Zoning Board – Meeting Minutes

Wednesday, May 5, 2021 - 6:00 p.m.

Pursuant to former Governor Gina M. Raimondo Executive Order 20-25, dated April 15, 2020 as revised, this meeting was performed via Zoom.

 

Council Chambers, Westerly Town Hall

45 Broad Street, Westerly, RI 02891

 

 

A. CALL TO ORDER –

Mr. Pawelkiewicz called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and read into the record the rules of procedure for hearing applications at the Zoning Board. He clarified that Ms. Robinson would be voting as a full member tonight as Mr. Russo was excused from the meeting.

 

 

B. ROLL CALL AND REVIEW OF STAFF ATTENDANCE

 

Members Present:     Chair Walter Pawelkiewicz, Vice Chair Larry Cioppa, and Members Doug Brockway, and James Torres, and Alternate Member Dawn Robinson

 

Members Absent:      Member Jeffrey Russo

 

Staff Present:             Zoning Official Nathan Reichert, Minute Taker Stephanie J. LaSota, Assistant Solicitor for Planning & Zoning Todd J. Romano, Esq., Information Technology Technician Michael Harris, and Court Reporter Meredith Fortune

 

D. APPROVAL AND REVISION OF MINUTES

 

1.  March 25, 2021 – Ms. Robinson made a motion to approve the March 25, 2021 Zoning Board minutes as submitted. Mr. Cioppa seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

 

2.  April 7, 2021 – Mr. Brockway asked Ms. LaSota to double check public commentary of the April 7 meeting minutes to ensure Dr. Samuel C. Rindell, of 33 Terrace Avenue, did not speak at that meeting. Mr. Brockway made a motion to continue the April 7, 2021 meeting minute approval to the next regular Zoning Board meeting agenda. Mr. Torres seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

 

 

E.   CHANGES TO AGENDA – Consider, discuss, and act upon schedule change for Applications.

 

 

1. Continuation requests: Item G.1 Mayo, Variance, 5 Ice Pond Road.

 

 

Mr. Reichert explained that the applicant filed a new application for only a dimensional modification and is hoping for a future administrative approval. He said the applicant requested a continuance of the existing application to potentially withdraw it in the future pending the dimensional modification approval.

Mr. Brockway made a motion to continue the Mayo, Variance, 5 Ice Pond Road application to the June 2, 2021 Zoning Board meeting. Mr. Torres seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

 

 

2. Item H.1 and Item I.4 South County Cultivators Appeal and SUP Amendment, 71 Quarry Road.

 

 

Mr. Reichert explained that the Planning Board has not yet provided an advisory opinion on the amendment to an existing Special Use Permit so the application must be continued.

Mr. Cioppa made a motion to continue the South County Cultivators application to the June 2, 2021 Zoning Board meeting. Ms. Robinson seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

 

 

3. Item G.3 Montesano, SUP and Variance, 5 Terrace Ave.

 

Mr. Reichert said the Zoning Office received a request for a 30-day extension from the applicant’s lead counsel as the applicant is working on amending the existing.

Mr. Brockway made a motion to continue the Montesano application to the June 2, 2021 Zoning Board meeting. Ms. Robinson seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

 

4. Item I.3 Sisco, 59 Shore Road

 

Mr. Reichert explained that the Sisco application required five voting members and Mr. Cioppa was recused and Mr. Russo is absent, so the applicant agreed to a June 2 hearing.

Mr. Brockway made a motion to continue the Sisco application to the June 2, 2021 Zoning Board meeting. Ms. Robinson seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

 

 

F.    APPROVAL OF DECISIONS - Consider, discuss, and act on application decisions referred to staff for writing.

 

 

1.    None

 

 

G.   PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Business - Consider, discuss, and act on application(s).

 

 

1.    Mayo, 5 Ice Pond Road, AP ‘137’ Lot ‘27UUU’ Install an 18’ x 38’ inground pool in the rear of an existing residence. (§260-19) Dimensional Variances.

 

 

Continued to the June 2, 2021 meeting pending approval of modification.

