Zoning Board - Regular Meeting

No, I'm not sure who that is. No, I'm not sure who that is. Maybe ask Stephanie. Yeah. Okay. All right. Hi. How you doing? Good. How are you? I'm good. So, I got that email about that um that zoning tax. Yeah. When is he want for next month? I think next month. Yeah. All of them too. But it's I was traveling this thing. I just got back from the show in Nashville. Oh, nice. It was really fun. Yeah, apparently fun down there. I have and my wife has the for There's so much talent. Like I love live music and stuff and we don't have that over here. There you turn. Even my Uber driver was like playing the harmonica. Like everywhere you turned there was music. Yeah. But um so yeah, I'll I'll take a look at it. I'll see something. Yeah. My question is, can you have a section that specifically says you don't have to conform to another section? I know. I don't It seems weird to me. You can say that you can like I I know there are laws and statutes that say like unless noted otherwise you can do this and then like it'll know otherwise that you can't do it in a certain situation. So like I want to say yes, but I've never seen like a blanket no like that. Yeah. So what is he and he's looking to he's looking to so he's got a non-conforming apartment complex that has too many units per acre right now. He wants to increase the density. He

wants to add six more units to a non-conforming lot and he need a special use permit that says he can't get any variances. So I mean it's like what else is there to do? Yeah. All right. Yeah, I'll I'll look into it. It doesn't seem like some like my initial gut reaction is probably no, but okay. I'll take a look into it. I don't know the internet here. Do you have a Wi-Fi? Uh, it's on the wall over there. Yeah, I don't have the information. I'll find it. It's going to be a lot. Yes, unfortunately. Yeah, we're expecting It was like 50 people last time. So probably you're on the scene. Yeah. Yeah.

Is Anthony coming to he wanted to see this one through? He said, "Yeah, there's a lot of people uh that don't want it." No, that um that flood analysis was interesting though that you sent us. Oh, yeah. Everybody just I sent to the board. Yeah. Um, I'm actually kind of surprised that she said I'm actually kind of surprised her answer. Yeah, I thought there was going to be more restrictions than that based on Yeah, I mean I thought she was going to be more maybe strict on it based on the property itself. Like one foot is not crazy. Yeah, she brought us to that site. So like I want to say like October, maybe November, she and some people from FEMA came to the town and brought the building inspector and myself to every flood zone in the town and pointed out violations that we had to get corrected. Okay. And that was one of them. And she told and you know we said he's planning on doing a development here and she gave us all the regulations. So, I thought it complied, but I wanted confirmation and she confirmed that it does. So, I'm just I'm not I don't do a lot of flood stuff. Yeah. Uh over here, it's like this the first time I've encountered a flood zone in North Provin. I used to work in Narro and it was like every property was a flood zone. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. All right. But yeah, I mean, I guess we'll see if he's willing to do that. It sounds like he is. Yeah. So, and parking being in a flood zone, even if it's allowed, right, it's not really it's not good a good idea, you know. I mean, I know when my house flooded and my my car totals Oh, yeah. When I was in college, I lived in a

river and the river uh raised 40 feet and my almost my entire second floor was underwater. Wow. What did you eat? Yeah. And I actually swam to my house cuz um Oh my god, that's crazy. I at the time I had a I had a shotgun because I wasn't hunting and I I technically wasn't supposed to have it in the off campus rentals. So I ran there to get it. I swam there through the flood zone and uh yeah, it was uh that's crazy. It was well beyond standing. I got two feet and it was like I' I've never seen something like that in a house where I'm 40. That's Well, so my house was probably 25 feet up a cliff from the river. So the first 25 ft didn't hit the house and then the next like 15 feet did. And I was as it was going they're like you can't go up 25 ft. Well, the cops came and uh and my landlord and they were like everyone needs to leave now. The river the dam water valley uh breached so the the whole valley is going to flood. Yeah. So we had a for warning. We you know we moved all of our take what you can expensive stuff to the second floor and threw all the couches into the hallway and the second. Yeah. Wow. That's wild. But yeah, floods, you know, where where they going to put their cars? Where are they going to It's not safe. Yeah. Period. End of story. It's just not safe to have that. I don't care if it's allowed in flood regulation. It's really just not safe. Yeah. And the problem is like how can we we can't enforce regulations that don't exist. be holding to those regulations, which is unfortunate. So, I'm interested to hear what everyone has to say tonight, just the members of the board because I don't know where anyone's stands and these guys, you know, I know Steve isn't having he said we asked for phase one and two environmental study and they didn't give us that. So, I'm not ready to vote

