I.    CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Meeting began at 6:00 p.m.

II.  OLD BUSINESS: - Preliminary Plan Public Hearing – Gardner Ridge Comprehensive

 Permit Major Land Development Project

The Exeter Planning Board will conduct a public hearing on the Preliminary Plan application for a Comprehensive Permit Major Land Development Project. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony, review the proposed development, and consider requested relief/waivers in accordance with the Rhode Island Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Act, R.I. Gen. Laws § 45-53-1 et seq., and the Town of Exeter Land Development and Subdivision Regulations.

The Planning Board will conduct a public hearing regarding a proposed Major Land Development Comprehensive Permit Project known as Gardner Ridge. The proposed development consists of twenty (20) condominium dwelling units contained within ten (10) duplex (two-unit) residential buildings. Each building is proposed as a one-and-one-half-story structure.

Five (5) of the twenty (20) dwelling units (25%) will be designated as affordable housing and sold to households earning up to 120% of the Area Median Income (AMI). The remaining fifteen (15) units will be offered at market rates.

The Owner/Applicant is MGT410, LLC. The property is identified as Assessor's Plat 58, Block 1, Lots 1, 2, and 3, located at 415 Gardner Road, formerly known as the Shady Acres Nursing Home property. The site contains approximately 3.72 acres and is located within the RU-3 Zoning District on the Exeter-Richmond municipal boundary.

The purpose of the hearing is to review and consider action on the Preliminary Plan application submitted as a Comprehensive Permit pursuant to the Rhode Island Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Act, R.I. Gen. Laws § 45-53-1 et seq. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Board may vote to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the Preliminary Plan application.

The Applicant is also requesting the following adjustments, waivers, and exemptions as authorized under the Act:

A. Requested Zoning Adjustments and Variances

1.      Section 2.4.1(38): Adjustment to permit two-family dwellings within the RU-3 Zoning District.

2.      Section 2.4.2(4)(4): Front yard setback adjustment from the required 100 feet to a proposed 19 feet.

3.      Section 2.4.2(6)(7): Rear yard setback adjustment from the required 50 feet to a proposed 11.5 feet.

4.      Section 2.6(4): Adjustment to permit multiple principal buildings on a single lot.

5.      Section 1.4(4)(B)(B): Relief to allow all undeveloped land to be owned by the condominium association as a common element.

6.      Section 1.4(4)(D)(12): Density bonus request.

7.      Section 1.4(4)(D)(4)(A): Adjustment from the maximum density requirement of six (6) dwelling units per acre.

8.      Section 5.1(B)(2): Waiver from the requirement to install interior curbing and bumper guards within parking areas.

9.      Section 5.1(B)(3): Waiver from the requirement to provide interior parking lot landscaping.

10.  Article VII: Waiver from Groundwater Protection Overlay District restrictions based upon the Applicant's assertion that the proposed development will generate less demand than the site's previous nursing home use.

B. Requested Waivers from the Land Development and Subdivision Regulations

1.      Section 3.4: Waiver from preparation of an impact study based upon the site's previously developed condition.

2.      Section 4.1: Waiver from off-site improvement requirements based upon the Applicant's assertion that the project is self-contained and will not create significant off-site impacts.

3.      Section 4.2: Waiver from performance improvement guarantees beyond required maintenance guarantees.

4.      Section 4.3: Waiver from phasing requirements based upon the Applicant's assertion that phasing provisions are not applicable to the Comprehensive Permit review process.

5.      Section 13.3(A): Relief from minimum cistern capacity requirements, with capacity to be determined by the Fire Chief.

C. Other Requested Exeter Code Exemptions

1.      Exemption from Article III (Growth Management), pursuant to Section 14-208(1), based upon the Applicant's interpretation that affordable housing units required under Article IX of the Exeter Zoning Ordinance exempt the entire development from Growth Management requirements.

2.      Exemption from Article I, Section 14-242(3), Impact Fees.

Chair Gina Thurn called for a motion to open the Public Hearing. Michael DeFrancesco made the motion, Seconded by John Toro, all in favor (5-0), the Public Hearing was opened.

(Gina Thurn, Michael DeFrancesco, John Toro, Michael Viveiros, Norman Machon)  

Chair Gina Thurn asked the applicant to step forward to review their proposed project. Attorney John A. Pagliarini, Jr., applicant and co-owner introduced himself and would speak on behalf of MGT410, LLC.

Mr. Pagliarini began by reading his Disclosure letter of January 5, 2026 to the Planning Board, as follows: RE: Proposed Development 415 Gardner Road (AP58 Lots 1.1, 1.2 & 1.3): Chairwoman Thurn: Please accept this letter as a Disclosure of my ownership interest in the abovementioned project. I am a co-owner of MGT410, LLC, the owner of record for these three parcels and shall be the presenter before the Planning Board. I am the authorized party and signatory for the owner. Respectfully submitted, John A. Pagliarini, Jr., Esq.

The applicant indicated to the Board that he will be referencing several times over the course of the evening information from the Gardner Ridge Comprehensive Permit Application binder, submitted April 29, 2026 (As Amended).

Mr. Pagliarini gave the Board and those present his background information, which included Land Use Attorney; M.C. P., Community Planning Degree; Former West Greenwich Town Planner; Former City of Woonsocket Director of Planning and Development; the only Attorney in Rhode Island as a Certified Tax Assessor; Licensed Real Estate Broker in Rhode Islander.

