Planning Board – Meeting Minutes
Thursday, May 14, 2020 - 7:00 p.m.

 

Pursuant to Executive Order 20-05 (March 16, 2020) and Executive Order 20-25 (April 15, 2020) this meeting was conducted via Zoom conference call and publicly advertised.

 

 

A.    CALL TO ORDER

 

Mr. Constantine called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m.

 

B.     ROLL CALL AND REVIEW OF STAFF ATTENDANCE

 

Members present:     Vice Chair Richard W. Constantine, Secretary Christopher K. Lawlor, Alternate Secretary Justin M. Hopkins, and Members Dylan Kosten, Jason A. Parker, and Joseph M. Montesano

 

Members absent:       Chair James A. Hall, IV

 

Staff present:             Assistant Solicitor for Planning & Zoning Atty. Scott Levesque, Town Planner Nancy Letendre, and Minute Taker Stephanie J. LaSota

 

C.    APPROVAL AND REVISION OF MINUTES

 

1. February 18, 2020 Regular Meeting – Mr. Montesano made a motion to approve as submitted the February 18, 2020 meeting minutes. Mr. Lawlor seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote. Mr. Constantine abstained as he was absent from the February 18 meeting.

 

D.    CHANGES TO THE AGENDA

Review, discussion, and possible action by the Planning Board on changes to the agenda, including known continuances and the order in which items will be heard.

 

Ms. Letendre recommended moving agenda item E 2 to later on the agenda before item F 5 so that the Board could first address matters from individual applicants. Mr. Hopkins made a motion to change the agenda as suggested by Ms. Letendre. Mr. Lawlor seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

 

E.     OLD BUSINESS

 

1. 2020-DPR-02: Ritacco-Mixed Use | (Rescheduled from March 17, 2020 )25 Railroad Avenue ﴾Assessor’s Plat 56, Lot 53﴿ Review, discussion and possible action and/or continuation to a future meeting by the Planning Board on combined Master and Preliminary Plan review of a Development Plan for a mixed-use building and Zoning Board recommendation.

 

Ms. Letendre reviewed the application for repurposing an existing two-story building. The Planning Board previously authorized combining the Master and Preliminary Plan sin February. Applicant Robert Ritacco was on the conference call, as well as his representative, Attorney William Nardone. Ms. Letendre shared the site plan on the screen. She said they would discuss parking and circulation and it will require a Variance. There is no existing parking, which is typical with Railroad Avenue buildings, she said. She said there is a condition of approval suggestion requiring that they receive the appropriate Zoning relief for the project. Atty. Nardone said it’s a simple plan and maybe in the future these types of matters won’t come before Board. He said there are only interior changes of adding a second-floor apartment. He said a Variance application is pending before the Zoning Board for the parking spots. There is no proposed landscaping or special features. He said the applicant is agreeable to the condition that if there is signage or lighting that they comply with the Zoning Ordinance or seek additional relief.

There was discussion on the parking spaces and who would be visiting the location. Atty. Nardone said it is currently a furniture consignment and remnant sales, with an upholstery business adjunct, and most work is done for one client. He said there will not be many visitors to the building. He said it is important to note that the prior use of the building was a church and they used both floors and had more traffic. Mr. Hopkins asked how the lot came to be and if there was any concern with the curb cut being in the middle of the property line. Atty. Nardone said it is existing and they haven’t proposed any changes to that. Mr. Hopkins said he understands it is existing and isn’t concerned about the existing parking spaces but even the three that are there are tight for the site. Mr. Parker referenced a provision in the Subdivision Regulations 261-21 for a waiver and aside from parking it seems right that it would qualify for a waiver of DPR (Development Plan Review.) Ms. Letendre said there is a draft motion available for the Board’s consideration. Mr. Constantine asked if there was any public comment. There were none.

