?

Yeah.

Um probably uh I you know what a a little bit, but not really like we we did it with Waits Warfare where we asked for additional signage, including educational signage and the curb cuts, right?

And curb cuts and everything else.

So I mean, like for us to turn around and say, like I kind of want to expand on Jared.

Um that for for the application the the applicant to provide sources of encouragement.

God provide a sources of encouragement for um residents to use public transportation, even if that's posting bus routes within within common spaces so that the residents are aware of what bus routes are available for them to take.

Um, or think things of that nature.

Um I didn't see in the floor plans any kind of common areas.

Um of the entrances and then where the stairwells and uh elevators are plans uh I guess all we have stairwells.

Yeah, first floor is just kind of private entrance.

Oh, yeah, maybe just the stairwells.

Anyway, um I don't want to belabor this too much.

Um to provide sources of encouragement for residents to use public transportation and uh public transportation awareness and options.

God I know I know we're kind of beating this, but I I will I like what Frederick was saying.

You know, it speaks to L T1.

And it speaks that's that's why we're doing this is because of T1.

We're trying to help hit this as being more than just again, like this this is an urban corridor.

This is how we met the the um hardship for the parking requirement.

We're in an urban corridor, people are gonna be using their bikes, they're gonna be walking, they're gonna be um uh not having two cars because they're gonna be using transportation because you're gonna have the applicant provide sources of encouragement for residents to use public transportation, both through awareness and options.

Okay.

Um thanks, Patty.

Um anyone else want to speak to any of this.

Um staff's goal WA3 is per perfect.

Again, I I I always love seeing uh proper stormwater management, especially in our city.

Um, and them taking it taking advantage of an applicant to having to meet these requirements is is a perfect example of meeting goal WA3.

Um staff on EN 2.2 for leader of innovator and energy efficiency that they're actually going to be including a solar array on the building, which um I I think is uh excellent um use of their rooftop um to try to capture some some energy here on the island.

Um there's also the uh the drop ceilings and the more efficient air conditioning or HF systems that they're using.

Yep.

Jeff, under the energy, um is there still a requirement to build or have uh electric vehicle charting stations per number of spots.

So I didn't see it anywhere.

It that would most likely be dependent on the type of use that's like it would fall within certain requirements for certain uses, so that just may not have been part of the development standards for a multifamily in this special use category.

Okay and and the separate special use categories have certain requirements, sometimes it's the EV chart stations, but I feel like in the TRC report they mentioned, or where did I see that?

The request of uh offering EV charging stations was that not in the TRC report.

It might have been in the TRC memos.

We can look for that right now.

I feel I feel like I saw it somewhere it was it was in the TRC report.

Is that where it was?

Yeah.

Um because I know I want to just show up that goal, that's all.

Yeah, no, I thanks.

Thanks, Kevin.

Um leader for energy efficiency, and I wanted to say that that helps meet one of the transportation goals, but um provide EV parking options as part of the available parking on site.

Um in reference to meeting policy EN 2.2.

Uh ask for condition of the applicant to provide EV parking options as part of the available parking on site.

Um yeah, so Hayden just pulled up the second TRC memo in which it says um open to installing.

Yeah, the applicant is open to installing them.

So you're more than welcome to put that condition on.

It's been um semi-addressed in the DRC memo.

So um sorry.

So tip typically you guys kind of have a standard condition in your staff report that references that the applicant needs to meet the requirements of TRC.

That's not in here this time.

Well, there were unless I'm missing it.

We listed out the conditions proposed based on the TRC requirements.

So there were so many that we listed them out and they're separated as like for the TRC memo.

Yeah, in in the TRC memo, you have you listed them.

No, they're right on the staff report or the TRC memo.

The one from 826.

Yeah, because they meant TRC after our meeting.

Yeah, that being 15 and our part.

Yeah, but it didn't mention the EV.

But they did have the TRC memo.

Yep.

Per TRC memo.

Um that's why I should have okay.

Um sorry, guys.

It's it's totally up to the board if they want to put that condition and they don't feel the TRC conditions address that.

That's totally at your discretion.

Yes, no, I'm I'm okay thank you.

That's okay.

You guys you guys pulled the the bullet points from the TRC memo.

Um let me let me think on that.

I might want to condition to referencing the TRC memo um recommendations.

Anyway, let's let's continue on with the uh comp plan meeting meaning goals of the comp plan.

So obviously this is gonna be more stress on the housing chapter, the new housing chapter.

Does anyone want to expand on the goals of the housing chapter being met with this project?

