Meeting colors

OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD

Record of Proceedings

North Kingstown Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 2024

Planning Commission — Tuesday, May 7, 2024

BodyNorth Kingstown, Rhode Island

SessionPlanning Commission

DateTuesday, May 7, 2024

StatusFILED

Video Record

0:00 / 2:01:57

Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

0:00

Planning commission meeting.

0:02

We've got I think about six items on the agenda.

0:05

The first four ought to go pretty quickly, and then we have a preliminary uh planned public hearing.

0:12

Um I guess with that we should uh jump right in.

0:18

The uh first item of business is uh surety reduction Reynolds Farm uh 2D.

0:26

And I'll turn that over to Nicole.

0:29

Sure.

0:30

This is a request to reduce um the bond for phase 2D.

0:34

This is the phase that includes the pump station for um upper Reynolds farm, so the upper portion of it.

0:42

Um we went out to instruct the site, and there are still some issues with the pump station working and getting online, which um the engineering department in our DPW has monitored over time and they are now satisfied that it's working well enough for them to reduce it to the amount that's shown here.

1:02

Um not not a full 90% or anything.

1:05

So the the request um the recommendation is to reduce this out the the car insurerity held by 500,000 248 dollars and fifty-nine cents, which would leave 269,566 and four cents to complete this fees.

1:24

Okay.

1:25

Any uh questions from the I just can you clarify what you mean by working well enough?

1:32

So it's we don't want to reduce it more so if there are any issues with any of the computer systems or any of the parts that we would still have money to be able to to fix it, right?

1:42

Because it's still it's still new, but it's it's satisfactory enough to be at at the percentage that has been requested.

1:48

So it's working now.

1:49

Yes, you're just holding it.

1:50

Right, it's not not working, it's working, but we were not comfortable enough to say it's working so well, and we've been seeing it for so long that we want to reduce it further.

1:58

Um this this is where we're comfortable.

2:01

Thank you.

2:01

Just wanted that clarification.

2:03

And the um the developer knows that and has been in touch with the engineering department.

2:07

Um if Ali wants to clarify a little bit.

2:10

So I did reduce the pump station to a 90%, just that line item.

2:13

The pump station is um everything's installed, it is working.

2:16

Um the telemetry is all set up.

2:18

There's like one tiny little um we there's a one display that isn't working, but it's it's being worked on, and uh we are comfortable reducing it to 90 percent.

2:31

Oh, I'm sorry, Allie Sparks, uh town engineer and deputy director of public works.

2:39

And again, again, this one was a big confusion confusing with the correction.

2:43

From the beginning, right.

2:48

Right.

2:48

This is one where originally the sewer was left out, so then you added it back in.

2:52

So the numbers were have not been direct the whole way through.

2:57

Um any other questions, comments.

3:00

Uh we have a motion to uh to approve.

3:03

I make that I'll make that motion.

3:07

Second have a uh motion and a second.

3:12

Any more comments?

3:14

All in favor?

3:15

Aye.

3:16

Any opposed hearing none.

3:20

We'll move on to the next uh item, which is status of construction guarantees.

3:27

This item is just I think Jim at one of your previous meetings requested that we just give you a list of um projects that have guarantees in play.

3:36

So this is just an informational sheet.

3:39

Um if you have questions, please let me know.

3:41

But um if it I'm not sure if it's clear enough when the when you receive a cost estimate, that's just a dollar amount.

3:51

It's when we receive the bond that it then would go through the process of reductions requiring your review and the town council review.

3:58

So that's why the first numbers in many of these um are double because the cost estimate and then the amount that they place at a separate time is the same.

4:06

In other cases, the cost estimate is one thing, and then they um do work and have it reduced before they they place the bond.

4:13

So that's why you would see the numbers being different for the those top ones.

4:17

And then anywhere you had a recent release to A went to you in April and to the town council.

4:24

So while it's no longer in play, I put it on here because that was recent enough for you to see the difference.

4:32

Okay, and uh well, does anybody have any questions or comments for Nicole?

4:40

I I thought I had seen one on here.

4:43

Um and maybe it was the Reynolds Farm 2B.