 

2.    Montesano, 5 Terrace Ave., AP ‘142’ Lot ‘108’ Garage / Front porch addition, Home Occupation greater that 150 sq. ft. (§260-19) Dimensional Variances and Special Use Permit (§260-34). Continued from February 3 and February 25, 2021.

 

 

Continued to the June 2, 2021 meeting.

 

 

H.   PUBLIC HEARINGS - Appeal to the Zoning Board of Review – Consider, discuss, and act upon appeals.

 

 

1. South County Cultivators, Inc., 71 Quarry Road, AP ‘55’ Lot “1”

 

 

Appeal to the Zoning Board of Review. Appeal of Cease-and-Desist Notice of Violation issued November 18, 2020. (§260-38) Right to Appeal. Continued from February 3 and February 25, 2021

 

 

Continued to the June 2, 2021 meeting.

 

 

I.      PUBLIC HEARINGS NEW BUSINESS - Consider, discuss, and act on application(s).

 

 

1.    Grey Sail Properties, LLC, 65 Canal Street, AP ‘46’ Lot ‘12’ Addition of a covered (non- enclosed) pavilion. (§260-19) Dimensional Variances.

 

 

Teresa Transue and Sarah Britner, of Cherenzia & Associates, LTD., 99 Mechanic Street, Pawcatuck, Connecticut, were present on behalf of the application, along with applicant and owner of Grey Sail Properties, LLC, Jennifer Brinton, of 27 Yarmouth Drive.

Mr. Reichert explained that the application came to the Zoning office via a State grant for Covid-19 funds to assist with outdoor dining. He said it was given an emergency approval so the application could be processed, and the project built within the shortest timeframe possible. Mr. Reichert said the property will have an open pavilion along the rear boundary, which is shared with Narragansett Electric. He said staff recommends the application’s approval.

Ms. Brinton was sworn in for public testimony. She explained that the State approached them in November to seek grant money to help spend CARES Act (Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act) funds prior to December 31. She said the proposed pavilion will be able to seat about 60 people with the current Covid-19 restrictions and they have the flexibility to seat more if the restrictions decrease.

There was no public comment. In a poll of the Board members, all were in favor of the application. Mr. Torres made a motion to close the public hearing at 6:29 p.m. Mr. Cioppa seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

Ms. Brinton thanked the Town and the Zoning Board for the collaborative process of getting the project accomplished after a very difficult year.

Mr. Brockway read into the record the details of the application request from Grey Sail Properties, LLC, 65 Canal Street, for a 0.6-foot left side yard accessory setback Variance and a 12.8-foot rear setback accessory Variance to permit an 84 by 16-foot pavilion. Mr. Brockway included a description of the business and lot, its location and characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood, and a summary of the testimony given at the May 5 public hearing and made a motion to approve the Grey Sail Properties, LLC, 65 Canal Street Zoning application request. Mr. Cioppa seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

 

 

2.    Gary Julian, 23 Shore Road, AP ‘151’ Lot ‘91’ Expansion of a non-conforming use (§260-34) Special Use Permit

 

 

Gary Julian was present on behalf of his application. Mr. Julian was sworn in for public testimony. The project architect, Ken Wieber, was also present along with Teresa Transue, project engineer, with Cherenzia & Associates, LTD. Mr. Reichert explained that the address has two single family residences on one property, which makes it nonconforming. He said the Zoning Board may permit up to a 25 percent expansion on the homes. He explained that the applicant is proposing the expansion of the two existing units and the addition of a portico, pool house, swimming pool and exterior renovations, as well as significant landscaping. Mr. Reichert said the Zoning Board must review and approve the numbers that would exist in perpetuity with the potential expansion as any future applicants must abide by the numbers as stated in the Special Use Permit. There was some discussion on the definition of area use.

Mr. Julian said his main reason for expanding the home is primarily to create a retirement home for he and his family. He said the home is a large structure and they are taking it from 6 to 5 bedrooms, however the existing septic system is made for 9 bedrooms, which includes the guest cottage. He said he would like his and his fiancé’s family to have their own privacy when they visit. Mr. Julian said he has no intentions of renting either of the homes at this point.

