Click to view the entire meeting or click any video icon below to jump to that section of the meeting.

Planning Board – Meeting Minutes

Tuesday, January 16, 2024 - 6:00 p.m.

Westerly Town Hall | Town Council Chambers

45 Broad Street, Westerly, RI 02891

A. CALL TO ORDER –

Mr. Hopkins called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m.

B. ROLL CALL AND ATTENDANCE

Members present: Chair Justin M. Hopkins, and Secretary Andrew Delisio, Members Christopher Lawlor, Matthew O’Neil, and Auxiliary Member Karen Lentz Madison

Members absent: Vice Chair Richard W. Constantine and Member James Hall IV

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

Mr. Hopkins welcomed Mr. Lawlor back to the Planning Board as a member. Mr. Lawlor previously served on the Board.

1. November 7, 2023 – Ms. Lentz-Madison made a motion to approve as submitted the November 7, 2023 Planning Board meeting minutes. Mr. Delisio seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with an abstention from Mr. Lawlor.

2. November 14, 2023 – Ms. Lentz-Madison made a motion to approve as submitted the November 14, 2023 Planning Board meeting minutes. Mr. Delisio seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with an abstention from Mr. Lawlor.

3. December 5, 2023 – Ms. Lentz-Madison made a motion to approve as submitted the December 5, 2023 Planning Board meeting minutes. Mr. Delisio seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with an abstention from Mr. Lawlor.

D. CHANGES TO THE AGENDA –

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

Mr. Hopkins sought a motion to move agenda items F2 and F3 to F1 and F2 under New Business. Mr. O’Neil made a motion to change the agenda as requested by the chairman. Mr. Lawlor seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

E. OLD BUSINESS

1. 2023-LMIH-03– Combined Master & Preliminary Plan Review – Comprehensive Permit – Trendsetter Multifamily Residential (26 and 28 School Street | Assessor’s Map 66, Lots 91 & 91A. Continuation of the review by the Planning Board on a Revised Master & Preliminary Plan review of a Comprehensive Permit for multi-family development of 42 apartments with 25% (11 units) up to 80% AMI. Public hearing has been closed. Deliberations will be concluded, and a decision will be made by the Planning Board.

Ms. Letendre reviewed that the hearing was closed on December 5 and the consensus of the Planning Board was to issue an approval with conditions. She asked the Board to review the draft decision written by staff and discuss any suggested changes on the record. She said the official record of the hearing would benefit from a poll of the Board and any member voting against should note the reasons why. The draft motion was 15 pages long.

Attorney William Nardone was present on behalf of the applicant. He added to the record a letter dated January 16, 2024 addressed to the chairman of the Planning Board. He read it into the record and gave a copy to Atty. Levesque. Atty. Levesque marked the letter as the next applicant’s exhibit on record. Atty. Levesque suggested the Board acted within the statutory timeframe of the application and there had been no quorum for the December meeting. Atty. Nardone commented on some items within the written motion. His recollection of the discussion regarding Architectural Review Board (ARB) revisitation was that it was prior to phase 2 construction and not any construction as written. He asked for clarification on the suggestion of returning to the ARB as noted on page 7 of the motion. Ms. Letendre said her concern is that the ARB has not seen the new design of the second building or the changes to the addition. The Board had discussion on the matter and suggested that condition would go in section 2 of performance requirements for prior to phase 2 construction.

Atty. Levesque suggested the Board mark the Planning Office staff’s draft motion in the January 3, 2024 memorandum to the Planning Board as Board’s Exhibit 1 with amendments and any motion made can incorporate any facts, findings, conclusions and conditions of Board’s Exhibit 1 as amended in discussion this evening.

Mr. O’Neil made a motion that the Planning Board approve the draft motion as written in Board’s Exhibit 1 and as amended in discussion. Mr. Delisio seconded the motion. In a poll vote, Mr. O’Neil, Ms. Lentz-Madison, Mr. Delisio, and Mr. Hopkins all voted yes to the project. Mr. Lawlor abstained from voting on the project as he was absent from previous hearings. The motion CARRIED.

F. NEW BUSINESS

1. 2023-DPR-06 –Development Plan Review – Eminel Holdings, LLC (24 Frontage Road | Assessor’s Map 49, Lot 36B) Review, discussion, and possible action by the Planning Board. The application proposes a new 3200 sf building for storage of topsoil, screened loam and crushed stone, and employee area, with an associated septic system and well, as well as operations including screening of loam and rock crushing onsite with the existing open lot storage of gravel.

Attorney Kelly Fracassa and project engineer Patricia Walker were present on behalf of the application. Atty. Fracassa described the property as 8 acres in size in an industrial site. He said the building will comply with all building requirements and they seek a recommendation from the Planning Board regarding a special use permit from the Zoning Board. Ms. Letendre and Ms. Lentz-Madison left the meeting at 6:25 p.m. during discussion.

