I.      NEW BUSINESS:

A.   The petition of Darlene Gardner, Applicant and Owner for property located at 237K Stony Fort Road, Exeter, RI; Zoned RU-4, and further designated as AP81, B4, L11; a request for dimensional relief under Zoning Ordinance Article II Section 2.4.2.2 (street frontage); for a proposed single-family dwelling.

Chair Richard Booth introduced the petition and asked if anyone was present to speak on behalf of this application.

Attorney Matt Callaghan was present to represent the applicant, Darlene Gardner. Michael McCormick, of Alpha & Associates was also present on behalf of the applicant. Attorney Callaghan asked Mr. McCormick if he had surveyed the land in question.

Michael McCormick stepped forward and was sworn in.  Mr. McCormick stated that he had surveyed the property and proceeded to review the site plan of the lot in question that consists of 12.8 acres.

Attorney Callaghan continued to ask Mr. McCormick questions about the site plan. Mike McCormick reviewed in detail including information on the agricultural area shaded in green; and two deeded easements – one through Stony Fort Road and one through Kayla Ricci Way. He noted that there is an approved septic system; an 8-foot water table on the property, excellent farmland.  No wetlands in near proximity of the proposed home, but stated that there are some wetlands on the very north-east corner of the lot.  Mr. McCormick stated, in his opinion, there are no environmental concerns with the development of this land. Mike McCormick referenced the existing driveway (right of way) that runs up to the lot, and stated it is approximately 18 to 30 feet wide and there has been no problem bringing trucks and trailers up there.  He offered to have the Fire Department check the driveway accessibility and added that he doesn’t think Ms. Gardner would have a problem adding a gravel turn around if necessary.

Chair Richard Booth asked Mr. McCormick to point out on the plan where the easement is from Stony Fort Road.

Michael McCormick showed the easement on another set of plans from 2017. Chair Richard Booth asked Mr. McCormick when the lots were sub-divided.

Michael McCormick stated that Darlene Gardner’s grandfather purchased the land in 1911 so

this land has been in the Gardner family for 121 years.

Chair Richard Booth asked if the land in question is considered to be agricultural property. Michael McCormick stated that approximately a 1/3 of the lot is and stated that the green area on the site plan signifies this.

Chair Richard Booth then asked if this land was being taxed as farm land.

Attorney Callaghan stated that of the 12-acre parcel, 7 acres are Farm Forest Open Space and the remainder is taxed fully.

Further discussion ensued in reference to the location of the proposed single-family dwelling. Attorney Callaghan handed Chair Richard Booth Exhibits A 1, 2 & 3 from the Town Tax Assessor.

Michael McCormick reviewed an aerial photograph, Exhibit B, and described the area and parcels 81-1-15, 81-1-13, 81-1-12, 81-1-11 and 84-4-12 all access their properties through the right of way.

Chair Booth asked about the length of the driveway and who maintains this. Mr. McCormick stated that it is roughly 2,300 feet long, close to a ½ mile.

Attorney  Callaghan  stated  that  Darlene  Gardner  has  been  and  will  be  responsible  for maintaining the driveway; he stated that this will be listed in the deed that her late husband left.  The Attorney stated the responsibility will go to the person who buys the lot/property. Chair Booth voiced concerns about the property being sold in the future (AP81-B4-L11). Attorney Callaghan stated if the Board requires, he will have a new maintenance agreement within a new deed to state that this runs with the property.

Questions were then raised regarding the property being zoned RU-4 but also designated as

Farm Forest Open Space (FFOS).

Michael McCormick stated there are 5 acres on the west side and 7 on the east; the 7 acres of FFOS won’t be developed but can farm, log, etc.

Chair Richard Booth asked if there was any intention to subdivide further. Attorney Callaghan replied no.

Further  discussion  ensued  regarding  the  easement,  condition  of  the  driveway  and maintenance of.

Susan Littlefield asked about the septic and stated that she has never seen requirements for a system like this on plans before.

Michael McCormick stated that this is an industry standard system and gave further details.

Chair Richard Booth asked the Clerk is she was in receipt of all the returned certified mailing cards and receipts; she stated in the affirmative.

Susan Littlefield asked if there were engineering reasons for not using the Kayla Ricci access. Michael McCormick stated there are (2) easements; one through Stony Fort and one through Kayla Ricci. They currently use the Stony Fort access, but once construction is completed, the other easement will be finished and can be used as well. He stated that Ms. Gardner is within her legal right to use either one, or both, and want to keep her options open.

