PLANNING BOARD MINUTES

Transcription

1 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES A regular meeting of the South Kingstown Planning Board was held on Tuesday, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, South Kingstown Town Hall, 180 High Street, Wakefield, Rhode Island. A. ROLL CALL Mack Present Clendenen - Present Riendeau Present Scherer - Present Kenerson Present Castrovillari Present Rubinoff - Present Mr. Dennis Vinhateiro, Principal Planner, Mr. Jon Schock, Director of Public Services, Ms. Nancy Letendre, Special Legal Counsel and Mr. David Petrarca, Esquire were also present. B. CONSENT AGENDA (CA) Ms. Mack read the items on the Consent Agenda. C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: (CA ) April 8, 2014 regular meeting E. (CA) REPORT OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIVISIONS recorded during April 2014 Egan/Ferguson Administrative Subdivision, Re-plat of Lots 28 and 29 (Sherman Homestead Plat), AP 88-1, Lot 83 and AP 82-4, Lot 19, located at 55 and 65 Hull Street, recorded 4/8/14. Bell /Sheldon Administrative Subdivision, AP 56-3, Lot 47 and AP 56-3, Lot 48, located at 343 and 349 Main Street, recorded 4/18/14. MINOR SUBDIVISIONS recorded during April 2014 RIDEM/BSA Minor Subdivision, AP 61, Lot 1, located off Worden s Pond Road, recorded 4/15/14. MAJOR SUBDIVISIONS recorded during April 2014 The Woods on Laurel Lane Major Subdivision, AP 12, Lot 13, located on the southeast side of Laurel Lane, recorded 4/17/14. TRC Approval, April 23, 2014 DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL South County YMCA Addition and Renovations, a proposed 1,921 square foot building addition and interior renovations, AP 49-3, Lot 7, located at 165 Broad Rock Road, recorded 4/28/14. Mr. Clendenen moved, Ms. Castovillari seconded; motion carried: Motion: To approve the Consent Agenda as read. D. SPECIAL ITEMS At the request of Ms. Letendre, the Board agreed to discuss the Sheldon Hill Preliminary Plan Draft Decision first.

2 Page 2 2. PRELIMINARY PLAN DRAFT DECISION Sheldon Hill, a proposed ten-lot subdivision (nine market rate units and an inclusionary two-household structure), AP 56-3, Lot 77, located on the south side of Winter Street 750 feet east of Kenwood Avenue, Thomas A. Mort, owner/applicant Ms. Mack stated that the public hearing has been closed and the draft decision is before the Planning Board tonight. Mr. Shock stated that he would like to add Condition of Approval #31: The applicant shall grant the Town a General Right to Drain Easement over the applicant s adjacent property identified as Tax Assessor s Plat 56-3, Lot 86. Ms. Mack also noted that on Page 5 of the April 8, 2014 minutes Mr. Prive made an incorrect reference to the retention basin being designed to hold a maximum of 8.2 inches of rain in a 24 hour period which is the 100 year storm capacity. The correct amount is 8.5 inches of rain in a 24 hour period (100 year storm capacity). Ms. Mack stated that the Planning Board members were very concerned about this site and wanted to be sure that they not only had the appropriate Conditions of Approval in place but were also definitive about how they tried to contain the run-off so that adjacent properties would not be further affected and that the drainage would function at its correct capacity. Assurances and extra inspections have also been required to facilitate maximum communication between the Town engineers and the construction crew. Mr. Riendeau asked that Condition of Approval #21 be modified regarding best practices for storm water management. Discussion ensued relative to the fact that the RI Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook (2014 draft version) is being referenced when it hasn t even been approved yet. Ms. Letendre suggested the language in Condition of Approval #21 refer to the current (not the draft) version of the RI Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook. Ms. Mack stated that the intention is that there will be better communication and ongoing inspections so that things do not go awry. Mr. Riendeau did not agree with this compromise and he feels that any comment made after the public hearing was closed should not be reflected in the motion language. He feels that the motion language should be fully vetted by the Board and Mr. Schock. Ms. Castrovillari agreed with the compromise stating that in the long run it helps the abutters and the neighborhood. Mr. Schock mentioned that a subdivision this large is already required by the Subdivision Regulations and the Sediment Erosion Control Ordinance to send in weekly soil erosion reports to the Department of Public Services. Mr. Riendeau moved, Mr. Kenerson seconded; motion carried: Motion: The South Kingstown Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary Plan Approval to the Major Land Development Project prepared for Thomas A. Mort, a proposed ten-lot subdivision depicted on plans entitled: Preliminary Plan Submission, Sheldon Hill Subdivision, Winter Street, South Kingstown, Rhode Island, Assessor s Plat 56-3, Lot 77. Plans by DiPrete Engineering, Sheets 1-11, dated with revisions through , scales as noted. This approval is also based on Landscape Plans, Sheldon Hill Subdivision prepared by John C. Carter & Co., Inc., Sheets 1-2, dated with revisions through This approval is further based upon the following Findings of Fact and Conditions of Approval: Findings of Fact 1. The subdivision is consistent with the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The subdivision conforms to the standards and provisions of the South Kingstown Zoning Ordinance. 3. No lot is designed and located in such a manner as to require relief from Article 5, Section of the Zoning Ordinance, as amended. 4. There will be no significant negative environmental impacts from the proposed development as shown on the plans with the required Conditions of Approval.