John A. Pagliarini, Jr. was sworn in. He then informed the Board of the names of those individuals who would be offering testimony on behalf of the Gardner Ridge Project: Patrick Freeman, American Engineering; Robert F. Ferrari, Northeast Water Solutions; Timothy J. Behan, Commonwealth Engineers & Consultants. Additionally, written testimony from Edward Avizinis, Avizinis Environmental Services, Inc.; Cheryl A. Hartnett, Vice President, Narragansett Affordable Housing Corporation. And, finally the Landscaping Plan stamped by Landscape Architect Mark J. Butler, Jr., Matunuck Design Group (MDG)—Landscape Architecture.

Mr. Pagliarini noted that the property was purchased on December 30, 2025—the property consists of approximately 3.43 acres located within the RU-3 Residential Zone and is identified as Assessor’s Plat 58, Block 1, Lots 1, 2, and 3. That the property was most recently occupied by the former Shady Acres Nursing Home, a licensed fifty-five (55) bed nursing facility. The property has a septic system that was built in 2018 that serviced the 55 beds and 25 staff members of the Nursing Home. There was a single-family home on the property. During the Blizzard the center beam cracked, a demolition permit was pulled and the house was taken down. He noted that importantly the rights to the Nursing Home had not been abandoned, that they had actually been contacted by a broker looking for a site for a Memory Care Unit earlier in the process, but that they had other plans for the property.

The applicant then reviewed the rules and regulations regarding the Comprehensive Permit application pursuant to the Rhode Island Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Act, R.I. Gen. Laws § 45-53-1 et seq. which allows the applicant to propose low- to moderate-income housing, as long as 25 percent of the units are low/mod housing. He noted that they had received their Letter of Eligibility from RI Housing on February 18, 2026 – the letter in its entirety is located within the Gardner Ridge Comprehensive Permit Application Binder. Mr. Pagliarini produced as Petitioner Exhibit 1: Letter from Narragansett Affordable Housing Corporation as the State approved monitoring agent who agrees to qualify potential residents meet the income guidelines for the five (5) proposed affordable housing units. Cheryl A. Hartnett, Vice President.

Mr. Pagliarini wanted it noted for the record that they are proposing one-bedroom units, that this came from the applicant not the community.

Mr. Pagliarini indicated that the Town Planner had issued a Certificate of Completion. Which included the requested Zoning Adjustments and Variances, the requested Waivers from the Land Development and Subdivision Regulations along with the other requested Exeter Code Exemptions.     

The applicant proposes five (5) dwelling units, representing twenty-five (25%) of the development, shall be permanently restricted as low- and moderate-income housing in accordance with the requirements of the Rhode Island Low- and Moderate- Income Housing Act. The affordable dwelling units will be integrated throughout the development and are substantially similar in appearance, construction quality, and architectural design to the market-rate units. Presented as Petitioner Exhibit #2, the applicant reviewed a Draft Implementation plan which showed the proposed locations of the affordable units marked as: Units 1, 2, 5, 11 and 16.

Mr. Pagliarini reviewed the various options that were discussed with the Planner early on in the process and the suggestions and modifications that came from both the Planner and the Board. He felt that what they are proposing to build had culminated in a very well thought out proposal. He noted that their plans have been already been vetted by the Town’s engineer. That before the Board this evening is a project that is as complete as possible. He acknowledged Town Planner William DePasquale and Clerk Rebecca Lukowicz, stating that the entire process was a professional pleasure.

Mr. Pagliarini stated that first class mail notification had been made to every property owner within a 1,000-foot radius. He asked that the Town of Exeter, RI Affidavit be marked as Petitioner Exhibit #3 stating that he had complied with the requirements of the Exeter Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Subdivision Regulations advising the abutters of the petition and hearing date.

The applicant asked that the email from Rebecca Lukowicz to Mr. Pagliarini be entered as Petitioner Exhibit #4 stating that the Gardner Ridge mailing of 180 envelopes was delivered to the Exeter Post Office on May 27, 2026.

Mr. Pagliarini indicated that signage had been posted on the property as required and the Public Hearing notice had been advertised in the Standard Pendulum on three (3) separate occasions: June 4, 11, and 18, 2026. That the Gardner Ridge mailing included notification to the Richmond Administrator, Richmond Town Clerk and the Richmond Planner.

Marked as Petitioner Exhibit #5 Richmond, RI, Town Council Meeting Agenda of June 16, 2026 under New Business, Item L: Communications, Petitions, and Proclamations and Resolutions from other Rhode Island Cities and Towns: e) Copy of Notice of Public Hearing from the Town of Exeter regarding a Comprehensive Permit; Preliminary Plan – Major Land Development Project.

Marked as Petitioner Exhibit #6 Richmond, RI, Planning Board Agenda of June 9, 2026 had no mention of the Exeter Planning Department’s Public Hearing regarding the Gardner Ridge Development.

Marked as Petitioner Exhibit #7 Richmond Planning Board Agenda of June 23, 2026 had no mention of the Exeter Planning Department’s Public Hearing regarding the Gardner Ridge Development.

The applicant noted for the record that there was nothing discussed at a duly noticed public hearing in the Town of Richmond, RI.

The applicant reviewed the requirements of a Type B build as required by Rhode Island Housing (2025 Rhode Island Housing Accessibility Act as Type B units), which they will include in their build.

Lastly, Mr. Pagliarini reviewed the plans that they have had with both the fire marshal and fire chief. Including the 20,000-gallon cistern required by the fire chief and centrally located on the 3.5 acres allowing the fire department to run up to 1200 feet, north and south from the cistern.