Again, there was further discussion regarding the (2) easements/right of ways on record. Exhibits C, 1-6 was submitted to Chairman Booth from Attorney Callaghan.

At this time, Darlene Gardner was present and sworn in.

Attorney Callaghan asked her a series of questions in reference to the property in question. Attorney Callaghan stated they were before the board to request dimensional relief for road frontage on Stony Fort Road and noted that the property was this way when Ms. Gardner and her late husband purchased the land in 2001. He stated that this hardship of no road frontage was not anything that they/she created.

Ms. Gardner stated this was correct and that the proposed home will be built for her son and his family to live in.

Attorney Callaghan then asked Ms. Gardner about the following zoning requirements as follows:

1.   If building the proposed home would provide her a greater financial gain; and

2.   If building the proposed home would alter the general character of the surrounding area. Ms. Gardner replied no to the above.

Attorney Callaghan continued to inquire:

3.   If this dimensional relief she requested was the least amount necessary; and

4.   If the request were not granted, would this be more than a mere inconvenience to her.   Ms. Gardner replied yes to the above and stated that it would be a major inconvenience.

Chair Booth asked Ms. Gardner if they were planning to build a 3-bedroom home with proposed dimensions of 32’x36’.  Ms. Gardner replied yes and that the plans are for a two- story home with a full basement, with a portion of which will be a walk out.

Tom McMillan asked if the applicant if she owns other property in area and lots that are abutting the lot in question.

Darlene Gardner replied in the affirmative.

Tom McMillian asked more questions regarding the (2) right of ways and the lack of frontage on the property. Further discussion ensued.

Tim Robertson asked how long the property had been in the Gardner family.

Attorney Callaghan stated that Darlene and her late husband acquired the land in 2001 from her husband aunt and uncle who owned it since 1984.

Attorney Callaghan submitted an old deed to Chair Richard Booth, labeled Exhibits D1 & 2.

Chair Booth proceeded to review aloud.

Chair Booth stated that if a motion is made on this application, he is recommending to see some kind of language with a clear definition of which property has responsibility to maintain that right of way.

Attorney Callaghan agrees and will accommodate that request.

At this time, Chair Richard Booth asked if there was anyone from the public who wanted to speak.

Public Comment:

1.   Patrick McDonald, 64 Kayla Ricci Way – Mr. McDonald stepped forward and was sworn in.  He is an abutter to the easement on Kayla Ricci Way and stated that this easement will interfere with his land and his neighbor’s property.  This access was cleared at one point but has since become overgrown and has boulders blocking any access.  He stated that this will have negative impact on his property.

Attorney Callaghan replied that the Fire Department prefers to have two accesses to the property and that the easement is not on Mr. McDonald’s property.  He stated that this was there prior to the property being owned.

Mr. McDonald stated that he wanted the Zoning Board to know of their concerns with this easement.

2.   Jared Allen, 58 Kayla Ricci Way – Mr. Allen stepped forward and was sworn in. He is also a direct abutter and stated that the easement in question is on his property.   The easement was deeded when he purchased the land and stated that was also deeded to National Grid. National Grid has established underground utilities there and a box is located at the corner of his property. Mr. Allen stated that when he bought the property, he was told this easement was for National Grids use and would not be used for any other purpose.  He went on to state that this easement is partially cleared with gravel, but is not cleared before Kayla Ricci Way and shared that there is a farmer’s wall which would have to be destroyed and then National Grid’s utilities and then a drainage area.  Mr. Allen stated that this will have a negative impact on his property.

Chair Richard Booth responded to the abutters concerns.

3.   Hal Morgan, Zoning Inspector – Mr. Morgan stepped forward and was sworn in.

Mr. Morgan referenced Appendix A, 1.3.B General provisions; substandard lots of record. Any legal single substandard lot of record or contiguous lots of record at the effective date of adoption or amendment of the Exeter zoning ordinance, notwithstanding the failure of that lot or those lots to meet the dimensional and/or quantitative requirements, and/or road frontage or other access requirements, applicable  in  the  districts  as  set  forth  in  the  ordinance,  and  lot  merger,  where applicable, has been completed, shall be considered a legal substandard lot or lots of record.

Discussion ensued between the Board members and Mr. Morgan.

4.   Susan Franco-Towell, 249A Stony Fort Road – Ms. Franco-Towell stepped forward and was  sworn in.    She  stated  that  when she  bought  the  property  there  was a  Knife Association but it has since been foreclosed on and is now defunct.  Ms. Franco-Towell stated that she does not get the sense that there are any easement issues with her property.