Mr. Lawlor made a motion that the Westerly Planning Board grant Master and Preliminary Plan approval for Planning Case 2020-DPR-02: Ritacco-Mixed Use, 25 Railroad Avenue ﴾Assessor’s Plat 56, Lot 53﴿ and read into the record the draft motion as referenced by Ms. Letendre with the condition that the applicant receive a Zoning Variance for off-site parking. Atty. Levesque reminded the Board of a recommended condition that future signs and lights receive approval by the Zoning Board. Mr. Lawlor amended his motion as suggested by Atty. Levesque. Mr. Hopkins seconded the amended motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

 

2. 2019-ATC-06: Old Town Garage Sale | Rescheduled from March 17, 2020 (39A Beach Street | Assessor’s Map 76, Lot 69﴿ Review, discussion, and possible action and/or continuation to a future

meeting by the Planning Board on revised opinion on sale of public property.

 

This agenda item was discussed at 10:04 p.m. Ms. Letendre said there is currently a nonconforming use of the property and the Board should make a consideration with regard to if that type of use should continue. She said Town Council could abandon the use before sale which would result in having the property be something consistent with general commercial Zoning. She said she penned a recommendation that might be better to convert the parcel to HGR6 before it is sold. Mr. Montesano asked said he was struggling with the end of the second paragraph of the draft motion regarding uses. Ms. Letendre said she sees it more as an explanation rather than a preference for use. Mr. Kosten said calling it public parking is fine. Mr. Parker agreed with Mr. Montesano and asked where it was decided that highest and best use was a lot. Ms. Letendre said that’s not what they’re saying, they are only using that as an example of a use. Mr. Parker said he doesn’t think it is needed in the description.

At 10:00 p.m., Mr. Hopkins made a motion to extend the Planning Board meeting by 15 minutes. Mr. Kosten seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

Mr. Kosten said it seems like a unique opportunity to implement Form-based Code. Atty. Levesque said he’s failing to understand how some of the guidance in the prepared motion is needed. He said what will be done will be dictated by a future review process and he’s struggling with what the Council is debating. There was further discussion on the intention of the Town Council and Ms. Letendre amended the draft motion to read that Town Council could abandon the nonconforming use and any new use comply with the Zoning Ordinance. There was further discussion of the motion and more edits. Atty. Levesque explained that the motion is a positive recommendation to Town Council that this property be sold as it no longer serves public use, and prior to the sale, the nonconforming use to extent there are any, be abandoned before marketing the property. Mr. Parker said to delete the specific uses referenced in number two of the motion.

Mr. Montesano made the motion as stated by Atty. Levesque and edited by Ms. Letendre. Mr. Parker seconded the motion. In discussion, Mr. Lawlor clarified that the Council already voted to sell the property. Ms. Letendre said the Planning Board voted to authorize that but this specific motion is about the use. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.  

 

3. 2019-MNS-02: Manfredi Subdivision | (Rescheduled from April 21, 2020) (9 Sweet Corn Lane | Assessor’s Map 82, Lot 21﴿ Review, discussion and possible action on the Preliminary Plan of a Subdivision creating a rear lot for a single-family residence.

 

Attorney Kelly Fracassa was present on behalf of the applicant, Sandra Manfredi, who was also on the Zoom call. Engineer Tony Nenna of On-Site Engineering was also present. Atty. Fracassa said the plan evolved because the applicant has preliminary approval from the State Property Committee for a purchase of land in front of the home. He said any condition of approval should be that the purchase be completed. He said the applicants will meet all standards for the project if the land purchase is completed. Atty. Fracassa agreed with Ms. Letendre’s recommendations and requirements of approval.

Mr. Lawlor asked if they don’t get State approval if they must return to Planning and Zoning Boards. Ms. Manfredi said according to State sources they will be getting approval but there have been delays due to the Covid-19 pandemic. She said the closing date as supposed to be May 1 and they’ve already agreed on the price and are waiting for a new closing date and some documents from Mr. Nenna. Mr. Hopkins said this solution addresses his past concerns. Mr. Parker asked if the purchase of property needs to be put in a condition. Atty. Levesque directed the Board to page five of the prepared memo that adds condition 4; complete purchase of frontage lot from the State and they will have to return to the Planning Board if they cannot meet that.