4:48

Mm-hmm.

4:49

That's I I I thought I saw one, and maybe I might have just read it wrong.

4:53

That was like six years old.

4:56

And I think there are some that are older, but they're still in under construction.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting

Stormwater Management███████████████████████████████████████39%

Water And Wastewater Management█████████████13%

Procedural███████████11%

Land Use Planning███████████11%

Public Comment███████7%

Environmental Protection█████5%

Engineering And Infrastructure███3%

Zoning Ordinance███3%

Public Works██2%

Summary of Proceedings

North Kingstown Planning Commission Meeting

Date: May 7, 2024, 7:00 PM Location: Town Hall, 80 Boston Neck Rd., North Kingstown, RI

The Planning Commission met to discuss six agenda items: a surety reduction for Reynolds Farm 2D, a status report on construction guarantees, a continuance request for a Verizon wireless tower, a development plan review waiver for a Pokemoto restaurant, and a preliminary plan public hearing for a two-lot minor subdivision (Juniper Hill Phase V). The meeting also included approval of prior minutes and adjournment.

Consent Calendar

Surety Reduction: Reynolds Farm 2D: The Commission unanimously approved a reduction of $500,248.59, leaving $269,566.04 to complete the phase. The pump station is operational but the town engineer recommended holding the reduced amount for potential future issues. (Motion by [Member], seconded, all in favor)
Development Plan Review Waiver: Pokemoto (PokeKings, LLC): The Commission unanimously approved a waiver of development plan review for a tenant fit-out at 20 Frenchtown Road (Hunt River Plaza). The applicant confirmed no exterior alterations and that the public water system can support the use. (Motion by [Member], seconded, all in favor)

Public Comments & Testimony

Juniper Hill Phase V Public Hearing: Several residents of Juniper Hill and adjacent properties spoke in opposition to the subdivision:
- Rich D. Maria (150 Juniper Drive) cited increased water drainage issues, basement flooding, and questioned the capacity of the existing drainage easement. He requested the board not approve the plan.
- Yuri Grell (166 Juniper Drive) reported frequent blockages, erosion, loss of trees, and standing water. He argued the rain gardens are optimistic given observed water flows and urged the board to consider environmental impacts.
- Jeffrey Panick (69 Sassafras Road) stated the drainage easement (50–60 years old) is inadequate and should be reworked before additional construction. He noted that water table issues have worsened since the existing house was built.
- Sandy Panick (69 Sassafras Road) expressed concern about rain garden effectiveness, mosquito breeding, and the loss of trees that previously absorbed water.
- Patrick Fanning (34 Sassafras Road) confirmed neighbors have drainage issues and questioned long-term maintenance of rain gardens, noting homeowners may replace plants.
- Kathleen Gareno (139 Summit View Lane) observed that clearing two acres of forest altered water flow and urged the town to monitor compliance with stipulations.
- John Laurent (100 Juniper Drive) focused on neighborhood character, arguing that increasing density diminishes the appeal of the established community.
- Richard Welch (8 Arrow Lane) questioned the applicant's track record (paving a gravel driveway without approval) and urged the board to address town-wide drainage issues before approving further development.

Discussion Items

Status of Construction Guarantees: Staff provided an informational list of active bonds. No action was taken.
Continuance Request: Verizon Wireless Tower (772 Fletcher Road): The Commission continued the application to September 17, 2024, to allow the applicant more time to explore alternatives. The continuance tolls the 180-day federal shot clock, leaving approximately 80 days remaining after the new date. (Motion by [Member], seconded, all in favor)
Preliminary Plan Public Hearing: Juniper Hill Phase V (Stephen Rainone): The applicant proposes a minor 2-lot subdivision at 80 Sassafras Road (Plat 119 Lot 17) in the Village Residential zone. The plan includes extending Sassafras Road (private) to provide frontage, a new single-family home on Lot B, and stormwater management via five rain gardens. The existing house (Lot A) will have its roof drains rerouted to a new rain garden. The town engineer confirmed the drainage design meets the 25-year storm (6.1 inches) requirement. The board discussed:
- Credibility concerns: Member Tracy McCue expressed distrust due to the applicant paving a gravel driveway without prior approval on the existing lot. The applicant's engineer, Amy Sonner, stated the paving was addressed in pre-application and the stormwater calculations now include the impervious area.
- Drainage: The board debated whether the rain gardens would adequately mitigate runoff. The town engineer (Allie Sparks) noted that rain gardens are appropriate for high water table areas and that the volume calculations will be verified at final plan stage.
- Conditions: The board agreed to require a bond for the road and rain gardens, a shared maintenance agreement for private road and stormwater features, town access for snow removal, and a 25-year storm design standard. The applicant will provide a final plan with corrected volume calculations.