Chairwoman Thurn turned over the discussion to Town Planner William DePasquale. Planner DePasquale referenced his 48-Page Planning Memorandum: Gardner Ridge, formerly “Shady Acres Nursing Home.” Assessor’s Plat 58, Block 1, Lots 1, 2, & 3, 415 Gardner Road, Exeter, RI. Dated: June 17, 2026.

The Planner began with the background and history of the property. The subject property was historically developed and operated as a nursing home and senior care facility, with this use dating back to its original construction in 1969. Historical Town tax assessment records and 1972 aerial photography confirm the existence and operation of a nursing home on the property during that period. Most recently, the property was owned and operated by Shady Acres Realty Associates, LLC as a 55-bed rehabilitation and health care nursing facility. The property’s long-standing institutional use is well documented and remained substantially consistent throughout its development history.

The property is located within the Rural District (RU-3)—the purpose of the RU-3 District is to provide adequate land suitable for low-density rural residential development blended with forestry, farming and recreational activities.

The Planner reviewed the initial proposal which would have taken advantage of R.I. Gen. Laws 45-24-37, which allows high-density development, the town planner and planning board requested that the applicant consider alternatives. In particular, the Planner and Board suggested reviewing the mix of housing types in town to identify deficiencies that could create an opportunity for a cohort that may have few options. Observations included the lack of housing types that would allow older residents to move to a smaller home while remaining in town, as well as to provide housing opportunities for younger groups.

Under the current proposal the project know as Gardner Ridge would consist of:

• Ten (10) duplex (two-unit) residential buildings.

• Twenty (20) condominium dwelling units.

• Each building is a one-bath, one-bedroom, one-and-one-half-story structure.

• Fifteen (15) units will be offered at market rates.

• Five (5) of the twenty units (25%) will be designated as affordable housing and sold to

   households earning up to 120% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

Planner DePasquale gave an overview of the Rhode Island Low- and Moderate- Income Housing Act. He noted that as of January 1, 2026, the Act requires municipalities that have not achieved the statutory benchmark of 10% low- and moderate-income (LMI) housing stock to provide certain minimum incentives and regulatory accommodations to qualifying developments that include at least 25% deed-restricted LMI housing units.

That according to the 2025 Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Chart published by Rhode Island Housing, the Town of Exeter currently has an LMI housing percentage of 7.59% in 2025, down from 7.67% in 2024, and therefore remains below the statutory threshold established under the Act (10%). It’s estimated that the town would need 60 LMI units to meet the 10% threshold.

Accordingly, the Comprehensive Permit process established under the Act substantially alters the conventional balance between municipal zoning authority and State statutory control over local development rights in a community that remains below the statutory 10% LMI housing threshold.

(See Pages 8-16 of the Planner’s memorandum of June 17, 2026 for complete details).

The Planner noted that another important aspect of this petition is that it will provide a type of housing that is currently limited within the Town of Exeter and in Rhode Island in general: One-bedroom duplex ownership housing. The proposal supports the Town’s housing diversification goals by introducing fifteen (15) one-bedroom dwelling units that will be offered at market rates. Exeter’s existing housing stock is predominantly composed of three-bedroom single-family homes, with a median home value of approximately $544,400. The proposed development would introduce housing opportunities at a lower price point than the Town’s current median home value, thereby expanding housing choice and improving affordability for households seeking entry-level homeownership, downsizing opportunities, or smaller dwelling units.

Under Technical Planning Assessment and Guidance – Preliminary, the Planner covered—Site Capacity and Development Intensity; Consistency with Community Planning Objectives – Housing; Architectural Design; Landscaping and Screening; and Groundwater Resources and Potable Water Supply. Based on the information provided, the applicant’s hydrogeologic evaluation presents a reasonable argument that the proposed 20-unit condominium development will have a lower overall water demand than the historical nursing home use.

(Pages 16-19 of the Planner’s memorandum of June 17, 2026)

From a planning and land-use standpoint, the Planner felt that the hydrogeologic evaluation generally supports the conclusion that the proposed development would have less impact on groundwater resources than the site’s former nursing home use.

With regards to Wastewater Treatment and Onsite Wastewater Systems (OWTS) the development will utilize the existing Onsite Wastewater Treatment System infrastructure that previously served the nursing home facility. To accommodate the proposed 20-unit, 10-building residential development, modifications to the existing system are proposed to enhance its capacity and functionality. An application to modify the OWTS was submitted to the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM) on June 3, 2026, and remains subject to RIDEM review and approval.

Under Traffic and Access the applicant has submitted a Traffic Vehicle Trip Generation & Sight Distance Report from Commonwealth Engineers & Consultants, Inc. The Traffic Vehicle Trip Generation and Sight Distance Report concludes that the proposed 20-unit condominium development will generate a maximum of eleven (11) vehicle trips during the Saturday peak hour. As a result, the projected traffic volumes fall well below the threshold of one hundred (100) peak-hour trips that would typically warrant preparation of a comprehensive Traffic Impact Study. The report also concludes that adequate sight distance is available in both directions at the proposed access driveway, subject to maintaining the identified sight triangles free of obstructions.

The Planning Assessment: Based on the trip generation estimates provided, the proposed 20-unit residential condominium development is not expected to create significant traffic impacts on Gardner Road, nor does it appear to meet thresholds that would typically require a comprehensive Traffic Impact Study.

The Planner covered Stormwater Management and Environmental Resources. He noted that the applicant submitted a Stormwater Management Plan entitled: Stormwater Management Plan for Gardner Ridge, A Major Subdivision Located at 415 Gardner Road, Exeter, RI; Assessor’s Plat 58, Block 1 Lots 1, 2, & 3; Prepared for MGTY410, LLC. 400 South County Trail, Suite A102, Exeter, RI 02822; Prepared by American Engineering, Inc., 400 South County Trail, Suite A201, Exeter, RI -2822; Dated: April 28, 2026.