Mr. Hopkins made a motion that the Westerly Planning Board approve the Preliminary Plan for Planning Case 2019-MNS-02: Manfredi Subdivision (9 Sweet Corn Lane | Assessor’s Map 82, Lot 21﴿ and read into the record the prepared draft motion, including conditions 1 through 5 as written and conditions 1 through 4 as amended. Mr. Montesano seconded the motion. In discussion, Mr. Lawlor said there was discussion with the Zoning Official about prior use of the rear of the property and staff recommended that it had to be residential use and not a gravel bank or timber field, etc. Ms. Manfredi said it hasn’t been used since the 1960s for that purpose. Atty. Fracassa said they agreed to that condition of approval. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

 

F.     NEW BUSINESS

 

1. 2020-DPR-06: 262 Post Road Redevelopment ﴾262 Post Road | Assessor’s Plat 112, Lot 24﴿ Review, discussion, and possible action and/or continuation to a future meeting by the Planning Board on request to combine Master & Preliminary stages of Development Plan Review.

 

Ms. Letendre introduced the project, which is at the former McDonald’s building on Post Road, as a redevelopment with the intent to share space with the existing South County Medical Building.  John Greim, principal at Alexey Development and Construction, LLC, was present on the call on behalf of the applicant. He said the company purchased the site in January and the intent is to construct another building next to 262 Post Road to make an ambulatory outpatient care center. He said they hired a team of engineers for the plan and filed an application to the Architectural Review Board (ARB) last week. He said the intent is to closely match and complement the neighboring building. He said they hope to prepare one application to combine two processes and return for the June Planning Board meeting.

Mr. Lawlor said he thinks it is a wonderful use of the property and it will enhance the look in the Town. Mr. Parker asked if June 16 gives the applicant enough time for the required materials. Mr. Greim said yes and they’ve already done a complete civil, landscape, photometric set and representative renderings, and a full set of elevations. He explained that their intention is to modify the existing Onsite Wastewater Treatment System (OWTS) and they already have a design by their civil engineer and will submit it to the Department of Environmental Management (DEM) for any modification to that system. Mr. Kosten said he thinks it complements the existing medical care building. Mr. Montesano suggested addressing pedestrian traffic between the properties. Mr. Greim said they have thought of putting in a marked cross walk with proper ramps and stairs. He added that the overflow parking is for employees. Mr. Montesano also suggested eliminating the entrance to the site from Post Road and using it as exit only to turn right onto Post Road, and having the building entrance be from Woody Hill Road.

Mr. Parker made a motion that the Westerly Planning Board authorize the combination of the Master and Preliminary Plan review for Planning Case 2020-DPR-06: 262 Post Road Redevelopment ﴾262 Post Road | Assessor’s Plat 112, Lot 24.) Mr. Montesano seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

 

2. 2020‐DPR‐03: Watch Hill Inn – Waiver ﴾38 Bay Street | Assessor’s Plat 179, Lot 101) (Rescheduled from March 17, 2020) Review, discussion, and possible action and/or continuation to a future meeting by the Planning Board on request to waiver Development Plan Review.

 

Architect Paul Azzinaro, principal of Azzinaro Larson Architects, Inc., was present at the meeting on behalf of the applicant. Ms. Letendre said there is a draft motion for the Board’s consideration. She explained that the project was for some architectural improvements at the rear of the building. She said there is a request to waive full the full DPR as there’s no site disturbance and all various aspects of the process could be waived. Mr. Azzinaro said it is newly acquired property. He described the location of the unit under discussion and the project proposed. He said the project will have to go through the condo association for its ultimate approval. There was discussion on the lighting involved in the plan. There was no public comment.

Mr. Kosten made a motion to waive DPR for planning case 2020‐DPR‐03: Watch Hill Inn – Waiver ﴾38 Bay Street | Assessor’s Plat 179, Lot 101) and read into the record the draft motion from the Planning Department. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lawlor. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

 

3. 2020‐DPR‐04: Master Plan – Turano-Morris Salon (8 Franklin Street| Assessor’s Map 77, Lot 403﴿ (Rescheduled from April 21, 2020) Review, discussion, and possible action and/or continuation to a future meeting by the Planning Board on Master Plan review of a Development Plan for renovation of a single-family dwelling to a salon.

