Narragansett Planning Board Meeting - June 10, 2026
Narragansett Planning Board Meeting - June 10, 2026
Note: The meeting date provided in the instruction is June 10, 2026, but the agenda and minutes list the meeting as Tuesday, June 16, 2026. This summary uses the instructed date.
Vice Chair Dr. Joseph O'Neill called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM. Board members present: Stephen DeSimone, Rupert Friday, James Grundy. Chair Thomas Callahan was absent. Staff present: Jill Sabo (Community Development Director), Ryan DiPanni (Environmental Planning Specialist), Amanda Aywas (Planning Technician), Scott Levesque (Interim Assistant Solicitor), Heidi Petrone (Clerk).
Consent Calendar
- Unanimous approval (4-0) of the May 19, 2026, meeting minutes.
- Confirmed quorum for the July 21, 2026, Planning Board meeting.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Elizabeth Packalay (resident of Sandhill Cove neighborhood) spoke during the Ocean Vibe Development site review. She expressed concerns about the proposed removal of a large boulder near Stanton Avenue, arguing it and surrounding vegetation provide coastal storm protection, buffer wind/water, and screen the road. She requested a detailed plan for boulder removal, vegetation disturbance, and mitigation measures, and noted that the applicant had removed beach roses on the dune. She also questioned whether abutters received notification (not required at this stage).
Discussion Items
649 Point Judith Road Comprehensive Permit – Master Plan Review (Continued)
- Applicant: Farrelly/Gillmore, represented by Attorney Patrick Dougherty.
- Project: Four single-family detached dwellings (three market-rate, one affordable to households earning up to 120% AMI) at 649 Point Judith Road (Plat V, Lot 40). The site is 4.2 acres with only 1.1 acres of usable upland; wetlands on the west side. The project requires a sewer waiver (previously granted for 8 units, now needing revision to 4 units) and a connection to a private force main. A CRMC preliminary determination accepted a partial buffer restoration.
- Engineer Michael Zavalia testified that the 20-foot driveway, snow storage, grass pavers, and stormwater management will be refined at preliminary stage. The conservation commission recommended reducing driveway width to 16-18 feet, subject to fire department approval.
- Housing Consultant Mr. Pimental addressed density standards: the base density in R80 is 2 units, but with public water and sewer, the allowable density is 6.445 units. The proposed 4 units are below that threshold. He noted Narragansett's median home price rose 108% from 2018 to 2025 (from $420k to $875k), while median income rose only 33%, demonstrating need for affordable housing.
- Board discussion: Members praised the reduction from 8 units to 4, buffer restoration, and single-family detached design. They deferred findings on design and traffic to preliminary stage. Conditions included a 99-year deed restriction, sequencing of certificates of occupancy (two market-rate, then affordable, then final market-rate), and review by conservation commission.
Ocean Vibe Development, LLC/Mahoney – Site Review (Continued)
- Applicant: John Mahoney (owner), represented by Attorney Jack McGreen.
- Project: Construct a three-bedroom single-family dwelling with decks, stairs, and driveway at 0 Stanton Avenue (Plat N, Lot 56), a 5,465 sq ft vacant lot in R10 zoning. Relief needed: 163-ft variance from coastal resources overlay district (Section 4.4) and 3.5-ft front yard setback variance (Section 6.4).
- Wetland Consultant Joe McHugh testified that a new CRMC preliminary determination was obtained. CRMC staff biologist Tracy Silvia concurred with the coastal feature flagging but noted the project (as originally proposed with an unconditioned roofed deck and hot tub) would require a variance. The applicant agreed to remove the roof and hot tub, and submitted a revised plan with a third roof deck (which raised new concerns at the meeting).
- Board concerns: Member Grundy questioned whether the dimensional relief was minimal, and whether the hardship was self-created. Others noted the boulder removal and coastal resilience. Public comment from Elizabeth Packalay highlighted the boulder's role in storm protection.
- Votes: Application found complete (4-0). In conformance with comprehensive plan (4-0) citing policies LU2.2, LU2.3, NR1.1. Motion to recommend approval of relief failed 3-1 (O'Neill, Friday, Grundy opposed; DeSimone in favor). Motion to recommend denial of relief passed 3-1 (DeSimone opposed), citing failure to meet development standard 1 (compliance with applicable standards) and concerns about the boulder, vegetation removal, and lack of a planting plan.
Old Business
- Zoning Ordinance Recodification: Staff (Sabo, Levesque, Aywas) are researching other municipalities' recodifications and developing a scope of work. No action taken.
- Section 4.5 Memorandum: A red-lined draft with proposed edits was presented; no board questions or concerns. The amendment is ready for formal consideration.
- Rules of Procedure: Previously suggested edits incorporated; a comprehensive draft will be reviewed by the solicitor and brought to a future meeting.