3 Page 3 5. The subdivision, as proposed, will not result in the creation of building sites with such physical constraints to development that building on these lots according to pertinent regulations and building standards would be impracticable. 6. The subdivision has adequate and permanent physical access to a public street, namely Winter Street. 7. With the required Conditions of Approval the subdivision will provide for adequate surface water runoff, for suitable building sites and for the preservation of natural, historical, or cultural features that contribute to the attractiveness of the community. 8. The design and location of building sites, utilities, drainage improvements, and other improvements in the subdivision minimize flooding and soil erosion. 9. The designation of proposed Lot 8 as the site of an affordable duplex satisfactorily meets the Planning Board s requirement that the affordable units be integrated throughout the development. 10. The existing topography divides the development site into two distinct sub-watersheds. Existing stormwater runoff from a small area in the northwest quadrant of the site flows in a generally southwesterly direction while the majority of the existing stormwater runoff flows in a generally southeasterly direction toward Highland Avenue. Down gradient property owners within both of these sub-watersheds are currently being impacted by up gradient stormwater flows. Although these impacts cannot be directly or exclusively seen as being caused by existing stormwater runoff from the development parcel, they add a need for increased sensitivity and scrutiny of site construction practices to mitigate any potential increases in stormwater runoff from the development site. 11. The Planning Board further recognizes that the proposed development is unusual with respect to stormwater management in that there is no natural watercourse or improved drainage system to which stormwater flows will be directed and that on-site infiltration of stormwater will be paramount to the development site s ability to reduce stormwater runoff. In this regard, the proposed stormwater management system has been designed to maintain exiting stormwater flow patterns and to contain a 100 year storm event. 12. In its review of the proposed development, the Conservation Commission noted that the soil on the site has been compacted as a result of predevelopment activities and this has had a negative effect on the livelihood of trees on the site. The Commission recommended the applicant follow the tree protection specifications as outlined in the Town of South Kingstown Subdivision and Land Development Regulations during site construction activities. 13. Conditions have been included in this approval that are intended to further improve the development site s capacity to infiltrate stormwater and to provide for healthy tree and plant growth through the application of best soils management practices during site development. Findings of Fact, Inclusionary Zoning Incentive 1. Pursuant to Article 5, Section E. of the Zoning Ordinance, the Planning Board s Master Plan Approval of the Sheldon Hill Subdivision (Winter Street) allowed the applicant to exceed the Basic Maximum Number of permitted dwelling units by two (2). Such allowance allowed the applicant to establish a maximum of twelve (12) units on the site, where without such incentive, ten (10) units would be permitted under a conventional subdivision of the parcel. The zoning incentive was permitted based upon the requirement that the applicant provide a minimum of twenty percent of the basic maximum number of lots expected to be developed under a yield plan as affordable to low and/or moderate income households as defined under RIGL 45-53, the Rhode Island Low and Moderate Income Housing Act. 2. The applicant has submitted a revised, preferred plan for consideration for Preliminary Plan Approval. The applicant s preferred plan reduces the total number of units from the twelve units approved at Master Plan to eleven units, including a Two-Household Detached Structure which will be marketed as two separate affordable units. The applicant s preferred plan contains an additional nine (9) market rate single-family home sites. 3. The Zoning Incentive (two units) shall constitute a municipal government subsidy as defined under the Rhode Island Low and Moderate Income Housing Act and the South Kingstown Zoning Ordinance.