underneath it. All right. So, it's at least one. This guy's name is Steve. What's this guy's name again? So Steve, Gary, yep. Dave is the chair. Uhhuh. Warren, Mark, and then Lou. So Warren's been on the board for like 49 years. Warren, you're saying? Yeah. He's the longest serving planning board member of the state. Okay. Yeah, that's what someone was saying the other day. Yeah. Yeah. And uh I mean he doesn't really have too much experience with planning except for being on the planning board and like knowing the laws at least. Yeah. And um like he does screen door repair. He owns Uncle Joe's screen door. Oh, okay. Dave's an architect. He knows a lot. Um Mark is a hockey coach for Roger Williams, I think it is. But you know, you learn on a job. Yeah. Yeah. He does uh the research enough that he you know he can ask intelligent questions and make you know appropriate decisions. And then this guy gave me planner he said it's north of Gary. Yeah. So he's from Northboro. He is getting the hang of it. He doesn't really know where to but he knows planning so that's good. Um and then Lou is an attorney or was an attorney. I think he's retired. How you doing Anthony? going on. Not much. What's going on? Just talking about the flood plane and the response from the flood plane coordinator. I'm here, right? Yeah, you're there. Um yeah, we just don't have a response and

how to our dismay and shock that it's pretty much Yeah, you can do things, but I don't want to approve anything tonight. Like we've got to write a decision on this. Steve doesn't either. He told me to. Yeah. I think what we do is take everything under adisement with their consent. Yeah. And come back at the next minute. You could you could help Reynold write a decision and you can help Yeah. craft the findings. Steve is adamant about the phase one and phase two. making a master plan decision. I told him you need to do it cuz he called me today this afternoon. Yeah. Oh, good. I said I said normally you would do it when he um coupled master plan and preliminary together. Yeah. Now it's decoupled. So now I said that would come in at the next stage. So you can condition your master plan that he does a phase one environmental at before preliminary. Before preliminary. Yes. That's what I would do. Yeah. So, they sent me the uh the title search for the environmental any fire marshall letter, right? And then uh you want to put that Facebook thread on the record. What? So, what what I mean what are they talking about? Well, Ridiculous. It's kind of funny. Is this all just public? Uh, it is just so stupid. Instagram us. Is it nonsense? There's a neighborhood uh North Proidence Neighbors Facebook page. That's great. We have one of those and uh yeah, he saw he saw this message posted on that group.

Angelica, we got to lower that tax rate in Smithfield. I love fund the schools. I am they got 100 they got they got more money than last year. 187,000 more they're going to get now. Wait, this is so if you cut if you cut 58 you cut that 58 that's achieved. Yeah. I What was the number? If you That's $1. Okay. So, or what's one? Every $100,000 reduces the tax rate by 2.5 cents. So, you could cut the tax rate by like 10 cents. That's a lot of money. So, it goes from 1247 to 1237. 200 every 100,000 reduces the tax rate by 2 and a half cents equals 2.5 cents. Okay. um reduces the tax rate. Tax rate by 2.5 cents. Okay. So we did 500,000. We're looking at Yeah. like almost 15 cents. 15 cents. Yeah. Like whatever 13, right? No, that's good. I mean, the schools, they don't do them to cooperate. They spend money like water. And I'm not I mean, you can't keep increasing 500,000 a year. It keeps building that base. Did you hear Peter the other day when she came to the meeting and she's like we have 1.3 in that account and no not that account. So we got and they got $1.8 $28 million level funded from last year and that's it or give them like 100 nothing nothing good statement and I think John say so if you get the vote so that that's good Mike might but they got more state how much 800 more but they got another 138,000 I don't want I hate to be like