Goal H1 or not being met.

Huh?

Goal H1.

Yep.

Um well it's absolutely needing having 38 new bedroom units, particularly with the condition that they have it as a yearly lease.

Um and can't be submeted.

I think a general fear from many people who see this or saw this coming up was it turning into a transient guest facility or something along those lines.

And I think that the condition that we placed on there prohibits that.

Okay the demand, which which is frankly the real the the real concern here is that you know, these these projects they might seem ominous and huge and everything else, but this barely this barely touches the the demand and our our need for housing.

This the rents that are expected might seem high, but if you were to go out and rent an apartment right now, it's two thousand dollars a month for not a nice place.

So if they can deliver a nice place at 2100 a month, it makes that guy asking 2,000 down the street, it makes him have to offer at 1800 for him to actually identify tenant.

And that's just how supply and demand works.

And our market has been too tight for too long and restrictive with adding no nothing to the housing supply.

And this is this the housing study in the chapter, which was that two years ago now.

It beat it to death that this is what is needed, is that we need to add more housing stock for us to address this housing crisis.

So um, I think this is exactly what goal H1 is intended for.

Um Rick, would you like to speak to the the next goal?

H2.

What's that?

Or me so I wanted to do something else.

Goal H2 support a variety of housing options that meet the residents' housing diverse needs.

Um staff comments petition proposes new units designed to address this spatial needs for year-round residents and the workforce retirees or individuals needing ADA accessibility.

These features are harder to find a typical housing stock due to the high quantity of historic structures that are used in rental units.

This is a large gap.

Well, I mean, they're they're doing it with the elevator right there.

I mean, that's just you know, check that box.

So any other comments on that one.

Moving on to H61, provide technical oversight of housing developments in order to protect city infrastructure.

Wait, can I just add something like that?

Sure, go ahead.

I also would say that the you know, we spoke briefly about the um systems to cool and create energy.

And that I think you have a new generation today that cares about these impacts.

And I think the fact that this development will offer those solutions, I think is another attractive point, selling point for people to select living there.

That's a good point, Fred.

Thank you.

Um the um moving on, H61.

Provide technical oversight of the housing development order to protect the city infrastructure.

DRC pretty much took care of that.

Anyone want to comment?

Um62B provide incentives to convert existing urban core parking lots into new housing developments.

Well, this isn't really a parking lot, so it's sort of hard to this isn't really something that it addresses.

Um that would have been I I mean, I don't know if this was the right right goal for for this project.

I think that um this was more aiming towards like if you were to develop the parking lot at the hospital or develop St.

Peter's um parking which is obviously not used except maybe Sundays and maybe small power is to do I don't have the planet I know my memory is probably not going to serve me well if you're but I thought we had one I'm so sorry could you just speak into your mic sorry that's okay I think I didn't realize it wasn't pointing this way anyway no worries um as I said I don't have it in front of me and I don't remember the exact one but I thought we had one that talked about taking large blocks land to increase the amount of housing that we had that that wasn't uh goal that was one of the strategies that was one of the strategies that was referenced in there in the housing plan.

I told you my memory wasn't gonna serve you right and trust me I had to I had to look it up myself um so it covers it covers those what the staff had um did anybody have any other goals or policies that they wanted to reference with the project um for me I wanted to reference for um for uh housing goal four uh action four point two a which is to continue to promote residential vibrancy in Newport throughout all 12 months of the year which I want to reference again to my condition to restrict it to a 12 month minimum uh residency in the building for all units because again for us to really meet this plan we need to ensure that like I I understand that Navy comes in for six months 10 months three months that's that's fine they can they can rent down the street we need to offer this to someone who's going to be here for greater than a year frankly so minimum of 12 months we can meet this goal um I also goal did they have that on here no h5.1 which is maintain a high quality of affordable housing so this isn't you know what you know what high quality affordable house so this is what isn't what we would call capital A affordable housing which is referenced to the through the unit where it's federally subsidizes state city subsidized and you have to meet certain income requirements for it i i think that providing this kind of project offers high quality affordable housing to anyone who's actually seeking rents in this market um against other rental housing options this is this is going to be that high quality um option for them um and I also wanted to add h 6.2a which is to restrict housing to outside at risk areas so um as we know with sea level rise um a lot of our city is within the floodplain including fifth ward in the point you know the the point used to have a lot of multifamily housing it doesn't have as much multifamily housing as it did 30 40 years ago uh fifth ward still has quite a bit of housing not much of it is year round anymore unfortunately but having additional housing built outside of at risk areas including up Broadway for example uh I think exemplifies this action and policy here for supporting sustainability um so the one I really wanted us to discuss about um is H13 which is sorry to keep everyone promoting a repair and revitalization prevent one point three h1 three no no no no no you gotta look in the new housing chapter Patty sorry uh prevent housing development which erodes Newport's quality of life and architectural character so this this policy is the one that I I really want us to to argue over all right um can can you show us the renderings guys um so prevent housing development which erodes Newport's quality of life and architectural character so the the the argument being that this is building a dormitory is kind of what this goal is trying to prevent right um it it kind of drives to where my asking about if you could add add scale and layers to to the actual development itself so that it feels more like the Broadway corridor and reflects a little bit more of that triplex quadplex multiple multiple structure development up and along the corridor that feels more of Newport's aesthetic