4 Page 4 Conditions of Approval 1. The use of the property shall be strictly limited to Use Code 10, Single Household Detached Structure residential development for nine (9) of the ten (10) lots and Use Code 11, Two-Household Detached Structure for the remaining lot. 2. This approval is limited to ten (10) building lots in total. 3. Fair Share Development Fees for both open space and school facilities as required in the Zoning Ordinance and as amended annually in the Capital Improvement Program shall be required for each of the nine (9) market rate units in the subdivision. 4. Per the restrictions outlined at Section K D.1. and Article 12 of the Zoning Ordinance, affordable housing units shall be exempt from Fair Share Development fees for both open space and school facilities. 5. The subdivision shall satisfy its affordable housing component requirement with the dedication of a two-household dwelling located on Lot 8 of the Preliminary Plan as the required inclusionary component. 6. The affordable unit shall be available for ownership and/or occupancy by low/moderate-income households as defined under Rhode Island General Laws and the South Kingstown Zoning Ordinance. 7. Any lease of either of the affordable units located on Lot 8 shall remain affordable to low or moderate income households for a period of ninety-nine (99) years from the date of occupancy. 8. Any sale of either of the affordable units located on Lot 8 shall remain affordable to low or moderate income households for a period of ninety-nine (99) years from the date of its initial occupancy. 9. The affordable units must meet the criteria for subsidy and deed restrictions such that the units count toward the low and moderate income housing stock within the Town. 10. Any future rental of the affordable units shall require that it be marketed and leased to households earning up to eighty percent (80%) of the Area Median Income in conformance with Article 12.(7.1) of the South Kingstown Zoning Ordinance. 11. Proposed low and moderate-income housing units shall be similar in scale and architectural style to the market-rate units within the project; and they shall be built and offered for occupancy simultaneously with the construction and occupancy of the market-rate units. 12. The monitoring agent for the project shall be certified and qualified by the Rhode Island Housing and Mortgage Finance Corporation. 13. Any monitoring agreement between the developer or subsequent owners of the affordable units and the monitoring agent shall require notification to the Town of South Kingstown, as a party with a vested interest, of the availability of affordable housing units for purchase or lease. Any such notification shall be directed to the South Kingstown Director of Planning. 14. Concurrent with the Record Plan, the applicant shall record all legal documents in support of the development. The documents shall include but not be limited to proposed Homeowner Association By-Laws and a Declaration of Conditions, Restrictions and Covenants governing the proposed development. Said documents shall include the following specific requirements: a. Restrictions on use, ownership, maintenance and replacement of commonly owned infrastructure components; b. Restrictions on use, ownership, maintenance and replacement of individual pervious driveway surfaces; c. Restrictions on use, ownership, maintenance and replacement of the perimeter buffer. 15. Prior to any further site work, the limits of disturbance as shown on the approved plans shall be taped or roped off using high visibility material. Construction equipment, materials storage and any and all related construction activities shall not be permitted beyond the limits of disturbance. 16. Those trees intended for preservation shall be protected during construction using best management practices as outlined in the Sequence of Tree Preservation & Protection on Sheet 2 of the approved Landscape Plan.