All right. That that that and then the other the other thing and that's like 80,000 plus benefit. Yeah. And then the other thing is village they're approved for 127 units right now. Are you talking about So it's the this one this one. This one. Yeah. But they're already reducing 200 units. Yeah. And I I also they asked for an extension and I know on it. Yeah. I didn't give them the full almost existing amendment in place having a hard time getting Not that I know. I don't know. I got signed out. I guess they're having a hard time. Everybody says it feels good. Yes. Not as nice to be. Oh, no. No. You get that right. Well, we're going to Italy. I'm going September. I know, but you go with your wife and then you're going to come with us. I go with you guys. I may not come back. Yeah, but that's all right. No, I go

with you guys. That's it. Well, fine. That's uh second wife. Don't open the wallet. That's the bottom line. Will Kurula open the wallet? Yeah. You know what? He's he pretty he opens it over there. Okay. Yeah. when I come so long. Oh yeah, he likes his wine. He likes it. He likes his wine. I told him both the lunch I said when you gonna bring Anthony and myself. Yes. Yeah. And it's engineer. He was down. Right. Yes. All right. So we have to make down tomorrow after we're gonna be down there Thursday, Friday, Saturday back there Sunday. But then I'm here for like two weeks. We'll have to see if we can make a we can get them to spring or something. Even like Haven. Well, I mean maybe um maybe Oh, do you ask them? No, they don't. Your standards already. Well, I don't want to ask my cousin for too much. Not really. They're not cousins. Oh, I same same area. Are you really? Well, maybe I'll give these I just did a closing today for Mike Robert. Oh, yeah. I never had that much interaction. He's the Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Right. I saw Dominic. I saw Mike too. Mike senior I saw Mike senior here seeing each other two weeks ago. Yeah. Yeah. He had the moment. I'm sure he's like an animal. Well, they already seen he works like 20 plus.

I got the filling that I made for Christmas for the rapper. Exactly. So I said you're going to let me know cuz he said I'm going to have you and Stephen over my house. you can do all the cooking and I'll bring the wine. I said, "Well, I got the filling." I said, "I'll make the raviolis." He go, "Well, let's do it." So, you got to remind them to do. No, he's supposed to meet me in September. Supposed to meet. So, he says he's going to be in Italy. So, that's what he tells. Are you staying over there? Are you staying on? Yeah. Four or five nights hanging in there. The only thing that gets nervous if anybody else is if you have a heart attack you're dead. That's true. But I guess if it's your time would have been husband Louis Diana that was your cousin Louie. Yeah. Yeah. My father's cousin went my second cousin. What a shame. Well, I went I took him to because Mariah Maria Pomado marries Antonio Laya. So, we go see Maria's kid son. And so, we go over there and My my uncle, my great uncle, it's going over the threshold to the house in Scotland. Dear Resort number eight, right over there, right next to the church. Yeah. He trips and falls all What am I going to do now? They put me up. I'm in a hotel. Turn it off. Right.

But he wakes up a chance to look at those stud. No, but but that's all right. And the food's good. That's where I stay. Yeah, glasses. As far as he I'm by myself with him. I got to get off the plane. He comes home. Look at my eyes. Nothing broken. I'm like, imagine. There's no way you're getting medical help. You're dead. So the law is you get your flow plane. There's a base flood elevation which is like uh you got to be in the law states that you have to build. Did you go to above that level? Is that restaurant still open over there? Freez open. The other one's open with the pizza place or whatever it is. So he's extending the One Paul Kosh is now. That's the one I met. I had my cousin got married over there. Truffle and then and then I'm leaving cuz I had to leave early cuz I had somebody drop me off there and pick me up and I was going to Naples next with my friend. Yeah. So it sound very expensive. I come out and the hunters are there. So expensive. And they got the beagles. They're feeding the beagles pristini with olive oil on the toasted toasted bread. They cook well the wild before they were taking it in to butcher it. And am I right? They cook well. So some of the best the cheapest food around and you eat the best you'll ever I thought the fireplace.