This Plan was peer reviewed by the Town’s on-call engineer, Crossman Engineering, entitled: Gardner Ridge Technical Review Memorandum (Stormwater) To: William DePasquale, Jr., AICP Town Planner; From: Chris Cabral, P.E. and Douglas Allam, P.E., Crossman Engineering; Date: May 29, 2026; Re: Gardner Ridge – Major Land Development Project, 415 Gardner Road, Exeter, AP 58, Block 1, Lots 1-3.

The Planner noted that the Crossman Engineering peer review does not identify any fatal flaws in the Gardner Ridge stormwater design, but it did identify a substantial number of deficiencies, omissions, and required clarifications that have since been addressed by the applicant. There are no substantial deficiencies that need to be addressed prior to final approval. The Drainage infrastructure is a concern at the sight and is being addressed with the assistance of Exeter’s DPW Director along with the applicant establishing a fund to improve the drainage on Gardner Road. Thus, remediating the last two concerns within the Crossman Report.

Planner DePasquale went on to cover Fire Protection and stated that the Fire Marshal’s review letter appears to resolve the major fire protection concerns associated with the project and

concludes that the revised plan is acceptable, subject to compliance with the following conditions: •Emergency Access   •Fire Suppression – Water Supply   •Long -Term Maintenance (Pages 30-31).

The Planner noted that compared with the previous nursing home use, the new residential development is more consistent with the neighborhood’s surrounding residential character and the Future Land Use Map. Additionally, when comparing the impacts of a single-family residential development to those of a nursing home, it is clear that the residential option better harmonizes with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. The development is expected to have a minimal fiscal impact on local schools, indicating that the development will not burden the existing educational infrastructure.

Mr. DePasquale noted that under Accessibility and Site Safety the Crossman peer review emphasized several considerations concerning accessibility and site safety that should be addressed prior to the final plan. In its assessment, Crossman identified: Lack of ADA Parking Spaces; Absence of Sidewalks and Pedestrian Access Routes; Insufficient Building Access Geometry; Need for Safety Barriers; Relocation of the Fire Cistern. (Page 32 of the Planner’s Memorandum: 6/17/26).

Under Zoning Adjustments, Variances and Waivers the Planner indicated that the Planning Board shall review and make an individual determination on each requested adjustment, waiver, or exemptions, and shall vote on each item separately as part of its decision on the Comprehensive Permit application.

The Planner reviewed his Findings and Recommendations. Pursuant to Rhode Island General Laws §45-53-4(e)(3)(iii)(E), the Planning Board is required to make specific findings based upon the evidence presented in the record. Based on the materials submitted to date, peer-review comments, agency correspondence, technical reports, and testimony presented during the public hearing process, the following preliminary planning findings are offered for the Board’s consideration: (Pages 38-40 of the Planner’s Memorandum: 6/17/26).

Finding 1: Consistency with Local Housing Needs

Finding 2: Compliance with Local Regulations and Requested Relief

Finding 3:  Integration and Compatibility of Affordable Housing Units

Finding 4:  Health, Safety, and Environmental Impacts

Finding 5:  Adequate Physical Access

Finding 6:  Development Constraints

The Planner’s Recommended Conditions of Preliminary Plan Approval are based upon the evidence presently contained within the record, the Gardner Ridge Comprehensive Permit Application appears capable of satisfying the findings required under Rhode Island General Laws §45-53-4(e)(3)(iii)(E), provided that the applicant addresses all outstanding technical review comments, obtains all required local, state, and federal permits and approvals, and complies with the conditions imposed by the Planning Board.

Accordingly, based upon the findings, analysis, and recommendations contained within his memorandum, the Town Planner recommended that the Planning Board approve the Preliminary Plan and Comprehensive Permit Application for Gardner Ridge, subject to the following conditions: •General Conditions  •State and Federal Permits  •Stormwater Management  •Wastewater Disposal  •Groundwater and Water Supply  •Fire Protection and Emergency Access  •Accessibility and Site Safety  •Roadway  •Traffic and Parking  •Affordable Housing Requirements •Condominium, Open Space, and Maintenance Documents  •Construction and Erosion Control  •Landscape and Building Form  •Merger  •Open Space Delineation  •Surety Requirements  •Inspection – Town on-call Engineer  •Planning Board Stipulations •Administrative

(Complete information can be found on Pages 40-48 of the Planner’s Memorandum: 6/17/26).

Note: Under Roadway—25. Shall now read: The Applicant shall provide $10,000 to a restricted receipt account to have the DPW Director repair, or replace the existing twelve-inch (12”) culvert identified as “crushed” on Sheet 3 of the plans prepared by American Engineering, Inc., Site Plan dated June 8, 2026, subject to review and approval by the Town Engineer. (Monies may also be used to chip seal Gardner Road).

Chair Thurn asked the applicant, Attorney John Pagliarini, to continue. Mr. Pagliarini updated the Board on the number of parking spaces at the proposed development. He noted that they are providing forty (40) parking spaces, with each unit designated one (1) parking space, the other twenty (20) will be visitor parking with two designated ADA compliant. Since their initial application and working with their design professionals all units will have 1.5 bathrooms. There will be several common mailbox locations. State permits: They have received their RIPEDS permit; the OWTS is in the works and will be providing the required paperwork.