5 Page The perimeter buffer is to remain undisturbed except for those activities necessary to install supplementary landscape buffer materials. 18. The applicant shall remove the recently installed stonewall foundation located on the Drainage Area lot prior to the construction of the drainage structures on the lot. 19. The applicant shall incorporate best management and construction practices in developing a soil erosion, runoff and sedimentation control plan. The applicant shall secure a Soil Erosion, Runoff and Sedimentation Control Permit from the Department of Public Services prior to any further site work. 20. The applicant shall insure that the site contractor avoids compaction of soils within those areas dedicated for water quality and storm water management. 21. To insure maximum stormwater infiltration, the applicant shall provide on-site inspection of soil preparation and placement of topsoil that includes pre-grading inspection, grading in progress inspection and post-construction inspection as outlined in the RI Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook. 22. The Project Engineer shall monitor construction to insure that Conditions of Approval #15 through #21 above are adhered to and that project infrastructure is installed in conformance with the approved plans. 23. Prior to recording, the Project Engineer shall provide written certification that Conditions of Approval #15 through #21 have been satisfied. 24. The applicant shall file Final Plans with the Planning Department and the Department of Public Services for review and approval. Approved Final Plans shall be recorded in the Town s Land Evidence Records. Individual deeds for each lot shall be recorded concurrent with the Record Plans. 25. The Final Plans shall be revised to reduce the sewer easement to twenty (20) feet in width. The resultant unencumbered land within the development parcel shall be added to the Drainage Area lot and the capacity of the detention pond shall be increased to the greatest extent feasible. 26. Landscape material shall be warranted for a period of two years. Any substitutions to the landscape materials schedule shall be subject to prior approval by the Administrative Officer. 27. Prior to the release of the Performance Bond, the Project Landscape Architect shall certify that the installed landscape materials conform to the approved landscape plan. 28. An existing accessory building located on Assessor s Plat 56-3, Lot 73 encroaches on the development parcel. Prior to recording the applicant shall resolve the encroachment. 29. As part of the final submission, the applicant shall provide a construction cost estimate on forms provided by the Department of Public Services. The construction cost estimate shall serve as the basis for determining inspection fees, the performance bond and the maintenance bond. 30. The applicant, the Project Engineer and the site contractor shall participate in a preconstruction conference. 31. The applicant shall grant the Town a General Right to Drain Easement over the applicant s adjacent property identified as Tax Assessor s Plat 56-3, Lot 86. Castrovillari - aye Scherer - aye Rubinoff - abstain Ms. Letendre left the meeting at this point. 1. ADVISORY REVIEW / RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF REVIEW Special Use Permit Application, The Pointe at East Matunuck (formerly Wakamo Park, Phase II), proposed expansion and reconstruction of 799E and 799F Succotash Road and construction of two accessory structures, AP 87-3, Lot 3, located at 801 Succotash Road, The Pointe at East Matunuck LLC, owner/applicant Mr. David Petrarca, Special Legal Counsel, was in attendance representing the Town of South Kingstown.