We'll see what he got my picture. I took Charlie. Yeah, I think I think Charlie's cousin said I haven't seen I go to a doctor in Massina. He invents his own treat. So his plan what do you want to do? I want to go to stop if you're either going to deny it or continue doing a whole new application. Yeah. So I think he's going to feel it out. This guy wants to come to Italy. He's going to win. list of people. The next year the next particular day or Sunday night. So you'll be looking at the door. So I um actually you know what I'm not even sure what's happened with it because January loaf of bread there might Yeah. All right. Very good. Did Kelly by chance talk to you about the ordinance dissolving the zoning ordinance or the zoning board? No, I the

last I knew it was just pending. Did they submit it to the legislature? No. No. As far as the state the state allows it to come by. No, but I thought she drafted a bill to send I thought she was but I had never seen a draft or heard anything draft. I was okay with it. I sent off on it. All right. Yeah. So, the hook got sent. I don't know. You got to ask her. All right. Yeah, ask her. Um I wasn't sure if she uh like passed the torch or anything. No, Steve. You missed the financial business. I missed a bunch. No, this market today that the 10 break off which means interest rates on mortgages and% Yep. Lou, I have the mics turned off right now. Okay, the meeting starts. Can you just flip the switch behind you? Yeah. Yeah, right when it starts. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. How are you?

Hello, Mr. How did you find uh Disney in France versus Disney in Orlando? Um it was like the they only have two parks. Yeah. Okay. So it's like the Magic Kingdom and uh no um Hollywood Studios. Oh, is that right? Okay. Yeah. So much much smaller. Yes. Yeah. I don't know about this the size like I think those two parks in Orlando and the parks um in France were were comparable. Were they okay? Yeah, they were obviously they weren't identical to each other. Even the rides weren't identical to each other. Okay. Um but uh it was Yeah, it was fun. There something different. Yeah, I um at first I was really objecting to going to Disney. Yeah, but um Yeah, while you're out there, you might as well. Yeah, but going to Disney allowed us to or allowed me to uh lobby for uh normal. Yeah, little give and take. Hi David. Gary Gary, how you doing? I gota tell you that uh yeah, how was it? That training was phenomenal. Oh yeah. Yeah. That's great to hear. Even though it was like three hours long. Yes. Um tough to do after work. It is. I I made it a little bit

longer because I I participated in but they did a good They did a good job. I can't wait to receive the actual presentation so I can shut it down. My wife used to work with that group some ask you a couple questions during the meeting. Yeah, go for it. question. So, did you get my email? I did. So, she's saying that it manufacturing is considered a commercial. So, the rest of the Oh, yeah. Yeah. All right. And then ask what has what new information is is being provided to the board from the first sub. Yeah. If you want to go over the new stuff that you submitted in the last week tonight with with everyone. Sure. But I don't want to. Yes. if you want to um with the the alternate proposal and and then go into like the 114 proposal that's on the table. Yeah, maybe like two separate conversations.

No, this with the foot plane coordinated. Yes. Um, she's saying he still has to raise it over the one foot over the flood plan, which that's what you know. Yes. Yes. So, it's in conformance is with what she's saying. Okay. But she did say she wants us she recommends us get a flood plan certificate. And if this is the right Yeah. So I I added that that um we require flood plum as the applicant that communication. Oh, they are now that was this afternoon and so it was pretty late. tonight. Yeah, I mean she pretty much confirmed that they meet the the regulations and sign they're familiar with the regulations, but if you want to just let them know that happened, just so you know, they they know we reached out. Couldn't hurt it. But we're going to um I didn't get a chance to revise this since we got the traffic report. So, we're going to strike condition two. Yeah. The recommended conditions because he already submitted the traffic study. So, where to vote on this? I mean, if if you do want to vote on it, you can. If you don't, that's up to the board.

Which one are we going to strike? Two. Two. Yeah. Traffic supply to traffic. are ready to start the meeting. I'll flip this way. Okay. Thank you. Right. Have you heard from um Warren or Mark? I don't think Mark's coming tonight. Um Warren I haven't heard from, but he generally doesn't answer anyway and shows up. So I expect them. How about number eight? Yeah, that's just like um erosioning control. Make sure there's no uh you know run off on the side. So that train is that is that the same threehour training is the content three-hour training that that Yeah, I believe the three-hour training is the same. It's the same content. Yeah. And then the one hour training after the initial first three hours every every year after that and uh two two hours of training for rising sea levels for all.