Mr. Wieber, of Weiber, Powell, and Associates, West Hartford, Connecticut, was sworn in for public testimony. He said every detail on the project maintains consistency with the existing architecture. He said it is unusual to have a client preserve so much of the classic architecture on site. Mr. Wieber explained the reason for the portico on the main entrance is to create a weather protected drop off area at the front of the home and to fix the architecture of the asymmetrical layout of the existing portico. He said the scale and massing of the proposed additions are appropriate and fit in well.

Ms. Transue was sworn in for public testimony and spoke with Board members on the math used to determine that the project expansion was under the 25 percent cap.  Mr. Brockway suggested the portico space be removed from the equation as it is not habitable space. Mr. Julian said the previous owner was thrilled about his plans for the new portico as it will give an amazing elevation to the home, which already has character and will serve as a covered porch for access to the main house. He said all three garage spaces are at least 750 feet or more away from the main house. He said it was advised by Mr. Wieber that they include four uncovered porches in the total area expansion usage.

Gerard and Caroline Murray, of 94 Ocean Highway, shared concerns on proposed changes to the elevation and slopes of the property as they are located below Mr. Julian’s property. Mr. Murray stated he wanted to ensure the property lines were set up appropriately as there is an existing easement. Mr. Julian said he met with the Murrays for the first time this week and appreciates their concerns. He said he would only remove invasive plant species. He added that he would plant a buffer between the two properties and sent the Murrays a series of photos this week. He said he is happy to show them what was done in the past week as it looks very different than two or three months ago. Atty. Romano commented that the easement discussion is a private issue and does not need to be discussed at the Zoning Board hearing. He said the applicant could submit engineering plans regarding water runoff if necessary as it is related to the expansion of existing structures. Mr. Reichert could ask the Town Engineer to look at the plans and see what is required for the easement as it is a drainage access for the Town. Mr. Julian said if the engineer visits, they could start an open dialogue as the current state of pond is showing clear signs of neglect and everyone that drives by is unaware there is wetlands, and it could be very beautiful. He said he would love to see it dredged or deepened and see it made into a real feature, if possible. Mr. Reichert said he will take care of introductions tomorrow and hopefully plan a meeting. He said the issue of vegetation buffers between the properties is a private issue that does not have to be addressed here. Atty. Romano advised the Board that the wetlands discussion is not part of the Zoning Board decision. Mr. Murray said he is more concerned with the Department of Environmental Management (DEM) getting involved and that is why he mentioned it. Mr. Reichert said involving the Town Engineer is a good first step to resolving it. He agreed a good condition of approval would be the applicant’s engineer providing a stormwater plan for the project. Ms. Transue mentioned there is a current existing survey of the property and they can easily have stakes marking the boundaries.

Deborah Lamm, chairman and president of the Watch Hill Conservancy, residing at 29 Oceanview Highway, shared concerns about how this application is being considered. She said she is very happy to hear the applicant is interested in restoring the original buildings. She said she disagreed that this property is nonconforming with two separate homes on it and argued that the property has a primary use and an accessory use: a main home and a guest home. She said when the application is processed this way, you come up with a different conclusion. She said the applicant is looking to turn the “accessory home” into a separate home, which is not what he purchased, and this would change its use and would not be permitted. She said the community has concern that the applicant will use the property as independent rental property. She also commented on the plan’s proposed driveway. She said there is no picture in the site plan of the proposed driveway, and she is drawing conclusions based on the work happening off the street. Mr. Julian responded that the driveway design comes up about 800 feet from Shore Road and divides left and right to go to each home. He said their intention is to remove a considerable amount of asphalt as he finds it unattractive. Ms. Lamm read into the record from Section 260-32 of the Zoning Ordinance on nonconformance. She said she believes that a full home is more intensive than a guest house and that it is an accessory use.

 

The Zoning Board took a brief recess and was called back in session at 8:26 p.m.