to argue over um can can you show us the renderings guys um so prevent housing development which erodes newport's quality of life and architectural character so the the the argument being that this is building a dormitory is is kind of what this goal is trying to prevent right um it it kind of drives to where my asking about if you could add add scale and layers to to the actual development itself so that it feels more like the Broadway corridor and reflects a little bit more of that triplex quadplex multiple multiple structure development up and along the corridor that feels more of Newport's aesthetic of the the Broadway corridor right um I want to talk to you guys about it make sure that we're we're comfortable with this um you know is this is this the one that we ask ourselves you know that's the the project is great and we want it and this is what we want but we need we we need more to be able to hit this policy you know is is this something we need to ask like I I do feel that it reflects enough of the buildings down the corridor um but again this is what I want to discuss so any so any comment let's just start with something very simple right which is the innovate neat newport is identical it's right there it's brick and it's got a flat roof just as a simple and it's next door it's right practically next door yeah so hospitals down the street um there across across the street there's a mil there's a multitude of brick buildings which were actually built by a guy that lived on Bedloe that just built a ton of brick buildings up and down Broadway.

Yeah innovate Newports brick building brick building I have to agree I do I do appreciate um two hands addition of adding adding some layers to the facade between different uh materials being used to try to break that up a little bit further um to give it a little bit more um at a quick glance a little bit more of a townhouse multi multiple building uh feel to it uh the the field stone wall the trees the break breaking up the use of the parking lot behind the buildings there certainly helped to that as well but again it kind of it I I understand they they couldn't because of those restraints of the lot but that's just that's exactly why I asked about the three family thing earlier you know if if dropping in a third a a third smaller smaller scale building to the right if that broke up um how the buildings felt so I'm not I'm not necessarily suggesting that that has to happen I'm just you know I want to hear from you guys you know this is this is this project an objection to this policy or is it is it meeting the policy enough knowing that some of the surrounding buildings that it is a brick building in the scale with it being in that urban corridor you know I want to hear it from you guys on that policy.

I can't believe I'm gonna jump on this because you know I wasn't a huge fan of this the idea of it but I think that they've gone to great lengths to try to make it fit something so it fits innovate Newport it fits the hospital they couldn't put the peak through you were denied correct um they couldn't do any of that to make it look like the homes and it's not gonna look like the homes anyway it's an apartment complex I think their use of alternating the lighter color on the one side of the one building and then on the bottom of the other helps break that up a little bit but you it's gotta fit something you don't want to put a sandstone building there when we have no sandstone buildings in Newport.

Yeah so they're they're making the effort for the design to fit the area I don't know what you could do.

You can't put a peaked roof on it you can't it's not gonna look like our colonial homes or Victorian homes or anything else because it's different but it doesn't look like an office building which is as far as it doesn't look like innovate Newport to me.

I mean innovate Newport was the historic school and it looks like a school building you don't want an apartment complex that's gonna look the same.

Yeah because then it would be mirror images of each other.

So you can't even build a two-family without an elevator.

Two families under three or higher.

I don't know what's happening, but I know that this is well, yeah.

I'm I'm just saying, like, you know, if sorry, 38 dwellings, you know, is 11 three families set up in a pattern of a neighborhood, you know, meeting is that is that our building cost that that that aside.

I mean, we try to put three buildings first grade, right?

Yes.

That's smaller buildings plus three buildings.

So yeah, it wants to be sort of the same.

We're still trying to think that's the block over.

Right, like having things like pilots and divided by some developing is less than it's still a commercial progress, but yeah, we're trying to figure it out.