 

Ms. Letendre explained the project to the Board. Applicant Liliana Turano Morris was present by phone on the Zoom conference. Architect Stephen Rogers and Engineer Tony Nenna were also on the call to represent the applicant. Ms. Letendre said as far as DPR goes, the vehicular access and circulation is a benefit in this matter to take traffic from Franklin Street and put on Wilson Street. She said the ARB discussed the project last week and they gave specific recommendations for the building and street trees. She said the ARB looked at the upper deck pergola area and back railings and suggested a more residential looking post for stair railings. They also suggested certain stucco detailing on the building and four deciduous trees along Franklin Street and one on Wilson Street.

Mr. Rogers said the design originally presented to ARB has evolved. He said they are proposing a steel and cable-like railing for the front stairs and for the upper deck and pergola. He said he consulted with his client and considered the ARB recommendations for the bolder corner posts and banding on the building and he suggested not fulling adopting those features. He said the building would still keep with the characteristics of the area with its original sleek and modern design. Mr. Rogers described the changes that he did make to the plan and showed screen images of original renderings and how it evolved with some ARB suggestions. He showed three examples of similar architectural style as their proposed project.

Mr. Nenna, an engineer with On-Site Engineering, reviewed the site plan. He said the front porch is becoming living space and the rear area will get a canopy. There is a significant gravel area in the back and the curb cut onto Wilson Street is about 75 feet wide. He said they will shorten it to the standard 24 feet for two cars to pass. He said the sight lines are in excess of 100 feet both ways. He said the proposed lot is for 12 spaces, which meets current Zoning regulations. He explained the proposed stormwater system, as well as the proposed lighting plan for the lot. He said there is a proposed sidewalk in back of main entry and a little walkway on the south end of building.  

Landscape Architect Brian Kent showed the Board a screen of the proposed landscape plan. He said above and below ground infrastructure was plugged into the design. He said they worked to match the landscaping style to the architecture with a clean aesthetic with horizontal geometry. He said there are no foundation plants or residential looking landscaping. Mr. Kent said the design is very clean and simple with low growing plants across the front so the architecture can be revealed to Franklin Street. In response to the ARB request to add trees along Franklin Street, he said the overhead aerial utility lines are dense along the frontage and they can’t plant anything under the wires that will amount to a good street tree. He said they can plant shade trees away from the sidewalk so that they frame the building and not block it. He said they can plant another tree on Wilson Street by the parking lot, saying Scarlet Oaks will do quite well. He said a significant buffer of mostly evergreen shrubs and small trees is planned for the neighbor to the south, which will give mutually beneficial privacy.

Mr. Lawlor asked if a gravel lot would help with drainage. Mr. Nenna said the main reason for paving is for snow plowing and for handicap accessibility and the stormwater plan for the lot is adequate to handle any runoff. Mr. Hopkins asked if exterior windows would be replaced. Mr. Rogers said yes. The basement level would be lowered by one foot and be a usable space for code for ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) accessible space. Mr. Rogers clarified that most clients will drive to the site and will use the rear entrance, but they wanted to maintain the connection to Franklin Street and keep a front entrance there, as well. Mr. Hopkins provided further comments on the design aesthetic. Mr. Kosten said he thinks it will be an improvement for Franklin Street and the landscape plan does a good job addressing the trees, utility lines, and architecture proposed. Mr. Montesano asked Mr. Rogers about the finish on the home and he said it would be a smooth or limestone finish. Mr. Montesano said they had a good landscape plan response to ARB requests. He recommended to Mr. Nenna that 3,000 kilowatt bulbs be used in the parking lot lights to keep a softer light similar to existing street lights and that they not be on the entire night. Mr. Nenna agreed and said he would discuss this with the client and lighting company. Mr. Constantine commented on the applicants’ intention to bridge the gap between residential and commercial buildings in that area. Mr. Rogers said they wanted to keep in the character of neighborhood and keep client’s modern vision. There was no public comment.

