The North Kingstown Planning Commission met on May 5, 2026, to consider a preliminary plan for the Franklin Commons 66-unit residential project and a unified development review for a ministorage facility at 915 Ten Rod Road. The commission also approved minutes and heard an administrative report.
Professional witness type status. That's all. Yeah, and I would just for the record, I would I would object to Mr. Crockett being identified. Yeah. Sorry. Uh Brett Yadley, Chase Rottenberg, and Friedman on behalf of the applicant. Um I would object to Mr. Crockett being identified as an expert. Um to the timeliness. The the public hearing on the presentation was last month, and it's at that time we would have been able to assess Mr. Crockett's credentials. It it doesn't fit in to the purpose of tonight's hearing, which is a public hearing on the decision itself. And James, I I agree. If extensive resume, yeah, I think the board can take your knowledge for what you present to us, but I think recognize you as an expert would be beyond. Totally fair. Again, I'm not here to argue that point or just again present that knowledge to the board for information. All right. Um, with all of that in mind, and again, excluding what we just talked about, um, I'm just here to follow up on a couple points. Mostly what we talked about last time. I'm not bringing in any significant new information except one major detail, um, and it clarifies something that uh the developing party said last time. So first and foremost, uh, with respect to the shared frontage of the property, we have confirmed through recorded land evidence that our property benefits from deeded use of the developer's land. Last time they specifically said that we are encroaching on their property, which per the recorded deeds available through the town. That doesn't appear to be the case. Uh they actually have an encumbrance on their property. That's uh an easement for us. Excuse me. Before you get off that point, do you have a copy of that? I do have three copies of it. Yes. One again, I have it in triplicate, one for file and then two to pass around. Or one for as well. So again, uh that DD's Ded Easement does permit the existing carport encroachment and it provides access onto the adjacent lot for the purpose of specifically maintaining, repairing, and replacing that structure. From a practical standpoint, that driveways and that circulation pattern are the only functional means of egress for those rights. Based on the current plan, it's still not clear to us that the roadway layout preserves sufficient clearance to maintain that access or accommodate the working space necessary to utilize the easement or replace the building. The subdivision of those parcels clearly relied on the use of the recorded easement to accommodate existing conditions and site constraints. The condition was formally incorporated into the land records, and is part of how those lots were configured to operate. Moving on to my next point, blasting. Last time we did quickly talk about some of the requirements for blasting, and we were told by the developer that they would meet minimum state requirements, and I do truly believe that they will do their best to do that under their construction means and methods. But those are just construction minimum standards that are set. Again, I would ask whether design is considered site-specific factors such as anticipated peak particle velocity at our foundation, potential prop uh potential fracture propagation within the ledge, and whether a project-specific vibration threshold has been established based on structural sensitivity of our building. In addition to the bleak preplast, excuse me, pre-blast survey that we talked about last time. I'm just curious if any real-time vibration monitoring with trigger thresholds and contingency provisions if those thresholds are exceeded are at all considered in this design. Third, stormwater management and groundwater. This is something I also talked about last time. The proposed infiltration system on that plan is 15 feet from our building, if not closer. 15 feet. I want to understand the system's performance under reduced infiltration conditions, such as partial clogging, seasonal groundwater variation, and what overflow or failure pathway would be considered in those scenarios. Again, I can no longer testify as an expert witness. I know you guys presented some hydraulic calculations previously.