I go back to like I was involved in this portable product on that by overlaying a lot of aesthetic exterior, which is not basically the requirements that you're seeing down games now, even though it's uh it is it is that house in fact we are trying to find that the ground so we don't have to get out of it.

That that that side I great, right?

Um and you know, I I really don't even want to talk about the economics of it.

It's a re that's the reality.

That's reality, right?

But I don't want to talk about the economics of it because that's not what we're talking about.

Um you know, it's just so you're this bottom we need and soft working.

It's a million don't exactly things turning the brick and those and still finding the shadow line across the side.

Like that's where sort of the right thing makes that sort of that's something that's not building ones get built to see.

Okay.

The building footprint is smaller than innovate new newport, right?

Yeah, yes.

I think just some of these drawings are so nice, like designed that you it makes the building look a lot bigger than it actually is gonna be, especially because it's you know nothing really contextual around sites and show it's all kind of greenery.

Yeah, these views like you there's like no way to sort of sit in a short scale, and that's not how long it's not built.

If we were these review buildings, we wouldn't be adding one.

Right, exactly.

Yeah, you the numbers don't really add up to the picture.

Yeah, and then like units themselves, right?

Or uh finding that in the ground, right?

Sounding all these things about false computer.

Thanks, Jeff.

Um anything else, guys, to it?

I mean I think aesthetically like this we kept calling this the unicorn site, but I think this also is we're gonna see if we we're probably going to see more development that looks like the buildings that are being replaced, like the school like caliber still looks like Cranc Caliber, it's just nicer, right?

Yep.

So this is unique in that we're not seeing a repurpose school, a repurposed industrial building.

This is a from scratch project.

Yep.

But reversal the buildings you just mentioned, which are beautiful.

Um they're all one color.

Right.

And here what the developers try to do is break it up, right?

And make, you know, introduce different tones, different shades, you know, to give it a different look.

And just a you know, a straightforward brick facade.

Um staff, can we can we can we ask a condition for God again?

I don't even know how to say this.

Like to where where we ask a condition to where with the final construction plan sets, bid sets, that the the details are approved by Jill, maybe, or that they meet that they meet aesthetics in relation to other brick buildings between that were constructed on Broadway between 1880 and 1950, something something along those lines, so I can ask for like how how do I formulate to have staff to have staff and and and someone who knows who's knows what they're doing, not me, to say this like we're the architect is beholden to meet an aesthetic that meets the brickwork that they're trying that they're that they're talking us about, right?

Which is 18 1880 to 1930-ish, um, and then 1950s era public buildings, like Cranson, Cranston Calvert, Sheffield School, uh, the brick buildings that are on Broadway that are across the street, their their build dates are like 1867 to 1920, right?

Right.

That's similar to so like you know, I don't want to have you beholden to meet some kind of historic like degree, right?

But at the same time, like how how do I describe in a way to keep you guys on the fire to meet this level that Jill will understand when we're given the condition to her?

Just be a condition in that being sure of that, but she's processed as something along the line.

Isn't that an existing process condition already?

Well, no, because they they staff has final plan approval, but we can also condition that a certain member of staff gives a certain aspect approval.

A job title, yes, sorry, not a person, a job title.

What's the authority of her to give it in it's not in the historic district?

That's well, she was at TRC.

This is an historic district.

She was still at TRC, weighing in on the aesthetics of it.

But well, that's my point.

Uh review landscape.

Shall we have that sense of the third authority to look at so or the preservation planner be able to look at details for the one line you better walk is that like a construction piece of this that she doesn't like her working over by why would she be able to hold up the product?

Yeah, that's my point.

I mean, it sounds like you're trying to create a historic district.

No, no, yeah, you're no no no describing this condition.

Nope.

I I I which again why don't we why don't we set a condition that says that the applicant must continue to work with the preservation planner and up until the final approval of project standing process?

She was there not just because she decided to show up, she was there because that's her job.

Yeah, yes, she already sort of so I don't want you guys to have to go to store district commission, but I want you to hit those cornices and tiny details that you described when you're walking through Portland, Maine or Ports of the New Hampshire.

I want I like I want to set a term for staff to be able to reference when they come back and they say, No, you can't do that.

Yes, we are asking you to do this because we I think you guys did a fantastic job of Cas Calvert.

I can't wait to see what you guys do in Cock Show.

Like I Sheffield, uh Sheffield School is it it's a beautiful building on the way that they restored it because of how it was originally built in the age it was originally built.

The other brick structures that are down Broadway that are single families, multifamilies out of Broadway that we're trying to exemplify here to meet this policy.

I want to be able to reference something.