Reports from Staff/Board
- Coastal Access Improvement Committee (CAIC): Working on strategic vision; follow-up on Narrow River dredging ongoing.
- Land Conservancy Trust (LCT): Sunset Farm Management Plan still in development; Gansett Days upcoming. Town council accepted a lease agreement for the old Wiley's building (yellow building on Narrow River) for a restaurant at no cost to the town.
- Comprehensive Plan Update: Public survey launched on town website and social media. A public workshop is scheduled for July 13, 2026, at 6 PM in the Town Hall Council Chambers. Town council approved two work sessions with the Planning Board on July 8, 2026: one on urban renewal and one on the comprehensive plan.
Key Outcomes
- Master Plan Approved (649 Point Judith Road): Approved 4-0 with 15 conditions, including 99-year affordability deed restriction, sequencing of COs (two market-rate, then affordable, then final market-rate), conservation easement on wetlands, CRMC assent, RIDOT permit, engineering review of stormwater and reinforced turf, and landscape plan for screening. Public hearing closed 4-0.
- Site Review (Ocean Vibe Development): Application found complete (4-0) and in conformance with comprehensive plan (4-0). Motion to recommend approval of relief failed (3-1). Motion to recommend denial of relief passed (3-1) based on non-compliance with development standard 1. The negative recommendation will be forwarded to the Zoning Board of Review.
- Adjournment: Meeting adjourned at 8:28 PM on a motion by Grundy, seconded by DeSimone (4-0).
Meeting Transcript
So we'll call the uh Eric Engine Planning Board meeting to order here June 16, 2026, PM. I guess we're supporter and businesses in roll call. Stephen needs the mountain. Here Dr. Cassipani L. Here Thomas Callahan. He is uh traveling. Yeah, with call. Thank you. Friday. Here. James Grandy. Yeah. Mr. Vice Chair, you have four members present. You have a four. Thank you. Well, first uh item on the agenda here as the administrative matters uh planning board meeting uh minutes uh May 19, 2026. Anybody have any modification questions or we have a motion to get it so moved? Second all favor? You okay? All right. Oh man, we're moving along here. Public hearings, okay. So the first uh the public hearing uh before us uh is uh 649 point Judith Road comprehensive comprehensive permanent development uh plan review barley Dilmore Lat 5, lot 40, 649. Comprehensive permit uh four units are land. So this we've mentioned now twice this project's at uh 649 point Judith Road know the designation, it's uh located in our 80 zone district. Presently uh single family dwelling, attached garage or on site. It's a lot cleared in the past, this thrown cover across the majority of developed area because it's open lawn, concrete gravel driveway. They're planning to eliminate one of those. This goes ahead. The applicant's request is to diminish the existing structures on site, developed the lack of the four single family uh dwelling and units with a singular driveway access off what you road. Pre-application meeting was conducted back in March for an eight-unit development, uh four duplexes, and remember 19th re-application meeting was held for four single family dwelling units. The uh according to the eligibility letter from Rhode Island Housing, this project will consist of four three bedroom, so three three three bedroom dwellings each with two and a half baths at market rate and one three-bedroom dwelling with two and a half baths proposed to be sold to households earning up to a maximum 120 percent of the area median income. So-called affordable housing. The letter does not specify proposed later time for beat restriction. The future land use of this lack phone size current zoning of moderate low moderate to low density designation. So thank you, Mr. Chairman. Patrick Doerty for uh warning to Gilmore and Thomas Farrelly, the applicants and owners. Um I uh we have a presentation here tonight, and I've got two witnesses here, and I'll send the owners here if you'd like to hear from that as well. Um just like to note from the outset that you did a great summary and no need for me to repeat exactly everything that you said we're going to take note of the fact that uh this project is less dense than what we would be able to apply for ordinary in our confirmator. Um that's in keeping in mind uh not only the constraints on the property but sensitivity to preserving wetlands. We'll be uh you'll you'll be hearing from Mike Savalier, our engineer who did the design, and uh you'll hear that we will also be uh restoring a buffer at present though the grass is cut all the way over up right to the wetland edge. There will be uh buffer restored there uh so that we don't uh run a foul of the special area management plan uh that's in effect from CRMC over there. Um we're fairly confident that we're very confident that we'll be able to make this project work in a uh in a good fashion and get CRMC approvals and all the necessary state approvers as well. And um I'd just like to say that uh when the project came before you there was a great sensitivity on the part of the board as to the eight units that were initially proposed. And we came back and we were looking at about doing six, but it just didn't really make sense uh in terms of uh making a nice project. It was rather crowded and now the sensitivity to the surrounding neighbors as well as the wetland area and the constraints of the property. We thought it more appropriate to bring it down to four units, um, and you'll hear uh the uh went into that decision as well as the design plan.
openpublica.com