Yeah. Do they have that available already? I bet I don't. They told me they were going to be repl they had a slide for it. You probably ask the question. Yes. So if some of these seems like decisions are going to get made after we make a decision. Um that prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a comprehensive erosion control plan. Um that came out and she's what she gonna do. She loses it by your foot. She's okay. Yeah. Yeah. So uh her surveyor unfortunately wrong side step setbacks. So they had to do a his plan was not to conform and he thought it was 10 foot step setback 15. They just had to make it uh actually they didn't have to make the building small. They had to make the deck smaller and they're asking for helping out with the waiver. Nice. Nice. Yeah. Yeah. very big supporter of I'm sorry. How you doing Gary? Hi everybody. Good to see you again. Good to see you. Good to see you. So the the erosion condition that's just um make sure that it's not before the No, no. I know what it's for, but I guess like why wouldn't we we review that? So he moved me. I I like it over there.

Why wouldn't we? Oh, we wouldn't. Um, that's just um that's just to ensure that it happens essentially before the building the building official reads these when he uh to make sure everything's in conformance before he issues the building permit. In conformance with what? So the say or landscape improvements or other landscape improvements within the right of way are subject to review and approval. Why wouldn't we review that stuff? because the right of way is DPW's responsibility. So I just put a condition stating that it should get approval from DPW beforehand because they don't necessarily look at the the rightways for new development. start. Let me give Warren a call real quick before we start. See where he's at. Hi Warren, how you doing? Will you be attending today? There is. All right. He didn't know about it, but he'll be here in in five to 10 minutes, he says. So,

you just want to start like two or three minutes late just time. It's a mutual. Hey, does this parking lot exist as proposed? So, it does. So there's a there's another survey that shows existing asphalt versus what he's removing and retaining. So most of the property is currently paved with it's in in relatively bad shape. But does this exist in this like this in this geometry? Uh yeah. Yeah. So uh let me what was the use for for a concrete plant? So they made cinder block. Excuse me. How are you my friend? Good to see you. My Gary. Yeah. If you look at this one, Anthony, how are you? So you see all all this. So I suggest getting we'll let the applicant present and then only the striped area he's on council and then we'll let the resident speak at the end. I was gonna make between the building and the street is 100% right now. Yeah. So they have uh the drain proof from existing condition. I can't believe they ever two and a half years. So did we have that peer reviewed or So that's figure that out. He doesn't have what's presented. So what? So he doesn't have a storm water report. The storm water report before preliminary plan. He might do something. We're looking at master.

Yeah. Okay. Yeah. So master plan is conceptual. I don't know. That must be a approvals administrative unless the board yeah unless the board request that be done for them. So master plans are conceptual preliminary is your public hearing in your engineering stage and final is administrative unless you well Bren tonight's a public hearing as well. Yeah it is just because it was continued but otherwise it wouldn't be so it's just a regular master plan. Okay but I'm going to open the public we're going to open the public hearing with a vote. Yeah, correct. You guys ready? Yeah. Hello. Good evening out there. Good evening. Can everybody hear me? All right. Thank you very much uh for your attendance uh and your patience with our uh technical difficulties that we uh encountered last week. Um uh with our uh inability to broadcast. Um today is uh May 21st, 2025. Uh this is the Town of North Providence uh planning board hearing located at 2000 Smith Street, North Providence, Rhode Island. May you please join me in saying our um country's pledge of allegiance. I pledge to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one indivisible for all. Thank you. Um we're going to open up the meeting uh with uh attendance and uh Lou we will start with you Lou Dukio David

