| | Town of Smithfield Planning Board 64 FARNUM PIKE ESMOND, RHODE ISLAND 02917 January 16, 2025 Virtual Meeting Minutes |
Members Present: Richard Colavecchio, James D’Ambra, Al Nani, John Yoakum,
Catherine Lynn, Michael Moan, Charles Boyd
Members Absent: Joseph Rotella
Others Present: David Ursillo, Assistant Town Solicitor
Chairman James D’Ambra opened the January 16, 2025 meeting of the Smithfield Planning Board at 6:00 p.m.
EMERGENCY EVACUATION AND HEALTH NOTIFICATION
Chairman James D’Ambra read the Emergency Evacuation and Health Notification.
MINUTES:
Discuss and approve the December 12, 2024 meeting minutes.
Catherine Lynn requested that her absence from the December 12th meeting be listed as excused and Board member Michael Moan requested the same. Ms. Lynn also requested that it be noted that Charlie Boyd came in late to the meeting and was not present to vote on the minutes.
John Yoakum made a motion, seconded by Al Nani, to approve the December 12, 2024 meeting minutes as amended. The vote on the motion was all in favor and the motion carried. ((Charles Boyd arrived late to the meeting and was not present for the vote on the minutes.)
REGULAR AGENDA
Minor Subdivision - Preliminary Plan Review
AP 43/Lot 75 – 260 Old County Road
6.5 acres (approx.)/3 Lots/Zone: RMED
Applicant/Owner: KLRS Realty LLC.
Engineer: Joe Casali Engineering, Inc.
a. The Board will review and discuss the proposed submission with the project proponent.
b. The Board will conduct a public hearing to receive input on the proposed project.
c. The Board may approve the application for zoning relief as submitted, approve with changes and/or conditions, deny the application or continue the meeting to a future date.
d. The Board may approve the Preliminary 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.
f. The Board may vote to have the Final Plan approval be handled administratively.
Attorney Tim Kane, having offices at 627 Putnam Pike in Greenville, represented the applicant and stated the applicant is requesting another continuance.
John Yoakum made a motion, seconded by Al Nani, to continue the Emilia’s Way application to the February 20th Planning Board meeting with the applicant agreeing to suspend the timeclock for approval. The vote on the motion was all in favor and the motion carried.
Comprehensive Permit Application/Major Land Development Project – Preliminary Plan Review
AP 44 / Lot 82 – 89 West Greenville Road
43 Acres/74 Proposed Duplex Condominiums/R-80 Zone
Applicant/Owner: West Greenville Road, LLC
Engineer: Garofalo & Associates, Inc.
a. The Board will review and discuss the proposed submission with the project proponent.
b. The Board will conduct a public hearing to receive input on the proposed project.
c. The Board may approve the Preliminary Plan as submitted, approve with changes and/or conditions, deny the application or continue the meeting to a future date.
d. 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 John Mancini represented the applicant on this Comprehensive Permit application consisting of 37 duplex condominium units for a total of 74 units with 25% being designated as affordable. Attorney Mancini stated that this Board granted Master Plan approval in December of 2022 and the applicant is seeking Preliminary Plan approval this evening. Attorney Mancini stated that the applicant is seeking relief on a use variance, variances on the requirements for density bonus, having more than one structure onsite, not exceeding 1% of housing stock, and waivers on roadway width and cul-de-sac length.
Chairman James D’Ambra stated that the Board requested an independent peer review of the applicant’s traffic study and questioned whether that has been done. Planner Michael Phillips stated that the peer review has not yet been done by the Town and that it is typically done by Crossman Engineering who has prepared the report for the applicant.
Michael Moan stated that the recorded decision stipulates 2-bedroom units only but that the plan before the Board is for 3-bedroom units. Attorney Mancini stated that upon their review of the transcript that it was part of a discussion at the Master Plan but was not memorialized as a condition of approval. Solicitor David Ursillo stated that it is in the decision and part of the vote as a condition of approval. Solicitor Ursillo stated that the applicant could have brought the issue up at the time the decision was recorded but they did not. Solicitor Ursillo noted that the Board can approve the Preliminary Plan as a 2-bedroom project and the applicant can then appeal that one piece of approval.
Attorney Mancini stated it is the applicant’s belief that the decision requests they look at the idea of reducing the unit size to two-bedroom units and that the applicant has submitted half the number of bedroom units which was submitted at Master Plan. Chairman James D’Ambra stated that a request by the Board for a reduction in the number of bedrooms is significant. Solicitor David Ursillo stated that the applicant wants to move forward with their presentation of the project as submitted at the risk that the Board could deny it based on not being in conformance with the written decision. Chairman D’Ambra stated that no decision will be made by the Board today because the peer review of the traffic study is not completed but suggested moving forward with the applicant’s presentation anyway.
