/p>

 

Planning Board – Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, September 15, 2020 - 6:00 p.m.

 

*Pursuant to Governor Gina M. Raimondo’s Executive Order 20-25, dated April 15, 2020, this meeting was held in person and electronically via Zoom and was publicly advertised.

 

Council Chambers, Westerly Town Hall
45 Broad Street, Westerly, RI 02891

 

 

A. CALL TO ORDER

Mr. Hall called the meeting to order at 6:08 p.m. Mr. Hall noted that there are three vacancies on the Board

 

B. ROLL CALL AND ATTENDANCE

 

Members present:           Chair James A. Hall, IV, Vice Chair Richard W. Constantine, Secretary Christopher K. Lawlor, Alternate Secretary Justin Hopkins, and Member Joseph M. Montesano

 

Members absent:             None.

 

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

 

C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

 

1.      August 18, 2020 Regular Meeting – Ms. LaSota noted that a citizen’s name spelling needed to be corrected under the Tower Street School Community Center (TSSCC) public comment section. Mr. Montesano made a motion to approve the August 18, 2020 Planning Board minutes as corrected. Mr. Constantine seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

 

2.      Discussion regarding posting of approved minutes for June 16, 2020 - Ms. Letendre explained that the incorrect version of the June 16, 2020 minutes was uploaded to the Town of Westerly Web site, causing confusion to the public. It was discussed that the Planning Board did approve the correct version of the June 16 minutes at the August 18 meeting, however the Minute Taker accidentally published the uncorrected version. Ms. LaSota apologized for the error.

 

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 suggested moving item F1 to the first order of business. Mr. Montesano made the motion to move Tower Street School Community Center, item F1, to the first order of Planning Board business. Mr. Lawlor seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

 

E. OLD BUSINESS

 

1.      2020-ATC-04: Tower Street School – Recommendation to Town Council (83 Tower Street | Assessor’s Map 58, Lot 186) Review, discussion, and possible action and/or continuation to a future meeting by the Planning Board on request for Recommendation to the Town Council on Sale of the Property.

Ms. Letendre reminded the Board that TSSCC discussion was a continuation from two other meetings and staff has provided financial information received September 4, 2020 for the Board’s review. She said they would like more guidance from the Board on how to proceed. It was discussed that the original question the Board was asked to assess is whether or not TSSCC has become unsuitable or has ceased to be used for public purposes.

Mr. Constantine said based on the financial information they received from the Town Planner, it appears the building itself is not sufficiently maintained and because of its age and construction, it would not be considered useful for school or possibly any activities and costs appear to be prohibitive. He said he would have to agree with the recommendations and decisions of the Finance Board and School Board to allow the Town Council to sell if that’s what they decide. Mr. Lawlor said the center was not closed because it was unsuitable, but because the school wanted it off their budget. He quoted from an August 6, 2020 document that the “majority of programs and services of TSSCC were active until the most recent transaction… programs were in high demand and would have continued had school not been closed.” He said his concern is if it were continuing there wouldn’t be a concern of suitability of property. He said it is not true that the parcel was “unsuitable” and he thinks it is valuable to the Town and community and he is not sure it meets the standard to deem it unsuitable. Mr. Montesano said he agreed with Mr. Lawlor, adding he believes he couldn’t in good conscience deem TSSCC unsuitable for public use. He said he has been involved with commercial real estate and residential development for decades and spent 35 years building a reputation of helping to create public-private partnerships and the fact that this subject is before them is heartbreaking. The testimony heard last time on the record further emphasizes the notion the building should be sustained for the public good, he said. Mr. Montesano said that it is suitable for public use and he has come to the conclusion that due to the actions of the Town it has ceased to be used for public use and that is reprehensible. Mr. Montesano shared his thoughts in a written note, which was marked as Board’s Exhibit 1. Mr. Hall shared Exhibit 1 via email with the Board members joining the meeting via Zoom. Ms. Letendre said there is a site plan associated with Exhibit 1 that she held up to the screen. Mr. Montesano shared his idea of selling 7.5 acres of land to the east of TSSCC for development and using the proceeds of the sale for a capital fund for renovations or demolishing and rebuilding TSSCC, if that is deemed necessary. He said he has gone to the property many times and every time he has gone there have been people playing tennis or basketball and to take this away would be a travesty.