Key Outcomes

Surety Reduction (Reynolds Farm 2D): Approved unanimously.
Development Plan Review Waiver (Pokemoto): Approved unanimously.
Verizon Tower Continuance: Continued to September 17, 2024, with shot clock tolling.
Juniper Hill Phase V Preliminary Plan: The Commission voted 3-1 (McCue opposed) to approve the plan subject to conditions. The final decision and conditions will be drafted and brought back for a vote at the next meeting on June 4, 2024. The public hearing portion was closed. The board directed staff to prepare a decision incorporating the conditions discussed.
Minutes: Minutes from March 5, March 19, and April 2, 2024 were approved without change.
Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at approximately 9:30 PM.

Meeting Transcript

Planning commission meeting. We've got I think about six items on the agenda. The first four ought to go pretty quickly, and then we have a preliminary uh planned public hearing. Um I guess with that we should uh jump right in. The uh first item of business is uh surety reduction Reynolds Farm uh 2D. And I'll turn that over to Nicole. Sure. This is a request to reduce um the bond for phase 2D. This is the phase that includes the pump station for um upper Reynolds farm, so the upper portion of it. Um we went out to instruct the site, and there are still some issues with the pump station working and getting online, which um the engineering department in our DPW has monitored over time and they are now satisfied that it's working well enough for them to reduce it to the amount that's shown here. Um not not a full 90% or anything. So the the request um the recommendation is to reduce this out the the car insurerity held by 500,000 248 dollars and fifty-nine cents, which would leave 269,566 and four cents to complete this fees. Okay. Any uh questions from the I just can you clarify what you mean by working well enough? So it's we don't want to reduce it more so if there are any issues with any of the computer systems or any of the parts that we would still have money to be able to to fix it, right? Because it's still it's still new, but it's it's satisfactory enough to be at at the percentage that has been requested. So it's working now. Yes, you're just holding it. Right, it's not not working, it's working, but we were not comfortable enough to say it's working so well, and we've been seeing it for so long that we want to reduce it further. Um this this is where we're comfortable. Thank you. Just wanted that clarification. And the um the developer knows that and has been in touch with the engineering department. Um if Ali wants to clarify a little bit. So I did reduce the pump station to a 90%, just that line item. The pump station is um everything's installed, it is working. Um the telemetry is all set up. There's like one tiny little um we there's a one display that isn't working, but it's it's being worked on, and uh we are comfortable reducing it to 90 percent. Oh, I'm sorry, Allie Sparks, uh town engineer and deputy director of public works. And again, again, this one was a big confusion confusing with the correction. From the beginning, right. Right. This is one where originally the sewer was left out, so then you added it back in. So the numbers were have not been direct the whole way through. Um any other questions, comments. Uh we have a motion to uh to approve. I make that I'll make that motion. Second have a uh motion and a second. Any more comments? All in favor? Aye. Any opposed hearing none. We'll move on to the next uh item, which is status of construction guarantees. This item is just I think Jim at one of your previous meetings requested that we just give you a list of um projects that have guarantees in play. So this is just an informational sheet. Um if you have questions, please let me know. But um if it I'm not sure if it's clear enough when the when you receive a cost estimate, that's just a dollar amount. It's when we receive the bond that it then would go through the process of reductions requiring your review and the town council review. So that's why the first numbers in many of these um are double because the cost estimate and then the amount that they place at a separate time is the same. In other cases, the cost estimate is one thing, and then they um do work and have it reduced before they they place the bond.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI

TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com