 

Atty. Romano clarified the issue Ms. Lamm raised by reading from Section 260-60 of the Zoning Ordinance on residential buildings, that no more than one residential building should be on a lot. He said Mr. Julian’s property has two residential structures, neither is an accessory use, and it is a nonconforming use, and he has a Special Use Permit to use the two buildings as they are being used. Mr. Brockway rejoined the meeting at 8:31 p.m. In a poll of the Board, all members were in favor of approving the application. In discussion on possible conditions to approval, Atty. Romano said the Board could not write a restriction specific to renting. Mr. Reichert asked the Board to consider having staff write the decision and reading the approval at the next meeting with permission from the applicant to extend the decision deadline. There was discussion on the timeline of the project and the applicant’s desire to avoid construction in the summer months. Mr. Julian requested the decision not be extended. The Board discussed special meeting dates to approve the applicant’s project sooner than June 2.

Mr. Torres made a motion to approve the application with the discussed adjusted area of use reflecting the removal of the portico and for staff to prepare that decision for the Board to review at a special meeting on May 17, 2021 at 6:00 p.m. Ms. Robinson seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

 

 

3.    Christopher Sisco, 59 Shore Road, AP ‘151’ Lot ‘89’ Addition (278 sq. ft.) to an existing garage. (§260-19) Dimensional Variances.

 

 

Continued to the June 2, 2021 Zoning Board meeting.

 

 

4.    South County Cultivators, 71 Quarry Road AP ‘55’ Lot 1’, Modify the recorded plan of a previously approved marijuana cultivation facility. Special Use Permit, (§260-34) Aquifer Permit (§260-52)

 

 

Continued to the June 2, 2021 Zoning Board meeting.

 

 

5.    Lori J. Paolella, 38 Weekapaug Rd., AP ‘143’ Lot ‘25’ Construction of a (315 sq. ft.) deck, (§260-19) Dimensional Variances

 

 

Mr. Reichert explained the application to the Board. He said because the advertisement for notice for the meeting came out with the deck dimension rather than steps, the applicant agreed to withdraw the application for the steps to expedite the application. Project engineer Anthony Nenna, principal of On- Site Engineering, 3 Crestview Drive, Westerly, described the project to the Board. He said the

applicants’ hardship is due to the unique characteristics of the lot. He said the lot area is over half size under what it needs to be, and the applications is requesting the least amount of relief necessary.

There was no public comment on the application. Mr. Torres noted that nothing in the application referenced the potential flooding Mr. Nenna spoke of and it would be nice if it were included in the narrative. In a poll of the Board members, all were in favor of the application.

Mr. Brockway made a motion to close the public hearing at 9:04 p.m. Mr. Cioppa seconded the motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

Mr. Cioppa read into the record the details of the Paolella application and made a motion to approve the request for construction of a 315-square-foot deck with the condition that the stairs on the original application that went down to the deck will not be built. Atty. Romano said they need to make one amendment to also approve a left side Variance of 10 feet and rear yard Variance of 21 feet. Mr. Cioppa amended his motion to include the comments from Atty. Romano. Mr. Brockway seconded the amended motion. The motion CARRIED by unanimous vote with no abstentions.

 

 

J.    STAFF COMMENTS

 

 

1.   None

 

 

K.   Applications Declared Complete, Waivers Granted and Scheduled for Public Hearing at the June 2, 2021 Zoning Board Meeting. Informational no action to be taken.

 

 

1.    Weekapaug Yacht Club, 23 Spray Rock Road, AP ‘158’ Lot ‘2’ Demolish existing clubhouse and its replacement with a new flood zone compliant facility within the existing footprint. (260-34) Special Use Permit

 

 

2.    Nordstrom, 2 Spray Rock Road, AP ‘169’ Lot ‘3’ Demolish existing structure and replace it with a new single-family residence and install swimming pool. (§260-19) Dimensional Variances

 

 

There was no discussion on this agenda item.

 

 

L. ADJOURNMENT –

Mr. Torres made a motion to adjourn the Zoning Board meeting at 9:16 p.m. Mr. Brockway 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 TBA