Mr. Pagliarini stated that with the understanding that this application may be approved he would like to see the building on the property gone by August 1. With regards to the Planner’s comments asking for a more comprehensive landscaping plan, he referenced the green binder and that the number of curb cuts will be reduced from six (6) to four (4). (Gardner Ridge Comprehensive Permit Application binder: Department of Public Works Letter Regarding Curb Cuts).

Mr. Pagliarini asked Patrick Freeman, P.E., American Engineering, Inc., to step forward. Patrick Freeman, was sworn in. Mr. Freeman stated that he has testified before the Board as an expert witness in engineering previously.

Mr. Pagliarini asked Mr. Freeman if he was the person who designed the proposed project? Response: Yes.

Did you design the Erosion Control & Soil Stabilization plan? Response: Yes.

Did you file permits with the RI Department of Environmental Management (DEM) for RIPEDES and Onsite Waste Water Treatment? Response: Yes, I did.

Did you design the Sedimentation Control Plan? Response: Yes, I did.

Did you address the peer review comments that were provided?  Response: Yes.

Mr. Pagliarini reviewed with Mr. Freeman the layout of the development which included the following: The proposed project will contain ten (10) structures, each a 42x42 duplex. Each unit being a one-bedroom unit, 924 square feet. No private or public roads. The property will have four (4) curb cuts; the development will be connected to the existing septic system and connected to existing wells. The project will have multiple, common mailboxes and dumpster locations and will not have overhead lighting in the parking area, complying with dark sky regulations. Each unit has one dedicated parking space with the remaining 20 spaces for visitors with 2 ADA compliant. There are two proposed utility buildings on the easterly side of the site. Proposed four smaller parking sites. Best management practices used for soil erosion control. It was noted that there are no wetlands on the property.

Petitioner Exhibit #8 Avizinis Environmental Services, Inc., Letter dated: June 9, 2026 addressed to John Pagliarini, RE: Wetland evaluation, AP58-1, Lots 1, 2, and 3, 415 Gardiner Rd., Exeter, RI. Stated that on June 2, 2026, Avizinis Environmental Services, Inc., (AES) staff visited the above referenced property to assess whether any regulated freshwater wetlands exist on the property that would interfere with any proposed development of the property…. AES staff found no wetlands either within the property itself or within 200 feet of the lot that would incur any jurisdiction onto the property.

 --Edward Avizinis, CPSS, PWS, President.

Mr. Freeman was asked if his office had conducted a soil suitability test on April 28, 2026? Mr. Freeman indicated that American Engineering/Matthew J. Cotta, soil evaluator, had done two test holes and the findings are available in the applicant’s green binder under the heading: Soil Surveys.

Mr. Freeman was asked if he had filed a RIPEDS application and could he explain what the application is? Patrick Freeman explained that the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management Office of Water Resources (RIDEM OWR) determines compliance with the Rhode Island Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (RIPDES) and states that all fill material shall be clean and free of matter that could cause pollution of the waters of the State. That the stormwater collection and treatment system approved by RIDEM is for the discharge of stormwater only. Any other discharge is prohibited. Petitioner Exhibit #9: Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management Office of Water Resources Letter, Dated: June 9, 2026; File No. IA-0000022906; RIPDES CGP File No. RIR102940; Gardner Ridge.

Mr. Pagliarini asked Mr. Freeman to describe the OWTS system. Patrick Freeman indicated that the development will utilize the existing Onsite Wastewater Treatment System (OWTS) infrastructure that previously served the nursing home facility. To accommodate the proposed 20-unit, 10-building residential development, modifications to the existing system are proposed to enhance its capacity and functionality.

Mr. Pagliarini asked Mr. Freeman as to whether the proposed project is in a FEMA recognized flood zone? Mr. Freeman stated that it is recognized by FEMA as a Zone X—which is an area of minimal hazard. The Petitioner asked that Exhibit #10—National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette be added to the record. The applicant went on to show a contour map from the Town of Richmond’s GIS mapping system and asked Mr. Freeman to explain the elevation of the project site and that of the property behind the project site on Gardner Road. The applicant asked that the Town of Richmond contour map be marked as Petitioner Exhibit #11. Mr. Freeman explained that the two open, large parcels behind the project are at higher elevations than the nursing home property and the nursing home parcel is higher than Gardner Road, and that the water travels down Gardner Road from north to south and stops almost in front of the development site. Mr. Pagliarini then asked that Petitioner Exhibit #12—Town of Richmond GIS mapping system a Contour Map of 410 Gardner Road, which is across the street from the nursing home for Mr. Freeman’s interpretation who explained the water patterns and stormwater management system.

Mr. Pagliarini noted that Mr. Legault’s property (410 Gardner Road) sits well below the road and carries the burden of the drainage onto the back of his property. The system is on a road that is shared between the Towns of Exeter and Richmond and at one point Exeter maintains a portion of the road and at another point Richmond maintains it, the applicant noted that very little maintenance has been done to the road in the past 50 years. He indicated that the DPW Director of Exeter (Robert Shappy) is willing to go in and fix and repair the basin, if required. Mr. Shappy will also put nearly a half-mile of Gardner Road into the 2027 Road Maintenance Plan of the Town of Exeter to completely reoil and chip seal that portion of the road. The project will contribute to this effort. The Town of Richmond will need to resolve the problem(s) in Mr. Legault’s backyard.

Robert F. Ferrari, Northeast Water Solutions, 567 South County Trail, Suite 116, Exeter, RI 02822; was sworn in and asked to summarize his report. Mr. Ferrari reported that the proposed development consists of 20, 1-bedroom, residential units (10 duplex buildings). The total development site area is 5.2 acres, with access from Gardner Road. At full buildout and 100 percent occupancy, this development is expected to have an average daily potable water requirement of 1,804 gpd, and a maximum day demand of 2,706 gallons, excluding fire protection or irrigation requirements.