Tina Scofield, owner of At Home Science, LLC, 10D Canal Street, Westerly, said she has been a TSSCC community partner since 2012. She said the youth in Westerly need options like the TSSCC. She said she has seen wonderful changes in some of the students that come in in terms of increased confidence, social skills, and education. Ms. Scofield said these are services that benefit everyone in the community. She said parents rely on programming so they can work, as well. She listed many other business partnerships of TSSCC and shared the benefits of a community center on local health and culture. She said if the building is deemed unacceptable then they have to come up with another project and if (the Town) loses these programs it will see a dramatic decrease of morale in the community. She thanked the Board for their time.

Maxon Hence, president and co-founder of the Ayers Foundation, said his foundation was named after his great grandfather born in 1872 who ran a dairy farm that he currently farms at 6 Haversham Road. He said the foundation began in 2010 in memory of his great grandfather and works with nonprofits and local organizations on a shared mission with education at the forefront.  He said they partnered with TSSCC and agreed with Ms. Scofield’s comments that TSSCC has filled gaps that public education leaves in the community and that makes Westerly whole. He said it seems all are in agreement that the building is not unsuitable and nor is there any data to prove that. Mr. Hence said he is disconcerted with how TSSCC came to be in this place today and if it had been properly handled, they wouldn’t be here tonight deliberating this. He asked for someone from the Board to share how the TSSCC is congruent with the Comprehensive Plan. He asked if it is doing a disservice to achieving the Comprehensive Plan by doing away with the property. Mr. Hence asked Ms. Letendre to share a video he emailed to her earlier in the day. Mr. Tate searched for the video. He said TSSCC is a magnet for partnerships and for grants. He said grant information was shared with the Board. He said there are partnership letters he can share. Mr. Hall urged Mr. Hence to submit all evidence as Town Council will be making the final decision. Mr. Hence said we all understand that people need a place to live but developers must be creative with the kinds of homes they build and they don’t necessarily need to take open space that is in the middle of Town and providing a clean area, recreation, and services to residents. Mr. Hall said there are three openings on the Planning Board and encouraged him Mr. Hence to apply. Mr. Hence commented that Town residents may not have the same amount of money as those who live outside of Town but they still have an inalienable right to quality of life. The Board played a video created by the Ayers Foundation on the merits of TSSCC featuring testimony from various program staff at the facility. Mr. Hence said he wanted to add more elements to the video and will continue to edit it and share with the Town Council. Mr. Hall said the council will review the evidence and suggested they gather as much as possible. Mr. Hence said they have nearly 1,000 signatures on a petition via change.org and it was sent to the Town Planner.

Gina Fuller, of 19 Moriah Drive, Westerly, former Westerly School Committee member, former Citizen’s Advisory Committee member for the Comprehensive Plan, and current district manager of Southern Rhode Island Conservation District (SRICD), shared her background with the Board. She said she has been working with Mr. Hence and SRICD submitted a grant some time ago while working with Westerly Recreation Department and it the certified organic garden at TSSCC was something the new Recreation Director was very interested in. The grant would provide staffing and programming could be for free or for a fee and the fee could offset other costs. She said one thing she spoke about with other program managers was a public-private partnership, for example, opening a daycare facility is one way to provide funding. Ms. Fuller said TSSCC shows a lot of opportunity. She said she was only able to quickly look at what information was provided for tonight and she doesn’t think the financial information provided was complete. She said there were program revenues generated by the Westerly Recreation Department that may not have been accounted. Ms. Fuller clarified that the cost they are looking at for upgrading the building is the cost of creating an elementary school for 350 children to Rhode Island Department of Education standards. She further discussed the ways partnerships and organizations could help generate funds and that outdoor recreation programs in the summer could use TSSCC as indoor facilities on rain days. Ms. Fuller commented on that the new Comprehensive Plan looks great and it took a lot of work but it doesn’t include working families and children at all and she feels it is geared toward an elderly aging population. She said she felt that kids and families were not considered in the plan. She said a vital community center, like the Stonington Community Center (COMO), is a way to attract families with young children.

Mr. Lawlor said he liked Ms. Fuller’s comments on numbers because he found it confusing to figure out how much money was needed to sustain programs. He said a community center brings a Town together and there are too many things keeping the public apart and it is not something they can just throw away.

Mr. Constantine said his feeling is he is in complete agreement with the need for all these programs and he thinks it is important that the Town try to help the facility but he has a question if the building is up to standard for the uses, how much will it cost and how does it get paid for. He does not have enough information to make a recommendation one way or another. He would recommend that the Town Council have a taskforce to get to bottom of those issues.