Parenti chair Anthony Golan town solicitor Gary Erasian Steve Patassi Brown planner. Okay. Um we do have uh one planning board member who is uh on their way here. Uh Warren and um as soon as he gets here he can introduce himself. Um but we do have uh four active planning members present. Uh we do have a quorum tonight and um first on tonight's agenda is um is uh 114 Avenue plat 24A lot 110 zone residential limited RL10. The applicant is Patriot Builders, 14010 Road, Exit, Rhode Island. The description for a public hearing that was continued from February 2nd and recontinued from last week. The application for a master plan review for an adaptive reuse development converting the existing two structures into 48 residential units meeting the maximum number of units per acre permitted by right for an adaptive reuse project under section 203 district district use regulations of the zoning ordinance. from my fellow plan planning board members. Um, do I have a motion to open the public hearing? So moved. Second. Okay. Um, Gary has made the motion and Steve has second the motion. Uh, all in favor? I. Any opposed? All right. The uh public hearing is now open. It is 6:05 p.m. We'll like for the applicant to approach the um board and start your presentation for this evening. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, be before we start on the main application, I I think you're aware at least I I spoke to Brent before the meeting started and we do have an alternative project that we have on the back burner. Um this particular um alternative project would require town council approval to change the uh to change the zone to permit this um type of multi- uh uh multif family project. But um we just want to go over it for like two minutes just to let the people know that are here today and to let you know that we have this on the back burner as an alternative project. We're here tonight to go forward with our master plan approval on the original project, but my client feels and we we've put some feelers out there that perhaps that this project would be more palatable to the neighborhood than what we're proposing. So, if you would wouldn't mind giving us just a minute to make the pitch and then we'll go right into our while we're waiting for the other person to arrive, we'll go right into our uh our master plan request. Uh, one one question I have for you. You stated that the alternative um project would require a change in zone. Yes, because right now we're zoned um R10. Is it correct? Yeah. And uh this would require a change to RG and permit an increased amount of density. So, um, right now this is only permitted, uh, it's permitted by special use, the proposed project that we're thinking as an alternative, but we would need, um, it would require a special permit under an RG zone, and we would also want the town council to allow us to increase the density in order to do what this project would require. So, it's right now it's we can't even do it, but um, we um, we did put out some feelers. We think we might get some positive feedback, but we didn't want to even go in that direction until the neighbors that are here tonight had an opportunity to see the

project, maybe perhaps speak with their uh town um council people and see if that's a direction they want us to proceed. And if it is, then um um we would be willing to entertain going in that direction rather than proceeding forward um after we obtain master plan approval. Okay. Uh this is news to me. Um this is the the first that I'm being made aware of it. Um I'm assuming my this is the first the board is is aware of this as well. Um you you have piqu my interest. Um, I I do would I would like to say that um uh I I appreciate the applicants um I want to say research um in seeing what would be um palpable to the community and and to the public. But I I I do like to um instate that uh the decision solely rests on the planning board's shoulders right now, right? For the for the application that we're going to proceed on. It it's um that's what we're here for tonight. But since everyone's here, this presented us with an opportunity, a two-minute window just to show them what we could do if we were be able to go to the town council, get a zone change and um make this a different type of project. You know, you know, five or six smaller buildings, duplex style building as opposed to a large building and a small building, which I think that's one of the bigger problems that that that the neighbors have. So, if um if you permit us to show show this alternative plan, that would be great. If not, um we could do it after our hearing is concluded. Jack, if I if I may. I mean, the public hearing

obviously that was noticed was on your master plan application, right? You you're it's my you know, my opinion obviously we need to proceed on the master plan application, go through your testimony at the end of the night. That's something you want to stay around uh and address with the residents because it's going to require it's going to require council approval anyway, right? Totally different application. No, understood. David, can I ask a question? Yes, you may. So, this conceptual plan, is it on the same property as this project before us? Yes. So, I have to agree with council. I mean, that's inappropriate. That's essentially using the planning board as a form or a platform for you to have a a neighborhood meeting. It's not going to take two minutes. Residents are going to have a 100 questions. So, I agree with council and u and I know the chair was going to open up for further discussion, but um I think we should use the planning board as a platform for you to make a pitch to the residents. I think that should be done on your own time and then decide whether or not you want to move forward with this application, withdraw it, and come back with another one. Well, we're not going to withdraw the application. I maybe I didn't make myself clear. We're just going forward tonight, but I know everyone's here and I tried to actually get up here before you open the meeting to make the pitch to see if I could do the two-minute presentation, but that's fine. We'll just proceed forward. If the people would like to stick around after our meeting concluded and we can tell them what the alternative plan is, that'll be great. David, that's just my opinion. Ultimately, it's your decision with the rest of the board members. But, uh, no, I agree with um with our council. Um, I don't not going to ask for a um formal vote, but I would like to hear from both Lou and Steve. I I agree with council. Thank you. Uh, I agree with councel. Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So, uh, Jack McGreen for the applicant. Um, as you may recall, this hearing is a continuence from the February 12th meeting, um, of my client's applica application for combined master and preliminary plan review for an adaptive reuse development converting two existing buildings located at 114 Beard Avenue. Um it was previously a cement company into a residential facility uh containing 48 units. Um under section 203Q of the North Providence zoning ordinance concerning adapted reuse um the density permitted is not less than 15 units per acre which translates into um 48 units for this project. Um, as previously stated, my client intends to convert the two existing buildings into residential housing with a one building containing 42 units and, uh, building two containing six units. Um, since our last hearing, um, we limited tonight's request to a master plan approval. Um, we're not seeking tonight preliminary, we're just seeking master plan approval. Um at the last meeting um you were looking for after discussions in our presentation you were looking for a traffic study, you were looking for a phase one environmental. You also looking for input from the North Providence um fire department. Um I did send a traffic impact assessment that you probably have in your um package tonight and um it was prepared by Paul Bannon that's here and will be uh presenting his f findings and testifying tonight. Um the phase one environmental has not yet been completed. Um but we will have the phase one completed at preliminary. Um, for now I submitted um a title policy from Commonwealth Title Insurance Company that I believe believe satisfies the