Mr. Montesano made a motion to approve with conditions the application for Planning Case 2020‐DPR‐04: Master Plan – Turano-Morris Salon (8 Franklin Street| Assessor’s Map 77, Lot 403﴿ and read into record the prepared motion from the Town Planner, including an additional condition that the site lighting include Lumineers that are 3,000 kilowatts versus the proposed 4,000 kilowatt bulbs. Mr. Lawlor seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

Mr. Montesano made a motion that the Westerly Planning Board render a favorable advisory to the Zoning Board on Planning Case 2020‐DPR‐04: Master Plan – Turano-Morris Salon (8 Franklin Street| Assessor’s Map 77, Lot 403﴿ and read into the record the details of the drafted motion by the Town Planner. Mr. Hopkins seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

 

4. 2020‐DPR‐05: Master Plan – Ground Mounted Solar Installation (47 Quarry Road | Assessor’s Map 55, Lot 3﴿ (Rescheduled from April 21, 2020) Review, discussion, and possible action and/or continuation to a future meeting by the Planning Board on Master Plan review of a Development Plan for a ground mounted solar installation.

 

Ms. Letendre said this is another Centrica Business Solutions installation and reviewed the details of the project. She said the Town Engineer requested that the stormwater, soil erosion and wastewater control plan information be shared with him at the time of Preliminary Plan review and he receive a copy of the submission package sent to DEM on the RIPDES (Rhode Island Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permit. She said the applicant is requesting certain State permits be waived until after Preliminary Plan review, which involves the RIPDES permit and interconnection agreement.

Representing the applicant on the call was Sergio Cherenzia, engineer and Principal of Cherenzia & Associates, LTD, as well as his associate Teresa Transue, and Attorney William Nardone. Atty. Nardone said the total site is 35 acres and the solar array site will be 7.5 acres. He said they are requesting Master Plan approval and a favorable advisory to the Zoning Board for a Special Use Permit application. Ms. Transue shared a screen of the site plan. Mr. Cherenzia explained the details of the property, which is Zoned in an RR-60 Zone. He said the abutting properties are in an MDR30 Zone and Light Industrial Zone. He said they are not in any overlay districts, but there are State regulated wetlands on the property. Ms. Transue showed that area on the map. There was further description of the property and driveway entry.

Mr. Lawlor asked about map with wetland delineations that shows current homes and roads. Mr. Cherenzia further described the abutting properties and the interconnection of utility poles on Quarry Road. There was discussion about the stone walls on the property. Mr. Hopkins asked how the clearing of forested area uphill of the wetlands may affect that habitat. Mr. Cherenzia said when they need to mitigate for solar panels, they abide by stormwater regulations. He said the protocol is taking a wooded area and switching to grass area or less vegetation. He said there will be less water drawn up because of this, but ground underneath the panels is pervious. He said the naturally wooded area will be the same type of soil ground but grass instead of trees. He said the attenuation loss is accounted for in stormwater calculations. Mr. Cherenzia added that they don’t have to mitigate the water quality to the wetlands, but only the discharge quantity. He said he doesn’t anticipate altering the wetlands with the site plan design.

Mr. Parker referenced language in the Solar Ordinance that the clearing of forests or woodlands should be avoided and asked how this project meets that requirement if there is no existing cleared area on the property. He said he was confused about the Ordinance wording to avoid clearing to the “maximum extent possible” while it also reads “clearing shall be avoided.” There was further discussion on the wording of the Ordinance. Mr. Montesano agreed with Mr. Parker but said he is struggling with the application since the other land on the site is not usable for the solar arrays. Atty. Levesque said normally under law the word “shall” is a command but the problem with the referenced phrase is it is prefaced by “to the greatest extent practicable” and that negates “shall.” Mr. Kosten said land use is already split between areas that can or can’t be developed. He said he is unsure if they can tell the land owner what to do if it is State approved. Mr. Kosten said there are other ecosystems besides forest and it could be difficult to prioritize forest over other areas. He said that perhaps this application points to Westerly applying some science to these applications. Mr. Constantine said if they decide to rule against the application will they encourage similar property owners to clear their property first before coming in with an application. Atty. Levesque said that is a risk Town’s run because people can do that.

