Another lengthy chapter for the “Belvedere at Thames Street” downtown development proposal opened last Thursday, when the Bristol Zoning Board of Review convened for its first look at the plan. For three and a half hours that night, board members watched as attorneys and witnesses sparred during the first round of testimony (and cross examinations) supporting Jim Roiter’s requested 14 zoning variances, involving parking, density and height relief.

Taking to the stand that night to make their case were Mr. Roiter’s legal counsel, Michael Kelly; civil engineer, Shawn Martin; architect, Paul Attemann; real estate appraiser, Peter Scotti; and East Providence zoning official Edward Pimentel. Joining them was the appellants’ legal counsel, Steve MacGillivray, fighting back against the testimony of them all. 

Financially feasible, architecturally sound

A large portion of the variances needed center around the new construction’s size and scale — necessitating relief in a number of different areas such as its height, number of dwelling units, lot coverage and rear-yard setback. However, that end design, Mr. Attemann said, is largely informed by the diverse architectural samplings throughout that part of town.

“There’s no real single type or height or material or style that defines the downtown Bristol area,” Mr. Attemann pointed out. 

Prior decisions from previous boards also dictated some of their choices, such as the removal of a third-floor restaurant and approval of a peaked-roof design. Not only that, but the lot sits partially within a flood hazard zone, warranting its own set of precautions.

While a similar project was proposed back in 2007 — that one with a larger commercial space and fewer, more spacious residential dwellings — Mr. Scotti testified that this new plan will prove to be economically feasible in Bristol today. With a $10 million all-in budget, cap rate of 5.5 percent and sustainable rents of, on average, $2,625 for the 20 one-to-two bedroom units, he felt as if Mr. Roiter was asking for the least amount of relief necessary to completely transform the corner of State and Thames streets for the better.

“It takes really an eye-sore corner, in really kind of the heart of Bristol, and really turns it into a viable, architecturally attractive, commercially viable project,” Mr. Scotti said.

Mr. MacGillivray, however, wondered if a conforming four-to-five unit structure would have proven to be just as viable, ultimately resulting in a request for many fewer variances. Though he was advised not to disclose any discussions with legal counsel, current or prior, Mr. Attemann did acknowledge that he was specifically asked by Mr. Roiter to design a 20-unit building from the start.

Mr. Scotti, meanwhile, though unable to determine its exact viability (or lack thereof) without conducting its own proper analysis, felt strongly that the current plan was the “highest and best use of that lot” and even considering a four-to-five unit building there would be irresponsible.

“This is a prime lot really in the heart of Bristol. Why don’t you just, you know, pull a trailer up?” he scoffed.

Despite those claims, Mr. MacGillivray was still not encouraged by Mr. Scotti’s inability to provide a breakdown of the $10 million budget for board member Charlie Burke, including how certain elements such as the proposed amenity deck and parking structure factored in to the project’s overall sustainability. Mr. Pimentel, meanwhile, later countered Mr. MacGillivray’s argument, stating that the project as proposed still very clearly met the goals of Bristol’s Comprehensive Plan and answered favorably to the following question:

“Overall, is it consistent, and does it better or further the health, safety, welfare and convenience of that community and of that neighborhood?”

Thinking long-term

Another major factor playing into the amount of relief sought, Mr. Roiter’s team said, was the fact that the current “Belvedere at Thames Street” initiative is actually part of a much larger, multi-phased development. They not only have to worry about the unique challenges of that individual lot, but how it also connects in relation to the restored Belvedere Hotel on Hope Street, carriage house on John Street and steel parking deck in between.

“It was a challenge to figure out how to develop the property as a cohesive unit and meet some of the other requirements for zoning,” Mr. Martin said.

Much of that revolved around the parking deck, Mr. Martin said, which would be shielded by the new development while simultaneously providing access to the 49 spaces available for the residents in both Belvederes, the carriage house and the proposed restaurant use. Though it is 13 spaces more than what is required to accommodate the new construction, Mr. Martin said that by providing the higher number of smaller-than-allowed spaces, they can take full advantage of the parking deck’s size while still maintaining safety and engineering standards.

“You can see the project has really been, from an infrastructure standpoint, set up to accommodate this future phase of development,” he said.

Forty-nine was still a number that Mr. MacGillivray took issue with, arguing it was an excessive amount of relief sought considering Mr. Roiter is under no obligation to provide parking for anything but the proposed building under this new phase of development. To Mr. Pimentel, that was an “absurd” debate, feeling that the benefits of providing future flexibility far outweighed the fact that it necessitated some variances.

“Of course you would support that; that’s good planning,” he said.

Some board members appeared to think so, too, with Chairman Joe Asciola seeing the opportunity to provide overflow parking as a potential positive.

“If you have more spaces, I think that’s a plus,” he said.

By the end of the night, those still left in the audience wanting to speak in favor were forced to wait, as board members voted to continue the hearing; they will get their chance at the next meeting, before the opposition formally takes their stand. A special meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, July 9, at 6 p.m. at town council chambers.