6 Page 6 Mr. Donald Packer, attorney, was present representing the applicant. Michael Chadwick and Charles Cummiskey, local residents involved in the park for many years were also present to speak with the Board. Mr. Packer stated that there is nothing in the Zoning Ordinance that directs this Special Use Permit application to the Planning Board for an advisory recommendation. He is questioning the authority of the Board to render an advisory opinion without jurisdiction. Mr. Packer questioned the Director of Planning s determination of the calculation method for the 50% expansion. The ordinance permits up to 50% increase in floor area, land area or intensity. He states that Mr. Murray used the tax assessor s figures for floor space which are not correct. These are different from the Special Legal Counsel s definition (in another recent case) of livable space which includes lofts and decks and these are the calculations that the applicant used in its application. Mr. Clendenen noted that there is, first of all, a difference of opinion between the Town s and the applicant s definitions of livable space; the applicant s definition includes covered porches and basements. He feels that the livable space calculation needs to be decreased somewhat (remove basements). Discussion ensued with Mr. Packer and Mr. Chadwick relating to the calculation methods. Mr. Clendenen also asked how the parcel came to be zoned Commercial Waterfront (CW)? Neither the Planning Board members nor Mr. Vinhateiro could answer that question definitively. Other Board members asked about the lack of defined lots in this subdivision, felt that the applicant should share its purportedly more accurate space calculations with the tax assessor, noted that the Comprehensive Plan does not support such a homogeneous community in the area, felt that this development would change the character of the area and they also voiced concerns about increased intensification of the area, establishing a protocol for expansion and impacts to the roads and utilities. Mr. Packer noted that CRMC has reviewed this project application, issued a Preliminary Determination and agreed with the footprint expansions. Mr. Schock asked what number of bedrooms had the current Onsite Wastewater Treatment System (OWTS) been designed to accommodate? Mr. Packer stated 27 bedrooms is the current number and Mr. Chadwick said that the number will remain the same when the system upgrade is complete. The Director of Public Services noted that he had gleaned from the RIDEM-OWTS that the previous owner of the property had not been in compliance with the OWTS. Mr. Chadwick stated that his group is making improvements to the OWTS and should be in compliance by June 1, Residents Stephanie Osborn, Brandt White, and Doug Fisher spoke on the importance of the specificity of the plan and the proposed guidelines, change in character of the community, future environmental concerns and too much development in fragile areas. Jenna Karlin, a non resident from Unite Here, presented her opposition to the drastic expansion into a beachside condo development that the applicant is proposing. Mr. Scherer suggested that this discussion could be communicated to the Zoning Board of Review (ZBR) in letter form. He also added that all the entities involved (TSK, CRMC and the applicant) need to be in agreement on their definitions. Mr. Petrarca stated that calculations are the issue; the Planning Board has not been given enough information in order to give a proper advisory opinion.

7 Page 7 Mr. Clendenen asked if the Planning staff could attend and testify at the ZBR meeting listing all the Planning Board s concerns. The Planning Board s list of concerns is as follows: issues on calculation methods and definitions (averaging, 50% rule, lofts and studies and their actual uses [i.e. as bedrooms], basements, covered porches, etc.), consistency with Comprehensive Plan, environmental issues related to flooding, OWTS, number of bedrooms, seasonal (?) issues and heating. Mr. Riendeau moved, Ms. Castrovillari seconded; motion carried: Motion: The South Kingstown Planning Board hereby directs staff to write a letter to the ZBR articulating the Board s concerns regarding The Pointe at East Matunuck s application for a Special Use Permit. F. CORRESPONDENCE Ms. Mack spoke about the letter to the Board from David Dawson, a resident of Laurel Lane, relative to the destruction of many trees during the construction of The Woods at Laurel Lane Subdivision. Mr. Vinhateiro stated that the developer has been very attentive to any problems that arose during construction. He has not cleared more land than the identified limits of disturbance allowed. There is, in fact, more open space than the required amount under the FDRP guidelines. Ms. Mack feels that the Board should respond by letter. Ms. Castrovillari moved, Mr. Clendenen seconded; motion carried: Motion: The South Kingstown Planning Board hereby directs staff to draft a letter of response to David Dawson. G. COMMENTS BOARD MEMBERS AND PRINCIPAL PLANNER Ms. Rubinoff volunteered to attend the May 28, 2014 TRC meeting. H. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Clendenen moved, Mr. Riendeau seconded; motion carried: Motion: To Adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m.