About eight months after a proposal to demolish two buildings located within Warren’s historic district to make way for a housing development was denied by a 4-3 vote of the planning board, a new proposal from the same developer seeks to turn 119 Water St. into a restaurant, and renovate the building at 113 Water St. into a mixed-use building with a business on the ground floor and one apartment unit above.

The proposal, brought before the Warren Zoning Board on Wednesday, Oct. 18 by Daniel Teodoro, owner of the adjacent Water Dog Restaurant, was touted as the result of lessons learned from the prior application that was ultimately shot down.

“Our client and ourselves reconsidered all the feedback that we heard [regarding] the existing structures and came up with an alternate solution,” said Julie Bartlett, a project manager for architectural firm ZDS Inc. of Providence, the same firm who designed the housing development proposal.

Bartlett explained to the zoning board that the new plan would renovate both 119 Water St. and 113 Water St., which are both currently condemned and unoccupied, with the former becoming a restaurant and the latter becoming a retail space with one apartment unit on the top floor.

To sweeten the deal, Bartlett reported that the plan includes the creation of a parking lot with 29 total spaces, far above the five spaces that would be required by ordinance. That lot would be shared between the Water Dog, the new restaurant, and the commercial/residential space at 113 Water St. Still, it would represent a significant increase in the amount of parking in the area compared to the current eight spaces available at the Water Dog.

As opposed to the defeated housing development, which called for nine variances to zoning code when it was proposed last year, this iteration of the project only would require one significant variance — a waiving of the amount of landscaped parking islands within the aforementioned parking lot, which Bartlett explained was only to “maximize the quantity of spaces we can achieve on our property.”

The zoning board was favorable of the application, with their lone conditions of approval pending on an inspection by the fire department to analyze the parking lot for accessibility and to provide a modest amount of landscaped area throughout the parcel, equal to the same amount of coverage as four parking spaces or 10% of the total site, whichever is greater.

“I would encourage anywhere where there is an opportunity to introduce some planted material on this site, I think it would be beneficial,” said board chair Andrew Ellis.

More on the restaurant, retail space
According to Bartlett, the restaurant space is in the preliminary planning stages but would closely resemble the hours of the existing Water Dog, with dining areas on the ground and second floors and storage/office space on the third floor. They envision the upstairs area having the ability to open up into an open-air style bar/dining space.

The building requires a significant amount of renovation to get it ready for occupancy, however.

“Some of you are aware that the existing structure has been deemed unusable at this point, and so we have worked with a structural engineer to identify a different remediation path forward,” she said.

The scope of work includes infilling the existing basement and pouring a new slab to provide foundation for new supports for the second floor. The southern wall is also bowing, so it would also need to be shored up.
At 113 Water St., they envision a boutique shop on the ground floor with one residential unit above (it is currently zoned for two residential units).

Teodoro said that the exact hours of when the restaurant and retail space operates would be determined as the process progressed.

“Customers will dictate what we do,” he said. “We just want to get open and get the process going and we’ll dictate what we do after that.”

Both sides were appreciative for the applicant’s openness to readjust a plan that generated quite a lot of controversy into something new.

“The Town appreciates taking into consideration the feedback received from the Planning Board in your prior application,” Ellis said. “I think we’re very considerate of the effort you’ve taken to readdress this project in a manner you believe is more in keeping with what the Town and Planning Board we’re hoping for.”

“We appreciate your time and the involvement to keep this as viable a project as possible,” Bartlett said. “Our client is really eager to make something happen here.”