In his report he noted that the water supply for this development (20 units) will require a minimum of two (2) wells, each serving five (5) duplexes (10 residential units) with a minimum effective yield of 3.0 gpm each. That this site is currently served by two (2) former public water supply wells that supported a 55-bed nursing home with an average daily water demand of 3,584 gpd and a maximum day demand of 5,376 gallons, in both cases approximately 200% of the projected demands for the proposed redevelopment of the site. Concluding that there is a significant reduction in the proposed groundwater extractions, compared to the historic site groundwater extractions.  He noted that the quality of water coming out the wells is very good; low hardness, virtually no iron, low chloride, low sulfates. (The complete Northeast Water Solutions Report can be found within the Gardner Ridge Comprehensive Permit Application binder under the heading: Groundwater Report.)

Mr. Pagliarini asked Mr. Ferrari, in his expert opinion, does the proposed project have enough water to support itself. Reply: Yes.  Does your report utilize best management practices? Reply: Yes. Will the development adversely affect the nearby area with the amount of water that the proposed project is projected to use? Reply: Based upon a review of the available data and information it is unlikely that new water supply well(s) serving the proposed development would adversely impact existing water supply wells in the vicinity.

Timothy J. Behan, Commonwealth Engineers & Consultants, Inc., Providence, RI was sworn in.

Mr. Pagliarini asked Mr. Behan if he has testified before this board previously and Mr. Behan replied, yes, many times. Mr. Behan was asked to discuss predevelopment traffic at the nursing home facility.

Mr. Behan, referencing his Traffic Vehicle Trip Generation and Sight Distance Report, Prepared for MGT410, LLC—Dated April 2026. (The complete report can be found in the Gardner Ridge binder.) It was noted that Traffic Impact Studies are typically required when a proposed development generated 100 or more new vehicle trips per hour during the adjacent roadway’s peak hour(s). Mr. Behan discussed vehicle trip generation projections/Predevelopment which totaled 177 weekday trips. The nursing home 168 trips/Single family home 9 trips; with Saturday as the peak trip time of 21 trips. Post-Development trips based on 20 condo units/single family attached housing a total of 102 weekday trips 46% reduction form predevelopment trips; with eleven trips on a Saturday, a 48% reduction from pre-development traffic. It was noted that the trip generation was reduced in each of the trip criteria.

Mr. Behan was asked about sight distance. He stated that at each of the four proposed driveways the sight distance required was looked at; Gardner Road was posted at 25 mph (155 feet) and the estimated 85% speed of 35 mph (250 feet). Under each one of those conditions at each of the four driveways there is adequate distance looking from both north and south directions. The conclusion was that the sight distance to and from the proposed new driveways on Gardner Road meets the standard for stopping sight distance based upon the assumption that vegetation within the sight triangles will be cleared.

Mr. Pagliarini noted that under the Planner’s Conditions and Recommendations to the Board that the sight distances be cleared of obstacles and Mr. Pagliarini indicated that they will abide by that.      

Mr. Pagliarini asked Mr. Behan in his expert opinion and under Rhode Island Standards is a Traffic Study Impact Study required for this project. Mr. Behan indicated no. Using the Department of Transportation requirements, the projection indicates that the post-development use on the site will generate only a fraction of the 100-vehicle trips/hour threshold that would trigger the need for a full Traffic Impact Study.

Chair Thurn opened the floor to Public Comments.

Against: Edward Andrews, 405 Gardner Road, West Kingston, RI

Mr. Andrews is concerned about his well. That by adding additional people to the area how it will affect his well.

For: Susan Squillante, 465 Gardner Road, #44, Exeter, RI

Resident Exhibit #1

Ms. Squillante is for the development but has specific concerns regarding the potential impact on local traffic safety. She feels there is a significant hazard at the intersection of Gardner Road and New London Turnpike regarding a utility pole located in the center of the intersection causing frequent driver confusion. That there are currently no signs or painted lane markings to direct traffic and has witnessed near-misses at this location on a weekly basis.

Chair Thurn asked if there wasn’t something that could be done to alleviate this problem? Planner DePasquale stated that he had visited with Susan after which he contacted the DPW Director and the DPW Director has agreed to build a cape cod berm around the telephone pole and to also include center line stripping. This will be a Town initiative not an applicant requirement.

Against: Gretchen Luke, 447 Gardner Road, West Kingston, RI

Her concerns are with the roads and the number of trips by staff and visitors.

Mr. Pagliarini stated that Mr. Behan used the safe standards for a nursing home which includes: visitors, staff, vendors and others when he came up with trips per day, based on associated persons.

Against: John Bernardo, 425 Gardner Road, (Exeter) West Kingston, RI, Treasurer of the Cranston Portuguese Rod and Gun Club, purchased in 1971. Concerned about individuals purchasing homes and then learning that they are close by an open gun range. Sundays after 10 am members of the club will be shooting outdoors.

Mr. Pagliarini appreciated the information and loved the idea of a waiver form, also placing it in the public offering statement.

Against: Isaac Lavardo, Secretary for the Cranston Portuguese Rod and Gun Club, 425 Gardner Road, (Exeter) West Kingston, RI had similar concerns and noted that hunting hours usually begin a half hour before sunrise in November and December.

Mr. Pagliarini asked if signage should be posted to alert individuals not to cross certain property lines. 