Mr. O’Neil questioned the Rhode Island Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (RIPDES) permit note on noncompliance on site operations and the maintenance plan. Ms. Walker further described the project. Mr. Delisio said he visited the area and said it is a great site for the project. Mr. Lawlor asked about materials to be stored on the property. Ms. Lentz-Madison returned to the meeting at 6:34 p.m. The applicant, Frank Terese, was also present for the application. He described the procedure and activity planned for the site. He did not have set business hours planned yet and said there may be times when materials are dropped off at night. The area is open but there are cameras. There will be no blasting or mining on site. Ms. Walker said they had to restore portions of the wetlands, so they were revegetated. Ms. Letendre returned to the meeting at 6:38 p.m. Mr.

Terese said you the area is not visible from Route 91. There was some further discussion on the circulation and entry to the site.

Mr. Delisio made a motion that the Planning Board approve application 2023-DPR-06 – Development Plan Review – Eminel Holdings, LLC (24 Frontage Road | Assessor’s Map 49, Lot 36B) in accordance with the application and supporting materials including the Sheets S-2 thru S-6 titled “Modification Plan for Site Improvements, for Eminel Holdings, LLC Assessor’s Plat 49 Lot 36B, 24 Frontage Road, Westerly, RI; dated August 2020, Revised November 2023 with the findings of fact and conditions as listed in the Planning Staff memo dated January 4, 2024 for the January 16, 2024 meeting. Ms. Lentz-Madison seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

Ms. Letendre said as of January 1, 2024 the special use permit is no longer allowed under State law because the Town Ordinance has no standards for it. Atty. Fracassa stated that if there are no standards for it then the permit is superfluous.

1. 2024-MJLD-01 – Pre-application Review – State Street Elementary School (35 State Street | Assessor’s Map 87, Lot 67) Review and discussion only by the Planning Board on request for a Pre-Application Review. Review, discussion, and possible action on a request to combine Master and Preliminary Plan Review stages.

Mr. Hopkins recused himself from the hearing as he also serves as the chair of the elementary school committee. Ms. Letendre said the Planning Board decision is to consider the combination of the master and preliminary plan approval and she recommends they do that.

Julia McFadden, architect and principal with TSKP Studio, and project manager, Andrea Baranyk, associate architect with Northeast Collaborative Architects, were present for the application. Ms. McFadden said they have been working with Westerly Public School (WPS) to design a new school on State Street site. The new building will be constructed just north of the existing site. It will be a phased construction project. Ms. Letendre suggested the Board pose any questions or comments on the drawings. Mr. Lawlor questioned any complications on usage of the land or student drop off while construction is happening. Ms. McFadden said some playground area will be compromised and there will be a loss of a few parking spaces for staff during the construction process and they will be able to show construction access when they return to the Board. She described the construction times and said a neighborhood meeting will be planned to discuss the project. She said the Westerly Senior Center is part of the site, but they anticipate keeping activities separate from the site during construction. The timeline for the new building was discussed. Ms. McFadden said the school was built in the 1950s with an addition in the 1990s. She explained that the new school will create a more cohesive layout for the grades, but the building is not much different in size. Mr. O’Neil questioned the construction entrance, and she said there will be a new service drive off Hollis Street constructed early in the process. They will also investigate Westminster Street, as well. Mr. O’Neil questioned the elevation choices and the changes in stories. There was further discussion on the layout and design choices. Ms. Letendre asked the applicant to note the discussion. The protection of wetlands was also discussed. Mr. Delisio said it appears that some of the open areas will be diminished. Ms. McFadden said there is still an open area between the two wings as a protected area for an outdoor classroom. Seventy-five parking spaces are planned.

Mr. Delisio made a motion that the Planning Board authorize a combined master and preliminary plan development for the application and an adjustment of the submission requirements addressed therein as discussed. Ms. Lentz-Madison seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

2. 2023-DPR-02 – Development Plan Review – Champlin Woods - Modification to Section A – Phase II (Shore Road | Assessor’s Map 139, Lot 1D) Review, discussion, and possible action by the Planning Board on modification to a previously approved development for a multi-unit residential structure of 30 units with 60 bedrooms.

Ms. Letendre introduced the application. Prezsent for the application was project engineer Sergio Cherenzia, principal of Cherenzia & Associates, LTD., 99 Mechanic Street, Pawcatuck, Connecticut and Attorney Thomas Liguori, with offices at 85 Beach Street, Westerly. The applicant Joe Garies was also present at the meeting. Atty. Liguori explained the first step of approval was a November 2000 approval from Westerly Town Council to amend a sewer boundary. He referenced a Providence Sunday Journal article about the project and described its details. He said the project takes advantage of the natural terrain and the area they are dealing with today is set aside for one large building. The plans were displayed and further reviewed. There was discussion on underground parking and the current design. The applicant reviewed the Architectural Review Board (ARB) observations on the elevator tower and the delivery drive for the clubhouse in the rear of the building. The applicant team will meet this week to reconfigure the area so there are sidewalks and a limitation on delivery vehicles to protect any conflict with pedestrians. Mr. O’Neil questioned a discrepancy of the parking areas in the plans regarding handicap spots. Atty. Liguori noted that and said they can be accommodated. Mr. Lawlor referenced the middle area planned for an elevator.

