Newport planning board hears revised Waites Wharf hotel plan; hearing continued to May

The Newport Planning Board on a continuance hearing heard updated testimony and exhibits for the Waites Wharf unified development plan, including engineering, stormwater, architectural and environmental testimony, and moved the item to the board’s May meeting for further consideration.

Attorney K. Russell Jackson, representing the applicant, told the board the revised submittal moves the south residential building back toward the Waite's Wharf right-of-way to avoid an existing sewer easement and said staff had been provided updated engineering and lighting plans. "The applicant amended the plans, has moved the South residential building back along the, Waits [Waite's] Wharf right of way," Jackson said.

The change followed testimony from the project’s civil engineer, Joe Mallow, who described the sewer work and other site adjustments. "The biggest engineering component was just the sewer easement... We increased the existing slope of that sewer connection from Coddington to Waits Wharf," Mallow testified, and said the team eliminated one manhole and shortened utility runs. He said the relocation did not reduce parking: "It did not." Mallow also told the board the amended design produces only minor stormwater regrading but no net increase in runoff.

Planner Paige Bronk summarized her independent review for the board and said the applications meet the city’s standards for the Waterfront Business zoning and the special-use criteria that apply to the request. "In short, my analysis found that the proposal complies with Newport standards and criteria," Bronk said. She told the board the project’s mix of hotel, accessory retail and multifamily dwellings aligns with the city’s comprehensive plan language that designates the harborfront as a mixed-use waterfront.

Environmental testimony described measures to manage historically contaminated fill on portions of the site. Jacob Butterworth of Sage Environmental said the waterfront parcels had previously gone through a Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (DEM) program and achieved closure; the upland parcels identified with urban fill will be capped and managed through a remedial action work plan under DEM oversight. "The contaminants that we're talking about, the real risk is direct contact," Butterworth said. He described capping, routine inspections and a likely environmental land‑use restriction with annual reporting to DEM at project completion.

The project team also described planned stormwater treatment: the engineer said the redevelopment will treat roughly 67% of the site’s impervious area, exceeding the city and state redevelopment requirement. Treatment will use bioretention areas and an underground detention system that discharges to modular wetland units; backflow preventers will be included on outfalls to reduce saltwater intrusion. The engineer said routine maintenance is expected (trash removal every 1–2 years, media replacement of some systems up to about 20 years).

Project architect Harry Wheeler (JCJ Architecture) presented updated renderings and said the hotel program now totals 89 guest rooms: about 54 rooms on the north parcel and about 35 on the south parcel, with accessory restaurant, ballroom and retail space; the team also proposes two residential buildings with 14 dwelling units total (seven units on each lot). Wheeler said the designs were revised to reduce massing and step down building heights, and that all occupied floors will be built above required flood elevations and meet applicable FEMA and building-code standards.

Ray Gomes, a fire and code consultant and former Newport fire prevention official, described emergency access changes planned with the redevelopment. He told the board the site plan adds a circulator road so apparatus can approach and leave without lengthy backing maneuvers, and the applicant will add hydrants at the site ends to improve water supply for the marina and waterfront properties. "There would be a circulator road that's in the site plan, allowing all the apparatus to come down the wharf," Gomes said. He also described a current operational issue unrelated to this application: one city ladder truck has a reduced turning radius pending replacement; the department is planning a replacement truck for spring 2026 and short-term measures such as designating nearby parking as attended taxi/rideshare spaces.

The project’s traffic consultant presented a traffic study update and said the proposed program is not expected to worsen traffic operations on nearby intersections under standard level‑of‑service measures. The consultant outlined assumptions for event activity (the ballroom has a 200‑person capacity but many events will be smaller), and described an on‑site traffic management plan for events that includes valets and shuttles. The consultant summarized: "The project is not going to impact traffic operations in the area," and added that the design also includes improved sidewalks and a widened harbor walk.

No final land‑use decisions were made. The board accepted the architects’ renderings into the record and voted to continue the development‑plan and special‑use permit applications to the board’s May 12 meeting. The board also approved meeting minutes from March 3 at the start of the session.

What remains to be decided and next steps

- The board will take final testimony and deliberation at the continued hearing on May 12. The application will remain subject to technical review conditions and outside approvals from DEM, the Coastal Resources Management Council where applicable, and building‑permit review for floodplain and structural compliance.

- Key outstanding items the board and staff will still review include final construction drawings, the formal DEM remedial action work plan and ELUR language, the finalized traffic‑management plan for events, and final details of the harbor‑walk and paving materials that will establish the shared‑street treatment on Waite's Wharf.

No vote on the development or the special‑use permits was taken at this hearing; the board’s formal actions were approval of the March 3 minutes and the continuance to May.