Against: Frank Legault, 410 Gardner Road, Richmond, RI has concerns with water runoff that ends up across his property and into his septic. Drain pipes under the road need to be fixed or replaced.

Mr. Pagliarini suggested that the Planning Board direct the Town Planner to send a letter to the Exeter Town Council to contact their counterparts at Richmond, to help resolve the problem.

Timothy Kindle, 414 Gardner Road, West Kingston, RI. Mr. Pagliarini addressed Mr. Kindle’s electrical concerns: Noting that all electrical will need to go through RI Energy, that their expectation is to install an underground service to the property.  Mr. Freeman discussed two utility buildings; their expectation is that the septic and both wells will be on generator(s). He noted that they are struggling on the heating source due to the size of the homes, but are exploring options.

Against: Alan Stone, 387 Gardner Road, West Kingston, RI. His concerns included wildlife; water usage with regards to laundry; trash expectations.

Against: Patricia Dunklee, 465 Gardner Road, Unit 21, West Kingston, RI. Her concern was questioning if there would be any additional development on Gardner Road. 

Andrew Cotter, 464 Gardner Road, Unit #112, West Kingston, RI. Mr. Cotter mentioned the drainage and that he has heard a number of times over the course of the evening that the Town of Richmond needs to step up and he questioned why Richmond was being asked to step up and not Exeter, which is where this development is being built? He lives in Richmond and is concerned about his taxes being affected.

Board members asked questions of the applicant. Mr. Viveiros asked that both the applicant’s diagram(s) and site plans match. He also suggested that there be some outdoor space for people to gather. Mr. Pagliarini offered possible suggestions.  Snow removal and trash enclosures were also concerns of Mr. Viveiros. Parking issues may become an item to be addressed.

Michael DeFrancesco voiced that he is in favor of the project and is very familiar with the property. He noted having been on the Planning Board for many years and that this presentation was the most comprehensive and professional project that has come before him. Traffic concerns were discussed. Clarification was asked of Mr. Ferrari on the location of the three wells and that one will be abandoned.

Mr. Pagliarini asked about the Waivers and Variances, the only one needing clarification was the impact fee, and they are asking for a waiver of the impact fee, with the removal of the house on the property.

Mr. John Pagliarini noted that the application before the Board was complete, thoughtful and thorough. Per the Comprehensive Plan, the Town has a duty to provide affordable housing for their residents through their policies. The applicant has demonstrated that all local and state criteria for a comprehensive permit has been met, that expert testimony explained the thorough basis for best management practices being utilized and asked that Preliminary approval be granted.

Chair Thurn entertained a motion to close the Public Hearing. John Toro made the motion, seconded by Michael DeFrancesco, all in favor, the motion carried (5-0).

(Gina Thurn, Michael DeFrancesco, John Toro, Michael Viveiros, Norman Machon).   

Guidance offered by Solicitor Stephen Sypole from Rhode Island State Law:

§ 45-53-4. Procedure for approval of construction of low- or moderate-income housing.

[Effective until January 1, 2026.]

§45-53-4 (II) Whether the proposed development is in compliance with the standards and provisions of the municipality’s zoning ordinance and subdivision regulations, and/or where adjustments are requested by the applicant, whether local concerns that have been affected by the relief granted do not outweigh the state and local need for low- and moderate-income housing.

Solicitor Sypole noted a list of ten (10) items requested for adjustments and that Planner DePasquale had recommended approval of all but one of them (#8). 

Board member Michael Viveiros made a motion to approve Items 1-7 an adopt the Planner’s findings. (Pages 35 and 36 of the Planner’s June 17, 2026 Memorandum). Seconded by Michael DeFrancesco, all in favor, the motion carried (5-0).

(Gina Thurn, Michael DeFrancesco, John Toro, Michael Viveiros, Norman Machon).  

#8. Section 5.1(B)(2): Waiver from the requirement to install interior curbing and bumper guards within parking areas. Finding: No. Safety, the Board finds that the proposed design does not provide safe and adequate general traffic conditions. Discussion.

Michael Viveiros made a motion to allow the Waiver for #8, but recommends that the Planner work with the developer on installing a cape cod berm or split rail fence. Michael DeFrancesco seconded the motion, hearing no further discussion, the motion passed, (5-0).

(Gina Thurn, Michael DeFrancesco, John Toro, Michael Viveiros, Norman Machon).  

Gina Thurn made a motion to approve both Waivers 9 and 10 and to adopt the Planner’s findings from Page 36 of the Planner’s June 17, 2026 Memorandum. Seconded by Michael DeFrancesco, all in favor, the motion carried (5-0).

(Gina Thurn, Michael DeFrancesco, John Toro, Michael Viveiros, Norman Machon).  

Chair Thurn introduced the Requested Waiver from the Land Development and Subdivision Regulations.

1.       Section 3.4: Waiver from preparation of an impact study based upon the site’s previously developed condition.

Motion made by Mr. DeFrancesco stating the Board finds that the requested waivers are necessary to facilitate the implementation of the approved development and are justified by the unique characteristics of the subject property, and the requested relief is consistent with the purposes and intent of the Rhode Island Low-and Moderate-Income Housing Act. Seconded by John Toro, all in favor, the motion passed (5-0).

(Gina Thurn, Michael DeFrancesco, John Toro, Michael Viveiros, Norman Machon).  

2.       Section 4.1: Waiver from off-site improvement requirements based upon the Applicant’s assertion that the project is self-contained and will not create significant off-site impacts.