Mr. Hall asked Ms. Fuller if she heard Mr. Montesano’s thoughts. Mr. Montesano reviewed his previous recommendation shared earlier in the meeting. Ms. Fuller said the forested area was a quarry at one time on the Tower Street side and a large portion receives storm water from a northern development so she doesn’t believe that there are 11 developable acres there. Mr. Montesano said in order to determine the feasibility they have to move forward. Ms. Fuller said she doesn’t think that it will be an option. She said if it were a public-private partnership, the benefit is there is no mortgage and the renters could generate income to provide janitorial and maintenance staff or a director. She said the recreation courts are used constantly and they are accessible to many people. Ms. Fuller said if the Town were able to have a building to offer affordable recreation to the community that would be a great benefit to the Town. 

There was further discussion on the operating costs for school employees in the TSSCC budget and a conversation about possible Town staff involvement in a public-private partnership.

Mr. Hence shared his thoughts about creating a public-private partnership and the quality of the open space on the parcel. Mr. Hopkins entered the meeting at 7:31 p.m. He said he has been listening in the meeting since 6:15 p.m. Mr. Hopkins said there is something to Mr. Montesano’s proposal and said a good first step would be considering a private-public partnership. Mr. Montesano recommended that Mr. Hence outline an economic proposal to the Town Council on the TSSCC. Mr. Hence said he is happy to put something together and added that the Ayers Foundation doesn’t have a mission to own buildings or administer human services, but would like to work with Ms. Fuller and others to establish a new non-government organization to enter into a public-private partnership with the Town on behalf of TSSCC.

Ms. Fuller addressed the condition of the building saying a new roof or at least portions of a new roof were built on TSSCC in the last eight years. She said the entire area was paved last summer and believes a boiler was installed during her tenure and lots of technological infrastructure was installed, as well. She said it only needed to be demolished if it were to be made into a school.

There was no further public comment.

Mr. Constantine said he still had questions on maintenance costs and thinks a small team should be created to get those answers. He said he doesn’t think the Planning Board or Town Council has enough information to make a decision about selling. Mr. Lawlor agreed. He said it doesn’t seem Town Council gave enough consideration to the community benefits of TSSCC.

Mr. Hopkins said for him this property has never necessarily been about the condition of the school. He said the Town Council can’t be asking the Planning Board to do all the creative work to create a solution and he agreed a group needs to be formed to do this and given time, as well.

            Mr. Montesano read into the record Board’s Exhibit 1, including Findings of Fact as written and made a motion to recommend the three following items to the Town Council; 1. To best meet the goals of the Comprehensive Plan, the public need of the community and, the need for housing options, the Planning Board recommends that a 7.5 acre portion of the parcel be marketed for residential development consistent with the High Density Residential (HDR-6) Zoning District. 2. The Planning Board recommends that the proceeds from the sale of the land be placed in a capital fund to be used for the rehabilitation of the existing community center or, the future development of a new smaller 20,000 sf community center on the remaining 3.5 acres of land which is to be held for public use. Outdoor recreational facilities such as basketball and tennis courts, public gardens and play grounds currently located on the property should be re-established on the remaining public parcel. 3. Develop a task force to determine the feasibility of using the existing building or if necessary, demolish the existing building and constructing a new building on the site. Mr. Hopkins seconded the motion.

In discussion, Mr. Hall said he finds the motion generally favorable but questions if the land serves a public good and a public need and he thinks it does. He said he would vote in favor with the caveat that the exact mechanics of the proposal be explored further but he thinks the findings are sound and the Town Council has the final decision. Mr. Constantine said he thinks the recommendation is sufficient to make it a viable proposal to Town Council. Mr. Lawlor said he agreed they have to give council options to look at and pursue and hopefully this will bring together various people in the community with background and expertise to come to a conclusion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

 

2.      2019-MJLD-07: 60 Ledward Avenue –Master Plan Review (60 Ledward Avenue | Assessor’s Plat 68, Lot 74) ~~~~ WITHDRAWN BY APPLICANT~~~~ no further review required.

 

Ms. Letendre said for the record all abutting neighbors have been contacted regarding the withdrawal of the application as it was an advertised public hearing.