Atty. Liguori said an ARB recommendation was to keep it more open and only an elevator with open space around it so it could be used as a lobby or common space versus a stairwell. He said that one wing of the building has underground parking, and one has at grade parking and that is because there is a 10-foot grade change on the property. He added that underground parking also exists under the five smaller buildings. A packet of photographs marked as Applicant’s 1 was distributed by Teresa Transue, of Cherenzia & Associates, LTD.

Mr. O’Neil left the meeting at 7:30 p.m. Public comment was opened.

Foong-yi Lin, president of Champlin Woods Condominium Association, said a main concern was the planned entrance from Compass Way into the garage. There are concerns that this would increase the traffic in the cul-de-sac and create wear and tear on the roadway. The increased traffic poses a risk to residents, mostly elderly, who utilize the area for exercise and have guests, many grandchildren, with scooters, wagons, and bikes. She added that it is still to be determined if the addition is part of the association.

Ms. Lin introduced Debra Hanley, one of the current owners and a resident since 2017, who is also, one of the first executive board members who worked with the original developer, Frank Levy. Ms. Hanley submitted a seven-page document dated January 16, 2024 which was marked as Remonstrance 1. Ms. Hanley described the contents of her submission to the Board and listed their concerns. She asked the Planning Board not to approve that entrance over their private property.

Atty. Liguori responded to the comments from page D of Remonstrance 1. The building shown in the driving zone is substantially less than the original approval of the five buildings. Ms. Letendre explained the change of grade from the north to south and there is some grading that needs to occur. She referenced ARB attempts to integrate the outside area by the clubhouse to make it an outdoor area for pedestrians. She asked if there is an opportunity to take the access to underground parking from the northside and suggested majority of that space in the basement would be better for containing storage or utilities that need to be incorporated into the building. Atty. Liguori reiterated that this is a modification of an already approved plan.

Mr. Hopkins asked about the condominium agreement. Atty. Levesque advised that it is not the Board’s job to interpret that document. If there is something in that document that prevents that access, then that is between the applicant and the association. He said Board approval could include the condition that that access is allowed. Ms. Letendre said access rights are one of a few issues to be addressed in redevelopment of the site.

Mr. Garies introduced himself and said the project was originally reviewed by the ARB in 2017. Ms. Letendre said the modification needs to be explained and the right to access demonstrated or it needs to be revised. Atty. Liguori said they didn’t undertake the modification without consultation. Ms. Letendre noted that staff was only made aware of the changes at the January ARB meeting.

Mr. Garies said when he bought the development rights, and his attorney reviewed the documents he was under the impression that it was all approved as one project; that the five buildings and addition of 74 beds were all incorporated. He said they are leaving 14 beds on the table with the new plan to turn them from apartments to condominiums and spending $600,000 to do the conversion because there are no apartments there so he is taken back by the concerns.

Mr. Hopkins reminded the applicant that this is the Board’s first review of the application and there will be questions that need to be addressed. Mr. Garies and Ms. Letendre discussed the original entrance approval. She said the original approval was for an entrance on Newbury Drive and a new entrance is part of the modification. Mr. Garies suggested that they can investigate how to keep the entrance as it is. Ms. Letendre clarified the development is for ages 55+ plus. There was some continued discussion on ARB comments from the January meeting. The applicant will continue discussions with the ARB on Thursday.

Mr. Delisio made a motion to continue the public hearing to February 20 Planning Board meeting. Ms. Lentz-Madison seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

G. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER’S REPORT

1. Development Project Status Report – Attached to agenda and printed copy distributed. Some approved applications expired.

2. Administrative Actions NONE There was no discussion.

H. ASSISTANT SOLICTOR FOR PLANNING AND ZONING’S REPORT

There was no report to give.

I. CONFIRMATION OF QUOROM FOR NEXT MEETINGS

1. January 23, 2024, Special Meeting at 6:00pm

2023-LMIH-04 – Master Plan Review – Winnapaug Residences Comprehensive Permit – Multifamily Residential (several parcels associated with 184 Shore Road| Assessor’s Map 141, Lot 94 & A.P. 119, Lots 3P, 5E3; A.P. 129, Lot 2; A.P. 130, Lots 4, 6; A.P. 140, Lots 4, 10, 13; A.P. 141, Lots 25, 95, 191) Public hearing to include review discussion and possible action or continuance by the Planning Board on a Comprehensive Permit. The application proposes constructing ninety (90) three-story structures comprised of a mixture of apartment units distributed on several properties associated with the current Winnapaug Golf Course, at 184 Shore Road. The proposal includes a total of 2,300 rental units of which 1,610 are market rate units and 690 (30%) are LMI qualified units.

There will be no meeting on this date.

2. February 6, 2024, Special Meeting at 6:00pm

2023-LMIH-04 – Master Plan Review – Winnapaug Residences Comprehensive Permit – Multifamily Residential (several parcels associated with 184 Shore Road| Continuation of the public hearing.

3. February 20, 2024, Regular Meeting at 6:00pm

J. ADJOURNMENT –

Mr. Lawlor made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:11 p.m. Ms. Lentz-Madison seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

Respectfully submitted,