So I'm not trying to put it and add a burden on you guys.

You know what I mean?

I'm just I'm just trying to say, like, so how how do I how do I how do I keep keep you into the fire?

Yeah, you're not giving very like the things.

I'm not giving her carte blanche either.

Yes.

I mean, guys, uh do you see what I'm trying to say?

Or am I just rambling?

Like, I see what you're trying to do, but the the use the condition or anything that's official, you're boxing them in.

I know I am.

That's exactly what I'm doing.

I don't know that we have the right to do that.

Of course we do.

Because again, for this policy to be met, just to prevent housing development, which erodes Newport's quality of life and architectural character.

This is exactly what I'm trying to do.

Is that this this project actually promotes Newport's quality of life because our housing crisis is hurting our quality of life for any of our true residents employees workers?

But at the same time, that apartment complex, the people calling it dormitories, everything else, that's the architectural character aspect of it.

So I want to be able to make sure we're meeting the architectural character of the policy.

Since you'd already reviewed and improved the piece, and we just say that the apple continue to consolidate the historic plan.

What if Jeff you said that the condition is that um they have to they have to meet the approval of the historic planner as the as the plans presented uh for review?

So you you're accomplishing that's but that's kind of what ball is.

No, I don't think she has the authority to disapprove this.

No, but they're I don't want to disapprove it.

I just want her to be just convinced member.

Can I ask that a question?

Who has the final say on the design?

The property owner is subject to uh compliance with uh building code and subject to compliance with these plans.

So uh what about aesthetically?

So substantial deviation from something that's approved in preliminary would require a return to the board at all.

So it will constitute substantial deviation.

Final is administrative, final is administrative clear.

So them all of the plus them.

And we do have the ability to read architectural elevations, so you know that is part of our approval process.

It's not like an exclusive skill that only one TRC board member has.

So we have an elevation set included that is part of the these materials.

Um, as Dylan was saying, you know, what dictates a subs substantial deviation from the approved materials, but the elevations are a part of the submitted materials and will be a part of the final materials, and all those details that you mentioned, cornices, and I don't remember what else was all in thought in that does that get included in that they're called out in the elevations as they are submitted now, and within final architectural sets, the D all the construction details have to be laid out in the spec sheet.

So as part of our building permit when we submit for the building permanent through the portal, it's gonna get built back or before the fire view so through the permanent portal steps, it will have to be a good idea.

Yeah, that's they everyone staff is involved through the whole process, and that's what I get about the profile that we have the detail that had profile.

So it is a ball, and they do get it.

So this is the aesthetic thing that we're discussing, right?

Like, I want like not sorry, it's not that I want, right?

If if and I'm and I'm sorry, it's already getting late, but like the Newport quality of life and architectural character is what the policy calls out for.

The corridor of Broadway, the brick buildings that are there, this is post-Civil War, pre-World War II construction.

This is that is what these brick buildings are.

Like I'm not asking them to meet historic district commission level of approval and foresight.

Like I'm not not oversight.

Sorry.

That's not what I'm asking for.

But at the same time, I want someone who's not me to stand there and say, you know, I I understand this is what your drawing looked like, but to have the same appeal as the as what 1863 Cogshell School looked like as what 1883 502 Broadway has built.

Like I need to have the windows look like this.

I need to have the cornics.

I I need to ensure the cornics are like this.

Like I'm I'm sorry if I'm belaboring, and again, if the whole board's like, no, you don't need to do this, then fine.

But for this, this is the aesthetic that we're that we've been discussing all along while still trying to meet the other hardships and goals and everything else is well meet the aesthetic, have that architectural character that we're trying for.

I think what this illustrates city needs to design it.

Oh dude.

We've we've talked about it so much.

It needs to be really popular and everyone.

I'll be honest in middle town did a term jump, right?

Other guidelines in a vacuum, frankly, re-reading disproval that doesn't exist.

So if you do bring in great people, uh really city.

You guys actually call that on this process we're right now.

We got nothing.

We're just going based on like the winds of how that's the that's my point.

That the current situation, at the future, whatever could be.

You want the city to be able to dick the aesthetics, but I think the solicitor just said the final say on aesthetics is the owner.

I know.

We had to let it go.

I think you got a good point, Jeff, but I don't think it's gonna it's not gonna go on this one.

Can you see?

Yeah.

That's what Ryan preservation.

We will continue that as all of the details developed right down and beyond it.

This is a finished road.

It's recommendation in this image, like each window needs to find a technical details to make sure that they are the best building that stage.

