That's not entirely true.”

Planning board member Roni Phipps, in response to comment made by Starbucks project manager Ken Caputo

It's not the 800-pound gorilla, it's King Kong.”

Anthony DeSisto, referring to the traffic impact the proposed Starbucks would have

A drive-through lane drew much of the focus of Barrington Planning Board officials and members of the public during a discussion on Tuesday night, Feb. 4 about the proposed Starbucks restaurant. 

The project manager for the proposed Starbucks, Ken Caputo, opened the discussion with a wide-ranging presentation about the development. He spoke about the lot coverage, setbacks, sidewalks, indoor and outdoor seating, landscaping improvements, traffic issues, menu boards, overhead lighting, noise levels and, for a short time, the proposed drive-through lane.

When planning board members were given an opportunity to speak, they turned their attention to that proposed drive-through lane. 

Board member Roni Phipps asked if people who park their cars in the Starbucks parking lot would have to cross over the drive-through lane in order to enter the coffee shop.

Mr. Caputo said the plan called for a raised crosswalk at the drive-through lane. He said the design was intended to slow vehicle traffic and improve pedestrian safety. 

Mr. Caputo also said that people who go to the Starbucks currently situated in the Barrington Shopping Center also have to cross in front of vehicle traffic. Some people in the audience called out that Mr. Caputo was wrong, and that customers who park along the north side of the shopping center do not have to cross any vehicle traffic. Even Ms. Phipps responded to Mr. Caputo's statement.

"That's not entirely true," she said. 

Planning board member Bill Kurtz asked about the impact the new Starbucks restaurant would have on County Road traffic. Mr. Caputo said he wanted to have his traffic engineer clarify that point. 

Planning board chairman Robert Humm asked Mr. Caputo if the traffic engineer would be attending the March meeting, as officials had earlier decided that the topic would be continued to next month. Mr. Caputo said the traffic engineer would be there. (It was later mentioned that the town's contracted engineer, Pare Corporation, which reviewed the plan, would present its findings/questions at the March meeting.)

Planning board member Jared Wallace asked for clarification on the size of the menu boards situated at the drive-through lane — the plan apparently shows a smaller sized board, but the information shared in the "sign package" from Starbucks was a larger, three-panel sign.

Scott Spear, an attorney for the property owner and applicant, Getty Realty Corp., said the sign package submitted by Starbucks did not conform to the town's standards. He said he wanted to run the sign permitting through the town for administrative review at a later date. Mr. Spear added that any requested relief from town standards for signs would go to the zoning board for review. 

Drive-through alternatives?

Planning board member Ron Pitt asked Mr. Caputo and Mr. Spear if any consideration had been given to alternatives regarding the drive-through lane — did officials consider exiting the drive-through lane somewhere other than onto County Road, or not including a drive-through lane with the proposal.

Mr. Spear said Starbucks officials would not be interested in the County Road site if the plan did not include a drive-through lane. 

Mr. Caputo and Mr. Spear also said that the drive-through lane, in their opinion, was not exiting onto County Road, but back onto the Starbucks property. Then vehicles exit the property onto County Road, said the developers.

"Sounds to me like it's semantics," said Ms. Phipps. 

Mr. Humm interjected that there would be time to discuss that topic at the March planning board meeting. He said Mr. Spear was expected to share his interpretation of the town's zoning standards regarding drive-through lanes, and the town's solicitor would give her interpretation also. 

Mr. Kurtz said he would like to see some further data from Starbucks regarding the potential up-tick in business if the new restaurant was built. Mr. Kurtz said that data might show that the new location for the coffee shop might just pull traffic from one side of County Road and deposit it on the other. 

Mr. Kurtz also admitted that he likes Starbucks coffee, holding up a cup of Starbucks coffee he brought to the meeting. Later in the discussion, Barrington resident Janet Searles questioned Mr. Kurtz's decision to bring a Starbucks coffee to that meeting.

Public comments

While public comments are not typically allowed during a development plan review, Mr. Humm said the board would allow it, as members would like to know how residents feel about the topic.

Anthony DeSisto was the first to speak. Mr. DeSisto spoke in two capacities — first as an attorney representing the Barrington Shopping Center property owner where the current Starbucks is located; and second as a resident who lives in Country Club plat, which abuts the site of the proposed restaurant.

Mr. DeSisto told board members that while they're going to hear from traffic experts, the board members' own experiences driving on County Road should also carry some weight. He also told the board that Starbucks is considering the different location because they will make more money in the new spot. He said the 800-pound gorilla in the discussion was the traffic impact. He then corrected himself:

"It's not the 800-pound gorilla, it's King Kong," he said. 

Barrington resident Max Masnick told the board he had three comments regarding the proposed Starbucks — first, he said the town would be replacing a local business (the auto repair shop and gas station) with a corporation; second, the drive-through lane feature runs completely counter to creating a more walkable downtown; and third, traffic in that part of town will worsen with the new Starbucks. Mr. Masnick said town officials should be working to reduce traffic, not add to it.

Maria Bruce, who lives on Maple Avenue, said Barrington officials have, for years, worked very hard to create a certain environment downtown, one that is focused on walkability. Ms. Bruce said allowing a drive-through at the proposed Starbucks would have a Pandora's Box effect, where many other businesses in Barrington would seek the same allowance. She said the drive-throughs would worsen traffic on County Road and on Maple Avenue.

Longtime Barrington resident Gary McLane said a restaurant with a drive-through lane is not part of the town's comprehensive plan. And property abutter Larry Trim said the proposed Starbucks plan runs counter to having a more walkable community.

Another resident, Janet Searles, said she was amazed that the proposal had "gotten this far." She said Starbucks should consider moving into the Rite Aid property on County Road, as that store is closing. Ms. Searles said that store already has a drive-through.

Questions from Dunkin owner

During the public comment period, Mr. DeSisto cautioned board members about the long-term impacts of allowing a drive-through at the proposed Starbucks. He said competitors and other restaurants would seek the same relief from the town. 

Christopher Prazeres confirmed that point. 

Mr. Prazeres, who owns the Dunkin Donuts on County Road in Barrington as well as other Dunkins in the East Bay, said that he would be seeking to enjoy the same relief afforded to Starbucks should that restaurant be granted permission to construct a drive-through lane.

Mr. Prazeres said the Barrington Dunkin has been in business for more than 30 years and in all that time, the town has required all vehicle traffic from the Dunkin lot to exit onto a side-street and not back onto County Road. He questioned why Starbucks should be treated differently.

Mr. Prazeres also spoke about some of the other features included in the Starbucks plan. He said the Rhode Island Department of Transportation requires a 10-car stack from the point of service, referring to drive-through lane. He said the point of service is the menu board, and the Starbucks plan only showed a four-car stack at that point.

"I would like some clarification on that," he said.

Mr. Prazeres also questioned the safety of pedestrians when they are forced to cross over a drive-through lane to enter the restaurant. He said motorists are often distracted when in line at the drive-through, checking their phones.

"The safety of pedestrians is something the board needs to address as well," he said.