OLD BUSINESS

WHIPPLE WOODS (ID#: 22-03) MASTER PLAN REVIEW

Major Subdivision – Public Informational Meeting

AP 42 / Lot 12 – 170 Whipple Road

40.91 Acres (approx.)/9 Lots / Zone: R-80 (Conservation)

Applicant / Owner: Louie Capital LLC & MAS Capital LLC; CAS Capital LLC & ERS Capital LLC

Engineer: Jeffrey C. Hanson, P.E. – Millstone Engineering, PC

a.   The Board will review and discuss the proposed submission with the project proponent.

b.   The Board will conduct a public informational hearing to receive input on the proposed project.

c.   The Board may schedule a site visit or waive the requirement.

d.   The Board may approve the Master Plan as submitted, approve with changes and/or conditions, deny the application or continue the meeting to a future date.

e.   The Board may authorize the Town Planner to prepare a written decision consistent with the Board’s findings of fact and motion for signature by the Chair and subsequent recording.

Attorney Andrew Bilodeau, having offices at 1350 Division Road in West Warwick, representing the applicants stated that at the last meeting there was an accusation of an undisclosed owner and he brought deeds for review indicating there is no undisclosed owner which were submitted as Applicant’s Exhibit #1.  Atty. Bilodeau stated that they had a meeting with Mr. Archambault and other abutters to review a plan combing Lots 8 and 9 to accommodate the objections to that one lot.  Atty. Bilodeau stated that the new plan meets with the parameters of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan and that the history of the property or the road is not applicable and is asking for the plan with 14 lots to be approved as provided this evening.   

Al Gizzarelli stated that the lot is still in the field and questioned whether the plan be configured to get the lot out of the field?  Atty. Bilodeau replied because of the economics of this lot being moved to the cul-de-sac would be a fifty percent loss in the value of the lot.  Atty. Bilodeau added that further there is nothing in the ordinance to prohibit building on that field.  Mr. Gizzarelli stated that the Comprehensive Plan does state that this field should be preserved and Atty. Bilodeau stated it is suggestive language and not a requirement.

Jeffrey Hanson, Registered Professional Engineer and President of Millstone Engineering, stated the lot in the field could be moved to the wooded area but would reduce the lot size and the controlling factor is the requirement of 60% of a conservation development has to be suitable open space and this plan is just over the requirement for suitable open space.  Mr. Hanson added that the lots in the cul-de-sac are 30,000 square feet and Lot 14 is 98,000 square feet and would have to reduce that lot size significantly. 

Charles Boyd stated that the Whipple Road property is mentioned several times in the Natural & Cultural Resources section of the Comprehensive Plan as having cultural value.  Jeffrey Hanson stated that because it is mentioned in the Comprehensive Plan does not preclude a property owner from developing it in accordance with the zoning and Subdivision Regulations of the Town. 

Al Gizzarelli questioned whether the applicant had an expert witness to attest to the financial differential between Lot 14 and the lots in the cul-de-sac and Atty. Bilodeau replied that he will be happy to bring an expert in but it is not usually a part of the review process.  Atty. Bilodeau stated that there were two lots, 8 and 9, with a value of about $350,000 and made the concession of eliminating one of them and the applicant is not going to be able to recoup that.

Mike Moan stated the Comprehensive Plan is how the community has asked this Board to consider priorities going forward and the only financial in this plan is related to how the government runs itself not how much money a developer is making. 

Jennifer Hawkins stated that it seems the Board finds the monetary argument distasteful and irrelevant and the only matters the Planning Board have to evaluate are dictated by the Comprehensive Plan and there is tension between the desire of the Town to allow for increased homeownership and the desire to protect the open space. 

Ken Orabona stated the Comprehensive Plan states land is to be kept contiguous and by putting a house in the middle of the lot is not.  Mr. Orabona stated that Lot 14 needs to be moved into the cul-de-sac and the entire corner be kept as open space as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan and that it is this board’s duty to preserve this wooded area as a whole.

The applicant, Richard Storti, stated that they have lessened the proposal by one lot, moved the building envelope 150 feet back from the road, given the corner for reduction of traffic and accidents, and telling him the lot is not buildable and operating under the premise that the Comprehensive Plan is law.  Solicitor Scott Levesque stated that the Comprehensive Plan is controlling law and the Board is required to make the finding that a project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in making decisions.  Solicitor Levesque stated the question before the Board is whether the project can be reasonably done without affecting the fields that the\is Comprehensive Plan seeks to protect and, if so, the Board is well within its rights to grant the project with the same number of units not in the field.

Richard Storti stated that they submitted a nine lot plan having the least impact on the city and was then charged with coming back with a new plan that has five lots across the front.  Mr. Storti stated the financial impact to that is in excess of $750,000 from losing four road-front lots. 

Jennifer Hawkins stated she appreciates the relocation of the lots to preserve the road frontage and questioned any planned improvements to the road and Mr. Storti replied they are willing to give that corner back to the Town.  Planner Michael Phillips stated that, as part of this plan, they are giving that corner to the Town as part of the open space and the DPW Director has indicated he would be interested in that corner.  Atty Bilodeau noted that this corner has been a problem for years and will probably be improved with this project.

Jeffrey Hanson stated that the conservation plan has in excess of 27 acres of open space and 17.6 of that is usable land and in excess of the 60% requirement.

Ken Orabona questioned the setback between the property line between the Campbell lot and Lots 1, 2, and 3 and Jeffrey Hanson replied there is a 75 foot setback.  Mr. Orabona questioned how much of the 75 feet will be left natural and Mr. Hanson replied they will try to maximize the separation to have less impact but still have to do the soil evaluations.  Mr. Orabona requested the developer have natural plantings along that property line to maintain privacy.