Okay.

So the board feels that this policy that I keep referencing in the housing chapter is is being achieved with the amendments that the applicants made since the last time they brought up and with their continued work with staff and the preservation planner.

So you ever want to say yes.

And I think we have to put our faith in staff to feel it, right?

I I have my full faith in staff.

Okay.

Okay.

And while we discuss I also think it's in their interest to design something that people want to live in and feel and not living in an office building.

Totally.

My sense is ultimately they're gonna want to design something that also has some warmth to it and appeals to you know a renter.

You're not you're not seeing some of the things that well.

There's so many more layers still on our end.

Okay.

Sorry.

Thank you.

Thank you, everyone, for dealing with me.

All right, and the last uh goal that I actually I wanted to add um after all of that is goal LU1, which is the city style support implementation of efforts to diversify, redevelop, and enhance the city's north end in collaboration with appropriate federal, state, regional, and private stakeholders with a focus on developing employment opportunities, especially for young adults.

I think that building this type of housing is redeveloping the city's north end with private stakeholders, and it's gonna help with employment by giving housing for young adults here in the city.

So I think LU 1-1 is also a goal to be considered as part of the comp plan being met.

Anyone else want to speak to this condition for development plan review?

Uh and then lastly is uh any conditions, restrictions required of site improvements required to meet these guidelines are incorporated and written, which uh we've been discussing all along.

So um sorry.

Um I do want to have a condition in here to reference the TRC report and other recommended actions of the TRC.

Let me see.

Um the applicant, the applicant to meet all recommendations outlined in the TRC report dated 1325.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um, so I just want to go over all these conditions first, and then we walk through uh the motion for development plan review.

Um the applicants to restrict leases to a minimum of 12 month period to prohibit sub-leasing at least five parking spaces deeded, uh deeded for guest parking and use at abutting church, the lot to the south.

Sorry, uh Mr.

Chair, that you know, we don't have the five deeded spaces yet.

Um and so we were they did indicate they would lease five spaces to us subject to details being worked out, but we're wondering if similar sort of the middle town situation where we don't know if we're going to get additional parking in middle town, can that be made that will make reasonable efforts to get the five deeded spaces from the church?

No.

No.

You guys gotta get those spots.

I mean, we it that the hardship, the hardship you see with parking, you know, we we we appreciated it with what the zoning is and what's being requested.

But you know, just like the access is being granted through um that deed easement.

Um, you know, if you can find a way to have those parking within that deeded easement on access, if you can have maybe the five spaces deeded within that easement, I think you can figure it out.

Um reasonable efforts, uh five deed five spaces at Cranston Calvert School for guest parking, reasonable efforts to have Middletown accommodate expanded parking options at the middle town section of the parcel.

Applicant to have a reasonable effort to work with RIPTA to provide options for bus shelters at the applicant's cost, both southbound and northbound adjacent project.

Applicant to provide sources of encouragement for residents to use public transportation through awareness and options.

Applicant to provide EV parking options as part of the available parking on site, and the applicant to meet all recommend recommendations stated in the TRC report dated 81325.

Um there any conditions that we discussed that I'm that I've left off missed out, guys that you could think of.

Good.

Okay.

Um from our discussion.

Um does the motion I may have a motion to find the development plan addresses each of the applicable standard provisions pursuant to 17.88.030 guidelines and standards for review and to grant approval for preliminary development plan with the conditions as presented and amended, and an approval is contingent upon review and positive recommendation from the TRC, the administrative officer review and approval of final plan development, a final development plan.

So moved.

Second it's moved and second.

Is there any discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, the ayes have it.

Thank you.

Uh next on the agenda is can I have a wait a minute?

All right, yep.

Next on the agenda is can I have a motion to continue uh unified development plan review for the minor subdivision application of 173-175 cock shell laugh tax assessor plat 37 lot 74?

So moved.

Second it's moved and seconded.

Uh uh continue to the September uh to the October meeting.

Uh all is in favor say aye.

I'm aye.

The ayes have it.

Um again, uh, can I have a motion to continue the unified development plan review for uh 48 the Treadway Hotel 49 America's Cup Ave, tax session plot 24 lot 178?

So moved.

Second move and second on the discussion.

All is in favor say aye.

Aye.

The ayes have it.

Uh next on the agenda is communications from staff.

One second.

Um we just want to confirm there was uh there was an individual, there was a vote for the variance approval, a vote for the special use permit, and then a vote for the DPR.

Correct.

Yep.

Okay.

All right.