Mr. Montesano asked if the applicant would put a conservation easement on the remainder of the land for green space in perpetuity as a condition of approval. Mr. Parker said they cannot do a lot with the land anyway because of the wetlands and the buffers associated with the solar array. Mr. Cherenzia said the wetlands extend over the remainder of the property. Mr. Kosten said if that easement becomes a reality it would tie nicely into the existing area in Woody Hill and the Bradford Preserve, which is already heavily used by the public for recreation.

Ms. Letendre said they need to come to a conclusion on the topic before moving forward with the application. She said they received comments from the Engineering Department late this week and if you decide to approve it with conditions, she will substitute the proposed motion on the screen with the most recent conditions of approval. Mr. Constantine suggested the Board vote and said the Town is trying to encourage these projects while discouraging them on farmland or clearing land for them. Ms. Letendre reminded that this will be an advisory to the Zoning Board, which will have the final say so the Board can make its concerns known in the motion. Mr. Hopkins said there is a lack of clarity in the regulations. Ms. Letendre read the discussed excerpt from the Solar Ordinance. Mr. Kosten made suggestions for amendments to the Solar Ordinance, for example percentages of land used for solar arrays. He said his opinion is they can’t tell the applicant that they can’t cut down trees on the land so they might as well grant approval for the green energy. Mr. Montesano said they are using 100 percent of the forested space on the property, which is a travesty. There was further discussion on land and protected areas.

Mr. Constantine asked if the proposed size of the solar array could be made smaller and still be economically viable for the applicant. Mr. Cherenzia said it is not economical to decrease the size of the array. There may be some small concessions in regard to stormwater mitigation, but nothing substantial, he said. Mr. Cherenzia said the Westerly Solar Ordinance states not more than 22.5 percent of the lot can be solar arrays. He said this project only covers 11.4 percent of the impervious cover and they still have vegetation under the arrays. He said the 7.5 acres out of the 35-acre lot is only 20 percent of the lot. He said the lot was not picked at random and the owner is conscious of picking the site based on location and abutters. He said there is around 2,000 acres of open space surrounding the site and land that’s protected by the State cannot be developed whether there’s a conservation easement or not. Mr. Cherenzia argued that the project is reasonable. He said the first condition of approval said the applicant shall secure all necessary relief from the Zoning Board and he’s not sure if relief is the right word, but the applicant will need a Special Use Permit and Aquifer Protection Permit from the Zoning Board once it has the Planning Board advisory. Ms. Letendre noted the change.  

Mr. Lawlor made a motion that the Westerly Planning Board grant Master Plan approval with conditions for Planning Case 2020‐DPR‐05: Master Plan – Ground Mounted Solar Installation (47 Quarry Road | Assessor’s Map 55, Lot 3﴿ and read into the record the prepared motion along with four conditions as emailed by the Town Engineer. There was discussion of the condition with the interconnection agreement. Atty. Levesque said Preliminary Plan approval can be conditioned on the Town receiving those items; “Preliminary Plan submission will not require submission of RIPDES or interconnection agreement.” Mr. Hopkins seconded the motion. In discussion, Mr. Montesano wanted clarity on if the applicant was willing to make a conservation easement on the remainder of the property and recommended it be a condition of approval. Mr. Cherenzia said the applicant was present on the call but he could not make a commitment to that and would need to sit down with the Westerly Land Trust and would consider it at Preliminary Plan. Mr. Montesano said that would satisfy him at this time. Mr. Lawlor made a motion to amend his previous motion with the condition to require the applicant to address a possible conservation easement for the remainder of property to be further discussed at Preliminary Plan approval. Mr. Hopkins seconded the amended motion. In a vote of the Planning Board, the motion CARRIED 5 to 1 with Mr. Parker voting no due to the language in the Solar Ordinance, which he said must guide the review process.