 

F. NEW BUSINESS

 

1.      2018-MJLDP-Ext: 51 Franklin Street Office-Residential Development – (51 Franklin Street | Assessor’s Plat 87, Lots 146 & 147; Assessor’s Plat 88, Lots 24 & 25) Review, discussion, and possible action and/or continuation to a future meeting by the Planning Board on request for Master Plan Extension of a mixed office-residential development.

 

Ms. Letendre said she recommended the two-year Master Plan approval extension because it is a good project and she would hate to see them lose the opportunity to move to the Preliminary Plan stage. Atty. Levesque said the extension is by right as an applicant gets two one-year extensions by right but this applicant is requesting both now and will make his case.

Paul Azzinaro, architect and principal of Azzinaro Larson Architects, Inc., 108 Airport Road, requested the letter he sent to the Planning Office be read into the minutes. Mr. Montesano read into the record the letter dated August 31, 2020 from the applicant, Southern New England Real Estate Development, Inc., for 51 Franklin Street. The letter requested the Master Plan approval granted November 30, 2018 set to expire at the end of October 2020 be extended. The letter was marked as applicant’s Exhibit 1.   

            Mr. Montesano made a motion to approve the Master Plan approval extension request of Planning Case 2018-MJLDP-Ext: 51 Franklin Street Office-Residential Development – (51 Franklin Street | Assessor’s Plat 87, Lots 146 & 147; Assessor’s Plat 88, Lots 24 & 25) and read into the record the legal motion. Mr. Lawlor seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

 

2.      Development Plan Review Procedures Discussion - Review, discussion, and continuation to a future meeting by the Planning Board on Development Plan Review application form and revised procedures for implementing the anticipated new Zoning Ordinance.

 

Ms. Letendre explained to the Board that Section 14 of the Zoning Ordinance applying to Development Plan Review (DPR) was presented to them. She said she and Department of Development Services (DDS) Director Lisa Pellegrini have worked to create proposed application forms for DPR. Along with the application packet there would be a checklist, she said. Ms. Letendre added there is a light agenda for October so far so she would like to work with the legal counsel and come back with a first draft of subdivision regulation amendments for the Board’s review in October. Mr. Montesano said he is interested in having information included on how administrative decisions are made. Mr. Hopkins said there are some review stages that are helpful for the Board and sometimes when review stages are combined the submission requirements aren’t as thorough. Mr. Constantine and Mr. Lawlor said they were fine with the plan. Mr. Hall asked if professionals submitted project applications have been consulted regarding the changes to the forms. Ms. Letendre said not yet but that is the plan.

 

3.      2020 Comprehensive Plan Town Council Revisions Discussion - Review, discussion, and possible action and/or continuation to a future meeting by the Planning Board on the Town Council’s revisions to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan and public hearing preparation.

 

Ms. Letendre said she sent the Board a link to the Comprehensive Plan posted today. She said there will be a Town Council public hearing on the plan on October 6. Ms. Letendre said between August and September Town Council work sessions, some revisions were made and it was very encouraging. She said most of the discussion was consistent with the policies and goals under discussion and was well-received. There was some discussion on various sections of the plan.

 

4.      Future Priorities of the Planning Board - Discussion and scheduling of a future Work Session to prioritize and sequence changes to zoning ordinance and subdivision regulations outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. Possible Work Session Date – Tuesday October 27, 2020

 

Mr. Hall asked if this could be added to the October meeting to see how it goes and pick a date reflective of the process. Ms. Letendre asked if she could circulate some dates in early November. The Board agreed.

 

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 August 18, 2020 to September 19, 2020:

· Approval of an Administrative Subdivision – 13 Ayers Road | AP 134, Lot 2

· Approval of an Administrative Subdivision – Manfredi Subdivision | AP 82, Lot 21

 

Ms. Letendre provided further details on the administrative decisions listed in the officer’s report. She reviewed the upcoming Comprehensive Plan public hearing schedule.

 

H. CONFIRMATION OF QUORUM FOR NEXT REGULAR MEETING

 

1.      October 20, 2020 Regular Meeting - Members of the Planning Board are asked to notify the Administrative Officer if they will not be present at the next regular meeting. Quorum confirmed.

 

Mr. Lawlor said the Planning Board needs to push Town Council to review Planning Board applications as he has learned some applicants have still not been contacted. Mr. Hall said he will make another call tomorrow and he did recently discuss it with the Town Manager.

 

I. ADJOURNMENT

 

Mr. Montesano made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:25 p.m. Mr. Lawlor 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 October 20, 2020