Sam Hemingway, with Garofalo & Associates, reviewed the adjustments to the plans since Master Plan approval. Mr. Hemingway stating that the road configuration has been adjusted for more standard turnarounds for better movement of town vehicles, the units modified to be attached garage units with parking in front of units, and buffering of vegetative screening to the abutting properties was added. Mr. Hemingway stated the lot reduction from 90 to 74 units, the project being serviced by public water, and public sewer having a privately maintained pump station on the property. Mr. Hemingway stated the project is pending wetlands review by RIDEM but after a year of correspondence is confident there will be no significant issues. Mr. Hemingway stated that a Phase 1 study was performed for fear of potential contamination and no exceedances for residential units were identified.
Charles Boyd questioned the project having privatized sewers and Sam Hemingway replied that this is a condominium development with a private sewer located along a main on a public road. Mr. Boyd noted Public Works Director Gene Allen’s concerns identified in the TRC report having to do with water pressure, ladder radius, and whether the earth berm can handle a 100-year flood. Attorney Mancini stated that once the sewer line hits their property it becomes private and they are responsible to maintain it but people can tie into the sewer line if they have approval from the proper authority.
Solicitor David Ursillo stated Public Works Director indicates a concern that the plans shows a private sewer main along a public road. Sam Hemingway stated if the sewer main is made public then the maintenance of it would be borne by the town.
Charles Boyd stated his concern that they did not talk with Public Works or the Fire Department about the TRC comments. Attorney Mancini stated that their engineer just received the report yesterday.
Catherine Lynn questioned where the mechanicals will be located in the units and Sam Hemingway replied some will be in crawl spaces, basements, and closets. Ms. Lynn indicated her concern with attic access and the amount of headspace.
Sam Hemingway reviewed the significant changes from the Master Plan being a reduction from 96 to 74 units, road terminal endings from hammerheads to more conventional rotary, garage entry type units, buffering from abutting residences, and snow storage.
The public hearing was opened at 7:32 p.m.
Matthew Fague, 247 Old County Road, stated his concern with the results of the environmental study, whether the berm is a dam, power lines running through the project, property being previously farmland, increased traffic, impact on schools and infrastructure
John Tucker, 79 West Greenville Road, stated his concern with contamination in the ground and questioned whether an archaeological study has been done.
Stefanie Lawrence, Orchard Gate Condominiums, stated her concern with one exit and an increase in traffic. Ms. Lawrence stated there is a water line running through the center of the lot.
Donna Marcaccio, 125 Smith Avenue, stated her concern with flooding and if water damage is done to her property she would like the applicant to be accountable.
Kathy Deluca, 125 Smith Avenue, stated her concern with flooding, density, and number of waivers being requested which does not seem right for this property.
Tom Ryan, 77 West Greenville Road, stated his concern with the lack of a buffer along his property line, flooding, and the possibility of chemicals from disturbing the ground affecting water quality.
James Tucker, 679 West Greenville Road, questioned how far down West Greenville Road the sewer and water line go, the amount of setback and buffers required, and the size of arborvitae.
Anthony Mekuto, 125 Smith Avenue, stated that there is a stonewall in need of repair and questioned whose property it lies on. Chair D’Ambra stated the stonewall appears to be on the property line and therefore is the responsibility of either party.
Attorney John Mancini requested the Town engage a peer review of the traffic study by the end of February and stated that his engineer then needs two weeks for review of the report.
John Yoakum made a motion, seconded by Catherine Lynn, to continue the application to the March 20, 2025 meeting with the applicant agreeing to suspend the timeclock for approval until April 12, 2025. The vote on the motion was all in favor and the motion carried.
a. The Board will discuss the proposed amendments with staff and the Town’s planning consultant.
b. The Board may make a recommendation to the Town Council on adoption of the proposed amendments
c. The Board may continue the matter for further discussion at a future meeting.
Town Planner Michael Phillips stated that the proposed ordinance amendment establishes criteria for allowing short-term rental units through a special use permit.
Catherine Lynn stated that the Town of Narragansett has a strict policy and that she would like to see ordinances adopted by other cities and towns. Ms. Lynn stated her concern with having to hire another person or an outside company to monitor the units.
Council Member Rachel Toppi stated that she has been researching this issue for some time and will be sponsoring another ordinance amendment that will be coming before the Board for review.
John Yoakum made a motion, seconded by Al Nani, to table this agenda item to the March 20, 2025 meeting. The vote on the motion was all in favor and the motion carried.
There was no one present to make public comment.
Michael Moan made a motion, seconded by Al Nani, to adjourn the meeting at 8:22 p.m. The vote on the motion was all in favor and the motion carried.
The next regular meeting is scheduled for Thursday, February 20, 2025 at 6:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Donna A. Corrao, Recording Secretary