Atty. Levesque suggested adding to the next Planning Board agenda discussion on possibly amending the Solar Ordinance.

Mr. Lawlor made a motion to render a favorable recommendation to the Zoning Board on the merits of Planning Case 2020‐DPR‐05: Master Plan – Ground Mounted Solar Installation (47 Quarry Road | Assessor’s Map 55, Lot 3﴿ with all amended conditions as reviewed by the Planning Board. Mr. Kosten seconded the motion. There was further discussion on the conditions of the advisory opinion to the Zoning Board and suggestions made for edits. Mr. Lawlor agreed and made a motion to add the amendments to his original motion. Mr. Montesano seconded amended motion. In a vote of the Planning Board, the motion CARRIED 5 to 1 with Mr. Parker voting no.

At 10:00 p.m., Mr. Kosten made a motion to extend the Planning Board meeting to 10:30 p.m. Mr. Hopkins seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

 

5. 2020-ATC-01: Pet Day Care Facility Use Code Review, discussion, and possible action by the Planning Board on a proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance establishing a use code and defining Pet Day Care Facility.

 

Ms. Letendre referenced distributed documents Exhibit A Revised and Exhibit B, which were in the Planning Board’s prepared packets. She said the amendment is intended to distinguish a pet day care facility from a kennel or boarding of animals. She said the idea is it could serve Westerly residents and there’s no over night accommodations. She said it is consistent with diversification of services to support the seasonal economy and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Letendre shared a proposed motion with the Board. Mr. Hopkins asked how it differed from a pet grooming facility. Ms. Letendre said there will not be medical or grooming work and the pets will simply come to play, interact and be given food, water, and shelter. She said it is a cage-free daycare for all domestic animals during daytime hours. There was further discussion on the accessory uses of the facility and other domestic pets besides cats and dogs. Mr. Lawlor said he can see the use in a commercial area but not a low-density residential (LDR) area. Mr. Kosten asked for clarity on the Zone. Ms. Letendre said LDR is 40,000 square feet up to 60,000 square feet. She said outside runs would need to be approved under Special Use Permit. There was discussion of the noise requirement of 45 decibels which is low.

Ms. Letendre shared a draft motion with the Board.

Mr. Montesano made a motion to make a favorable recommendation to the Town Council on drafted amendments to the Pet Day Care Facility Use Code and read into the record the prepared motion by the Town Planner. The motion was seconded by Mr. Kosten. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with the abstentions.  

 

6. Comprehensive Community Plan: 2020-2040 The Planning Board will review, discuss and may act on and/or continue the discussion on rescheduling of the public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan and progress to date; the revised Part II and Implementation.

 

Ms. Letendre said a public hearing is rescheduled to June 2 and Monday of next week it will be advertised in the newspaper and the revised plan will be available on the Town Web site. Mr. Parker said he is available for a meeting on June 2 but not June 9. She said a continuance of the June 2 hearing will be on June 9. She also confirmed a quorum for the June 16 meeting and said she would circulate all the dates via email to the Board.

 

 

G.    ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER'S REPORT

 

1. Administrative Actions Report on the following administrative decisions, extensions and/or other actions of the Administrative Officer taken from February 12, 2020 to May 12, 2020:

·         Approval of a Final Plan Amendment – Brodco Subdivision

·         Approval of a Final Plan Amendment – Gowen Subdivision

·         Approval of a Final Plan – Parking lot at 1 Commerce Street

·         Approval of a Final Plan –Cinder Restaurant

·         Approval of an Administrative Subdivision – Gencarelli Subdivision

 

There was no discussion on the Administrative Officer’s report.

 

H.    CONFIRMATION OF NEXT REGULAR MEETING DATE - June 16, 2020

 

I.       ADJOURNMENT

 

Mr. Lawlor made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:32 p.m. Mr. Parker seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.  

 

Respectfully submitted:

Stephanie J. LaSota Minute Taker

 

Approved by vote of the Board on June 16, 2020