Now staff.

Oh, really?

Yeah.

Sorry, guys.

I'm sorry I took too long with that.

Okay, Hayden.

Thank you.

So hi everyone.

Welcome to my TED Talk.

So I'm here to talk about the general timeline for five minutes of the comprehensive plan.

Uh I've met all of you, but just in case, I'm the city planner.

My name is Becky.

Uh, and I'm working with Trish, Hayden, and tons and tons of other people to get our comprehensive plan update through.

So this evening, what I'm going to provide you is a brief technical overview of the schedule and next month's meeting within our communication section.

We're going to have the consultant come and give you a more thorough review of content and intent and uh the comprehensive plan goals.

So right now, in this general timeline, we are in the September window.

And basically what has been going on thus far is staff and the consultant have been doing all the back of house work in order to prepare for a a soft kickoff, B a big kickoff, and the rest of the plan.

So the end date is September of 2026, which sounds like a lot of time, but it's not.

So we've been working behind the scenes a lot to get uh get ourselves and everyone else prepared for the consultant visit in early October, which will be so exciting, and you'll get so much more information from them.

But right now that's what we're doing.

Um recently you guys got materials that requested you to express uh interest in being a part of this effort.

There are various various levels of participation that you can volunteer for.

Um we requested at least three planning board members to be a part of the core staff.

That is a bi-weekly meeting.

We have two of you so far that have coordinated with us.

Yes.

Um sorry, I jumped around a little bit there.

So we have two of you that have volunteered.

We're looking for one more, but there are okay.

We got Teresa Sticks.

Who volunteered?

Sunny.

All right, Sunny.

For the record.

Um, and there are other levels of participation that you are welcome and encouraged to join.

So I'm not gonna get into all of these this evening again.

We're just in the technical review.

Um, and this Wednesday at City Council, we will be presenting the staff outline for the advisory committee, which is going to be the larger committee that meets bi-weekly and oversees the execution of the plan more or less.

So council will review that, provide comments, and provide their idea of what they think that that process should look like.

Staff have outlined and it's been provided to you what we think the advisory committee process should be, but council needs to weigh in, so they will do that on Wednesday.

They're gonna meet four times throughout the both.

Yep.

So as I said, the advisory committee is every other month, and the primary support staff is biweekly.

And in that level of participations, you'll see kind of all the breakouts of how often things will meet.

A lot of it is still in workshop phase.

So main takeaways are we're in a lot of prepping phase.

There will be consultants here at the beginning of October.

Uh, and an itinerary for that is being workshopped as we speak.

We will share that with you for your involvement in that process.

Um I'm trying to think if I had any other talking points.

I have one issue.

Okay.

Consultant is coming here in the middle of the winter, and they're not showing up October.

And in the middle of the winter and in May.

You can't, they can't make a visit in our summertime.

Well, making a comp plan.

So if you go to the second page of that document, it says they're gonna make a total of six visits throughout the year.

Okay.

So between now and next September, a total of six visits.

Okay.

But any other questions or concerns?

Sorry, Becky.

I just if they're that they just don't show up in the middle of the summer months, which is clearly the consternation of locals.

I mean, that's gonna be really difficult for them to wrap their head around.

Agreed.

We appreciate that comment.

Any other questions?

I know that was kind of brief, and I know it's quite late.

So uh feel free to review these documents and we will be in touch about the itinerary for early October.

You will meet the consultants at that meeting, they'll do a brief presentation.

And at every planning board meeting, we intend to provide you an update on the comprehensive plan status.

Uh we really want you guys to be involved, excited, and impressed by this process because you are the stewards of this plan.

So love it.

Thank you.

No problem.

Rebecca.

Um next on the agenda is presentation discussion of reports.

Um anything to comment on Third Street Amalcavus.

Uh we did have one more communication.

If you would like those introductory slides that I sent to you, um, if you want, I don't have to go through the full thing, but I did want to touch on just the recent state enabling um legislation changes.

Sure, sure, Hayden.

Sorry.

Yeah, I didn't mean to cut you off, ma'am.

Did everybody receive this?

Yes.

Yeah.

Yeah.

That's this is actually super helpful.

Yeah, that's like definitely keep this on file.

Yep.

So as I said in the email, um, for all future new planning board staff, this is uh sorry, planning board members.

This is how we would plan to onboard them.

And I will skip to the slides that have to do with the recent changes to legislation.

So one change is the definition of a minor subdivision.

So a minor subdivision, which is one of our two most common applications, with the other being DPR.