eligibility eligibility requirements of section 203 um of the North Proidence Zoning Ordinance which states that for the project to be eligible and I'll just quote from the ordinance, there shall be no environmental land use restrictions recorded and I emphasize recorded that would be recorded in land evidence records on the property preventing the conversion to residential use by RIDM or the US EPA. I gave you a title search. Title search shows that there is nothing on the property. No, no restrictions recorded land evidence records that would prevent this property from being used as a residential development because of some environmental issue. Jack, one one question on that because this is um information that is part of our packets up here, but weren't uh I don't believe was part of the information that was sent to the board previous to the meeting, but that um title insurance is that that's this right here by Commonwealth schedule A. Thank you. And I'm just to be clear, I'm an issuing agent for title. I'm the person that actually signed that policy as an agent for the title company, but I did perform a title search and it was authorized by the title company to issue that policy and and schedule B will indicate what if any restrictions are on the property and as you can see there there are no restrictions of that nature. Okay. Thank you. And this is submitted in the record. Correct. Correct. Thank you. Um um I guess at this point in time I'd like to call Paul Bannon um to come up and walk you through his impact assessment. I did provide you with a um a a resume I I pulled offline. Um it's probably not completely up to date but um as you'll see it's fairly extensive. I know Mr. Bannon's testified for this board before. So um you will Mr. Um if you want to just give me briefly

your background and qualifications and then go and then expert for the record my name is Paul Bannon a senior project director at Crossman Engineering uh 1982 graduate of the University of Rhode Island with a bachelor of science in civil and environmental engineering. I've been practicing um in the transportation industry over the last 40 years in Rhode Island. I've been um approved uh or qualified as an expert in over 40 communities in Rhode Island and Massachusetts and in superior court in Rhode Island and Massachusetts. I've testified before this board uh numerous times over the years. Uh unless I have any objections from my fellow council members, this board recognizes you as an expert witness. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So, Mr. B, if you would just go through your um conclusions and your observations in your traffic. Uh we were retained by the owner to assess the traffic um impacts, potential traffic impacts associated with redevelopment of the the subject parcel. Um as part of that effort um we reviewed the site plans uh provided by the site engineer uh to ensure that adequate and safe access was being proposed at the at the site site access. We conducted site uh numerous site visits of various times of the week and days of the week uh to observe traffic conditions. We completed a traffic counting program that included manual peak hour turning movement counts at three major uh intersections that would service uh this site. We also conducted a 48 hour uh count on Wardav adjacent to the property to get an understanding of the daily fluctuations in traffic. We inventoried the project area for existing land use, roadway conditions, horizontal, vertical geometry of the

roadway uh for safety and and site distances. We requested accident data from the uh local police department to determine if there were high occurrence or severity of accidents in the project area. We developed a trip generation estimate for this land use and then we assessed the safety and operations of the uh study intersections that we identified as key locations for access. Uh as you're aware the project is located at the uh northeasterly terminus of uh Beard Avenue. Uh it's approximately 3.2 acres in sight. Land use in the immediate area is primarily resident single family residential typically except for this property and properties along the perimeter of the neighborhood. Uh specifically reviewing the development, 48 units are proposed within an existing commercial building that will be renovated. Access will be provided at the existing driveway on Ward Avenue. Uh the existing roadways that will be serviced in the development um include Beardav, