North Kingstown Planning Commission Meeting - November 5, 2024
North Kingstown Planning Commission Meeting - November 5, 2024
The North Kingstown Planning Commission met on Tuesday, November 5, 2024, at 7:00 PM in Town Hall. The meeting covered several consent items, a discussion on a minor modification for an affordable housing unit, and public hearings for a 56-unit affordable housing development and a municipal office building addition. Votes were taken on multiple items, with decisions to approve, continue, or postpone.
Consent Calendar
- 3a – Sanctuary Estates Cost Estimate Modification: Approved unanimously (5-0). The cost estimate for two roads (Sanctuary Lane and Carrs Lane) was split into two phases while maintaining the total approved amount. The applicant has already started improvements, so no timeline impact.
- 3b – Dusty Hollow Surety Release: Final release approved unanimously (5-0) for $33,695.18 based on a satisfactory October 2024 inspection.
- 3c – Reynolds Farm 1D Reduction: Postponed at the applicant's request; no date set.
- 3d – Tide Mill South Surety Release: Final release approved unanimously (5-0) for $60,004 based on a September 24, 2024 field inspection.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Municipal Office Building (Items 3g/3h): Charles Roscoe (87 Fairway Drive) asked about design renderings and timeline. Nancy Chartier (101 Fairway Drive) inquired about construction traffic impacts on Fairway Drive, especially school buses. One resident verified no environmental impact to adjacent wetlands. Staff noted minimal road work (water line connection) and that the building would be unoccupied during construction.
Discussion Items
- 3e – Sanctuary Estates Minor Modification (Third Affordable Unit): The applicant requested approval to locate a third affordable unit (a new three-bedroom single-family home) off-site at 620 Dry Bridge Road. The lot would be subdivided from an existing duplex lot, creating a new ~14,000 sq ft lot (village residential zone requires 20,000 sq ft). Relief was needed for lot size and frontage. The commission discussed the benefit of creating a new affordable home versus deeding an existing unit, and the precedent of allowing undersized lots. A motion to approve the location with the density relief passed 4-1 (Chair Grundy, McCue, Borowick, Kerr in favor; Roach opposed). The project will return for subdivision approval.
- 3f – The Edge Apartments (Comprehensive Permit): Public hearing for a 56-unit apartment development (two 28-unit buildings) on Devils Foot Road. 14 units (25%) will be affordable. The project requires waivers for ground-floor use, density (16.1 units/acre vs. allowed 10), and building height/setback. Staff recommended conditions including merging lots, traffic analysis, and administrative final approval. No public comments. The commission found all statutory findings met and directed staff to prepare a positive approval letter. Continued to December 3, 2024.
- 3g/3h – Municipal Office Building Addition (Zoning Variance and Minor Land Development): Unified review for a 1,707 sq ft addition to 100 Fairway Drive, including a new lobby, ADA ramp, and interior renovations. A dimensional variance was needed for a 25-foot buffer on the east property line (which will not be disturbed). The commission discussed an encroachment issue on that property line, to be resolved separately. Public comments addressed traffic and design. The commission approved the zoning variance and the minor land development project with conditions (including administrative handling of minor modifications and addressing a neighbor's drainage concern). Continued to November 19, 2024.
Key Outcomes
- 3e: Motion to approve the third affordable unit location (4-1). The project will proceed to subdivision review.
- 3f: Consensus (5-0) to approve the comprehensive permit for The Edge Apartments, subject to conditions. Formal decision and continuation to December 3, 2024.
- 3g/3h: Consensus (5-0) to grant the dimensional variance and approve the municipal office building minor land development, with conditions. Continued to November 19, 2024.
- All consent items (3a, 3b, 3d) were approved unanimously.
- Reynolds Farm 1D (3c) postponed indefinitely.
Meeting Transcript
Good evening, everyone. Welcome to the Tuesday, November 5th, 2024 Planning Commission meeting. First item on the agenda, item 3A is a cost estimate modification for sanctuary estates. Nicole. Good evening. You have already approved of a cost estimate for sanctuary estates as a whole, but the applicant has requested to divide it into two pieces. So each route has its own individual, basically phase. So Allie has done just that, and the amount still equals what you had approved the origin first time, but this is now just separate per road. Okay. And Ali is here if you have questions. Yes, she has. Two things. One is there some documentation, a drawing that shows where the division is between the two. Allie, you did it based on the roads and the infrastructure that went with each one, correct? Not in your packet for tonight. Well, I know in the past you did use that. Some place with a line or something that I don't believe there is necessarily a phased plan, um, but it was pretty clearly delineated um with the cars cars lane road. There's um some stormwater associated with that. Um and then sanctuary lane is a completely separate. There was one lot that looks like it's closer to sanctuary, but it is included in the cars. Um I don't know if there's a record plan splitting them up. There is okay. Eric is still telling me that there is some kind of record plan showing the space split. But the infrastructure was all pretty obvious in my mind. Okay. The other thing is, does this you know we there's some timing is when construction has to start? So I mean, because we're kind of making it now two say two phased. Is this impact any of those timelines? I no, I would say it does not. The the only thing that they have to do is before they were to put a uh law on the market, they'd have to post the bond for it. Um at this point, we're we're not we won't run into any of those issues. I believe they have two years to start. So if they start say they start cars lane within two years and start seconds, so they later they can start construction pad, they just can't record you they can't sell the lots or record them without paying the bond. So I mean as long as they're doing work now, we wouldn't say we wouldn't say that they're that anything's expired. If they did nothing at all on the site in the site, right if there's no work at all being done, that would be a different story. But if they have started improvements and they're doing it, they're they're doing it on their their own. Um they pay their inspection fees, they can do that. It's if they weren't doing any of that, then I would say that would be an issue. It would be like we there I think it says two years in our ordinance. So in other words, they could do cars lane within the you know, start it within the two lanes, totally finish it. Yep. Pay the bond, close out the bond. Yeah. And 15 years later, start saying No, no, no. If it was 15 years later, that would be a different story. But right now, they're they're proposing to do work on both of them. It's just that they're not there, so they're not that they're not gonna pay the bonds at the same time. They'll do it when they're ready to record those different phases. If they were doing and we know they're doing work out there, so they've already started. If they were doing nothing, then it would be a different story.
openpublica.com