A minor subdivision is now creating any additional building lots without street creation or a subdivision creating nine or fewer builderable lots with street creation.

So almost all um subdivisions that create a new lot in Newport are now going to be considered minor.

Um so June 2025 state legislation changes to the definition of a minor subdivision.

On top of that, now subdivision creating new undersized lots are no longer prohibited.

A new lot that does not meet minimum lot size requirements can be created under the following conditions without this being considered zoning relief.

So the resulting lots are vacant lots or lots of residential use.

The resulting lots are greater than or equal to the lot area of 50% of the residential lots within 200 feet proposed lots.

This must be verified by a professional landsayer uh surveyor.

So you often receive reports from Jim Poole.

He's a real estate appraiser, it would be similar to that report, except it would be done by a professional land surveyor.

Um the resulting lots must have access to sewer and water lines for private wells on site wastewater treatment systems, and the resulting lots are not less than 3,000 square uh feet each.

For example, a lot of you might remember about a year ago the application for 99 seconds street in the point that would likely be approved under today's legislation.

Is there any questions about this?

This is uh state law.

I think he already did it, did he?

All right, yeah.

And let's see.

I think any other plan review.

We have to go through and get the city council approved this in some form of bachelor's.

Yeah, so no other as of June 2025 um legislation changes in this PowerPoint, but in general over the last couple years, there's wrong at least annually uh updating legislation changes.

So with um more things being by right and unified development review, um essentially the approval paths of applications have changed.

Um in order for an application to go for the planning board, not just be re um approved by either staff or CRC, the application must either require zoning relief or special use permit or involve street creation.

legislation changes in this PowerPoint, but in general over the last couple years there's been at least annually uh updating legislation changes so with um more things being by right and unified development review um essentially the approval paths of applications have changed um now uh in order for an application to go for so the planning board not just be um approved by either staff or CRC the application must either require zoning relief or special use permit or involve street creation um for example in the um uh the communications from the administrative officer that recorded document was the first minor subdivision that was approved um administratively by right without creating a new lot without having to go to the planning board uh so that is all of the uh state legislation changes included in the slide but if you have any questions about so the the the lot there at Van Zand in second that that's strictly that doesn't even come before us that's something that you I mean could but uh yeah so the what's on the um the specific one on third street in admiral um what was yeah third yeah third street in admiral callfus that was on tonight's agenda is um a communication that one uh created one new additional lot and it did not involve any did not involve street creation did not involve zoning relief or special use permit just uh change the lot lines to create a new lot so that one did not go before you other than that's communication that's a that's very quite here uh as administrative officer I could be done sort of I'm not the important extended to be able to approve actual creation of lot just um really sub line on the administrative Hayden great work um can you just reissue this every time there's a change sorry say that again can you reissue this document every time there's a change uh yeah we can communicate just keep it live keep it live it's a great document thank you thanks guys um okay so that discuss the um presentation reports uh liaison report tree and open space commission uh i wasn't able to attend okay waterfront commission uh waterfront commission is continue uh has their harbor management plan they're they're talking about how to make use of it and and develop it further um also the they're gonna go forward over the winter on the extension of the same uh Ann Street Pier um and it looks like um the development of uh parody park will probably be about two years out okay great uh energy environment commission do we have anybody on that do we not have a liaison on that right now it's margaret it's Margaret thank you yeah I was gonna say um dates in the top of the so as we go along one of the things that we're talking about with the Ben is um there's a lot of different ways of participating and we're gonna need everybody on board and one of the things is there's um a variety of chapters as we know well we're gonna ask what sort of subject matter experts to uh address each chapter and then right now the energy environment sort of a skeleton uh there um housing zoning workshop nothing to update bicycle and pedestrian advisory commission jared is that you no i don't think we have anybody on that yeah which reconstitute it's like they have a few chairs right they've they're they're supposed to submit meeting minutes to us that that yeah okay yeah I remember talking to them just just have them submit so we have that um can we have a update on kind of what Paul was driving on with at any between any state and city road work um you know plans that any if there's any major rework road work etc that we could reference to our transportation master plan um to have that communicated to us remaining and lastly uh next month will be my last meeting i uh I have to resign next month I'm be terming out and my wife won't let me stay on anymore so um thanks everybody but I'll see you next month um times 1014 can I have a motion to adjourn it's not moved second it's moved and second all those in favor say aye aye yeah I've thank you yeah sorry

Aye.

Yeah, I have it.

Thank you.

Yeah, sorry.

Your honesty.

Huh?