The public hearing was opened at 6:52 p.m.

Steve Archambault, 195 Whipple Road, stated he previously said he would bring a property expert to discuss information he provided at the last hearing.  Upon further reflection he determined that what he gleaned from the Comprehensive Plan was more than enough to satisfy the Board and decided he did not need the expert.  Solicitor Levesque questioned whether Mr. Archambault would withdraw his document previously submitted as expert testimony and Mr. Archambault agreed in terms of it being an expert document and stated the document was his own work that reflects his opinion of the Comprehensive Plan. 

Mr. Archambault stated the Comprehensive Plan specifically mentions this area to be preserved through preserving heritage landscapes.  Mr. Archambault stated that he met with the applicant and the developer wants to build in the field but that the Comprehensive Plan specifically names fields to be preserved and can be preserved through a conservation easement.  Mr. Archambault stated that he suggested to the applicant that the footprint could be reduced from 6 to 5 lots or reconfigure the lots.  Mr. Archambault stated there was conversation of having the Sleboda’s do the roadway and hopes to continue that conversation with the applicant.  Mr. Archambault stated that the Board should not deny 14 lots but approve 14 lots with the stipulation, based on the Comprehensive Plan that no development be allowed in the field.

Attorney Bilodeau stated he has been unable to identify this field specifically in the Comprehensive Plan and does not understand how Lot 14 as proposed is different than Lots 9-13 other than Mr. Archambault does not want it there.  Mr. Archambault referred to the Comprehensive Plan which speaks to the Whipple Road agricultural area and speaks to the Whipple fields. 

Dave Campbell, 146 Whipple Road, stated that he spoke out against the proposal at the last meeting and after seeing this new proposal thinks he is impacted worse by this scenario.  Mr. Campbell requested the applicant make the buffer large enough to not impact his 26 acres.

There being no one present to speak to this application the public hearing was closed at 7:30 p.m.

Mike Moan stated that, based on the Comprehensive Plan, the field should remain in its existing state and would approve 14 lots stipulating that Lot 14 be moved to the cul-de-sac.

Joseph Rotella stated that he prefers the plan with 14 lots with Lot 14 being restricted.

Al Nani stated there are important restrictions afforded by the Comprehensive Plan and proposed a compromise where lots are allowed along the road with no building in the fields.

Al Gizzarelli stated that he is looking to do what is in the best interest of everybody and sees a compromise with making Lot 13 possibly a 98,000 square foot lot on the end and with reduced road frontage to put an extra lot in the cul-de-sac.  Mr. Gizzarelli stated the Board has a duty to preserve certain areas and is amenable to the 14 lot subdivision with road frontage reduction and preserving the field.

Ken Orabona stated that he has no issue with either plan but the issue is preserving the open space in the field.  Mr. Orabona requested the applicant work closely with the Campbell’s in regard to a decent sized buffer to his property.

Charles Boyd stated that he is opposed to Lot 14 being in the field.

Jennifer Hawkins stated this is a delicate balance between desire for open space and maximizing density and would have preferred the 9 unit layout. Ms. Hawkins stated she thinks the Board is arbitrarily protecting fields and is purely subjective decision-making.  Ms. Hawkins stated that mandating moving the lot and switching open space is arbitrary and not a fair request on the applicant.  Ms. Hawkins stated that she thinks the 14 lots as presented is a good balance and requested the three LMI units be sold to those homeowners not exceeding 80% AMI.

John Yoakum stated that the wording in the Comprehensive Plan gives a level of flexibility and the idea of Lot 14 being moved is arbitrary having 27 acres of open space and one lot on the corner with a house does not destroy this area.  Mr. Yoakum stated his opinion is the plan as presented is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan requirements.

Ken Orabona made a motion, seconded by Al Nani, to grant approval of the Master Plan revision dated September 1, 2022 incorporating  Planner’s memo dated September 8, 2022 with handwritten changes and marked as Board’s Exhibit 2, the Findings of Fact, conditioned on the entire eastern portion of the lot being preserved as open space and Lot 14 being relocated to the cul-de-sac, stone walls being reconstructed in compliance with the Stone Wall Ordinance, granting waivers for reduction of frontage and road width, the portion of the southeast corner of Lot 9 being deeded to the Town, and adequate screening along the border of Lots 1, 2, and 3. The vote on the motion was all in favor and the motion carried.

Ken Orabona made a motion, seconded by Al Nani, for the Solicitor and Planner to draft a written decision.  The vote on the motion was all in favor and the motion carried.

Town Solicitor’s Report: Discussion regarding recent changes to the law from the 2022 Legislative Session, including required training for planning board members, changes to low and moderate income housing, including counting accessory dwelling units and counting deed restricted and market rate units in multifamily housing, repurposing vacant and unused school buildings for affordable housing, elimination of pre-application conference for comprehensive permits, and changes to quorum requirements for approval of projects.

Solicitor Scott Levesque summarized the recent changes in the law and the required training for Planning Board members who will now need to do an online introductory course with a one hour annual update. 

Solicitor Levesque stated that there were also changes to low and moderate income housing, including counting accessory dwelling units and counting deed restricted and market rate units in multifamily housing, repurposing vacant and unused school buildings for affordable housing in attempt to get to the 10% affordable housing requirement.

Solicitor Levesque noted other changes to quorum requirements for approval of projects and will now be a majority of members present.

Solicitor Levesque stated another change of elimination of pre-application conference for comprehensive permits.

Mike Moan made a motion, seconded by Ken Orabona, to adjourn the meeting at 8:05 pm.  The vote on the motion was all in favor and the motion carried.

The next meeting is scheduled for Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 6:00 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Donna A. Corrao, Recording Secretary