As there was no more public comment, Chair Richard Booth asked for a motion to close the public hearing.   Richard Quattromani made a motion; Tom McMillian seconded the motion. Voted all in favor. Public hearing was closed.

A lengthy discussion ensued among the Board members regarding the Planning Board memorandum introduced, if the least amount of  relief had been requested, the surrounding community/resident concerns, the property being a substandard lot of record, easement concerns regarding maintenance going forward and the addition of a turnaround access for emergency vehicles.

At this time, Solicitor Peter Ruggiero was asked to weigh in on the Board’s concerns. Solicitor Ruggiero stated that the Planning Board may not respond between now and the next meeting as they have given their advisory opinion to the Zoning Board.  In regard to the Fire Department, once a building permit is submitted, the Fire Marshal may submit a letter stating that they require something more be fulfilled prior to getting final approval.  In his opinion, the only issues the Zoning Board has would be the terms of the easement and maintenance of.

Tim Robertson made a motion to re-open the public hearing; Loren Andrews seconded. Vote was taken; voted all in favor. The public hearing was re-opened.

Attorney Callaghan spoke to the Board’s concern of the maintaining of the road in the future and stated that the board request a condition of approval and he will work with Solicitor Ruggiero to satisfy any of the concerns raised and prepare a maintenance agreement subject to approval and other possible obligations.

Michael McCormick stated that in his opinion, the easements and deeds, are beyond

the scope of the Zoning Board and that RI General Law dictates that whoever is using said right of way is responsible for maintaining it.

Solicitor Ruggiero agreed and stated for the record, that the property benefiting from using the easement access has to maintain it adequately.

At this time, a member of the public asked to make a comment.  Asa Davis stepped forward and was sworn in.  Mr. Davis shared his experience with building roads and stated that every right of way, every road is a public right of way, and then there’s the pavement. The right of way and the pavement is usually separated by 4-12 feet. The homeowners maintain the driveways, right of ways, mailboxes, etc. as they see fit.

Chair Richard Booth asked for a motion to close the public hearing.   Richard Quattromani made a motion; Tim Robertson seconded.  Vote was taken; voted all in favor. Public hearing was closed.

Tim Robertson made a motion to approve the petition of Darlene Gardner, Applicant and Owner for property located at 237K Stony Fort Road, Exeter, RI; Zoned RU-4, and further designated as AP81, B4, L11; a request for dimensional relief under Zoning Ordinance Article II Section 2.4.2.2 (street frontage); for 300-feet of relief as depicted in the application for the purpose of constructing a 32’x 36’ proposed single-family dwelling which is on a legal substandard lot of record.

Discussion between the Chair and the Solicitor suggested adding the letter from the Fire Department be included in the motion. Chair Booth asked Tim Robertson to amend his motion and then review the (5) criteria.

Tim Robertson amended his motion to include as part of the building permit process, the Board expects the Fire Department to address any concerns over access for fire equipment to the property. Richard Quattromani seconded the motion.  Voted 5-0, all in favor. Motion passed as amended.

Tim Robertson then reviewed Exeter Zoning Code, Appendix A, Section 1.3.E.C as follows:

In granting a variance, the Exeter zoning board of review shall require that evidence to the satisfaction of the following standards be entered into the record of the proceedings:

1.   That the hardship from which the applicant seeks relief is due to the unique characteristics of the subject land or structure and not to the general characteristics of the surrounding area; and is not due to a physical or economic disability of the applicant;

2.   That said hardship is not the result of any prior action of the applicant and does not result primarily from the desire of the applicant to realize greater financial gain;

3.   That the granting of the requested variance will not alter the general character of the surrounding area or impair the intent of purpose of the Exeter zoning ordinance or the Exeter comprehensive plan, upon which this ordinance is based; and

4.   That the relief to be granted is the least relief necessary.

Additionally, Section 1.3.E.D as follows:

The Exeter zoning board of review shall, in addition to the above standards, require that evidence be entered into the record of the proceedings showing that:

In granting a dimensional variance, that the hardship that will be suffered by the owner of the subject property if the dimensional variance is not granted shall amount to more than a mere inconvenience. The fact that a use may be more profitable or that a structure may be more valuable after the relief is granted shall not be grounds for relief.

B.   Discussion and/or possible action: Election of Officers

Tom McMillian volunteered to be the next Vice Chair. Tim Robertson made a motion to nominate Tom McMillian for Vice Chair; Richard Quattromani seconded. Vote was taken; all in favor. Motion passed.