This will be replaced with a Yes, (Page 43 of the Planner’s June 17, 2026 Memorandum) to read: Culvert Repair and Road Restoration. The applicant will provide the Town $10,000; the Town will place these monies in escrow for the repair and/or replacement of the infrastructure on Gardner Road with the remaining funds to be put towards a chip seal program to be administered by the DPW Director.

Gina Thurn made the motion, seconded by John Toro, all in favor, the motion carried (5-0).

(Gina Thurn, Michael DeFrancesco, John Toro, Michael Viveiros, Norman Machon).  

3.       Section 4.2: Waiver from performance improvement guarantees beyond required maintenance guarantees.

Motion to deny made by Gina Thurn, seconded by Michael Viveiros, hearing no discussion, all in favor (5-0).

(Gina Thurn, Michael DeFrancesco, John Toro, Michael Viveiros, Norman Machon).  

4.       Section 4.3: Waiver from phasing requirements based upon the Applicant’s assertion that phasing provisions are not applicable to the Comprehensive Permit review process.

Michael DeFrancesco made the motion to approve this Waiver for this application only, seconded by Michael Viveiros, all in favor, the motion carried (5-0).

(Gina Thurn, Michael DeFrancesco, John Toro, Michael Viveiros, Norman Machon).  

5.        Section 13.3(A) Relief from minimum cistern capacity requirements, with capacity to be determined by the Fire Chief.

Michael DeFrancesco made a motion not to grant this Waiver, but that the Applicant comply with the Fire Department recommendation, seconded by Michael Viveiros, all in favor, (5-0).

(Gina Thurn, Michael DeFrancesco, John Toro, Michael Viveiros, Norman Machon).  

P         

       Other Requested Exeter Code Exemptions

      1.  Exemption from Article III (Growth Management), pursuant to Section 14-208(1), based upon

           the Applicant’s interpretation that affordable housing units required under Article IX of the

           Exeter Zoning Ordinance exempt the entire development from Growth Management

           requirements.

          The recommendation is Yes, LMI is exempt. Michael Viveiros made the motion, seconded by John

          Toro, all in favor, the motion passed (5-0).

          (Gina Thurn, Michael DeFrancesco, John Toro, Michael Viveiros, Norman Machon).  

     2.  Exemption from Article I, Section 14-242(3), Impact Fees. The recommendation is No –

          Market rate homes require an impact fee.  The Applicant has requested that the Board

          consider the demolition of the one house that was on the property to count as a credit bring in

          down 15 market rate homes down to 14 market rate homes. Discussion.

John Toro made a motion to grant the Waiver of six (6) market rate units for a total impact fee of $17,712 for the contribution to the highway, seconded by Michael DeFrancesco, hearing no further discussion, the motion passed (4-0) One (1) opposed (Michael Viveiros).

(Gina Thurn, Michael DeFrancesco, John Toro, Norman Machon).

Gina Thurn made a motion to accept the six (6) Required Findings of Fact as written in the Planner’s Memorandum of June 17, 2026, seconded by Michael DeFrancesco, all in favor, the motion carried (5-0).

(Gina Thurn, Michael DeFrancesco, John Toro, Michael Viveiros, Norman Machon).  

Gina Thurn made a motion regarding the Conditions of Approval (Pages 41-48 of the Planner’s June 17, 2026 Memorandum) amending Condition #25 Culvert Repair and Road Restoration to read that the Applicant shall provide $10,000 to the Town of Exeter/DPW to repair and restore the infrastructure on Gardner Road with the remaining funds to be put towards a chip seal program to be administered by the DPW Director, seconded by Michael DeFrancesco, all in favor, the motion passed (5-0).

(Gina Thurn, Michael DeFrancesco, John Toro, Michael Viveiros, Norman Machon).  

Gina Thurn made a motion to accept all the Conditions of Approval made by Town Planner William DePasquale in his Memorandum dated June 17, 2026, Pages 41 through Page 48, all 50 Conditions, seconded by Michael DeFrancesco, all in favor, Michael Viveiros exception was to parking spaces, the motion carried. (5-0).

(Gina Thurn, Michael DeFrancesco, John Toro, Michael Viveiros, Norman Machon).  

Michael DeFrancesco made a motion based upon the evidence presented here tonight, with the six (6) required findings and the additional fifty (50) Conditions of Preliminary Plan approval that we approve the Preliminary Plan and Comprehensive Permit Application for Gardner Ridge, seconded by Michael Viveiros, hearing no further discussion, the motion carried (5-0).

(Gina Thurn, Michael DeFrancesco, John Toro, Michael Viveiros, Norman Machon).  

III.             NEW BUSINESS: - None

IV.             ADMINISTRATIVE:

A.    Approval of Minutes – April 28, 2026

Michael DeFrancesco made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted,

Seconded by John Toro, hearing no discussion, the motion passed (6-0).

(Gina Thurn, Michael DeFrancesco, John Toro, Jeffrey Vaccaro, Michael

Viveiros and Norman Machon).

B.     Administrative Officer approved Projects/Decisions and Correspondence

C.    Future Meetings:

Planning Board Workshop – Tuesday, July 14, 2026 - 6:00 P.M.

Planning Board Regular Meeting – Tuesday, July 28, 2026 at 6 P.M.

   --Two Public Hearings: Jade II and Exquisite Events

V. ADJOURNMENT:

Motion to adjourn was made by John Toro, seconded by Gina Thurn, voted all in favor (6-0). The motion passed. The meeting adjourned at 10:02 P.M. 

(Gina Thurn, Michael DeFrancesco, John Toro, Jeffrey Vaccaro, Michael Viveiros and Norman Machon).

Respectfully submitted, Rebecca M. Lukowicz, Planning Department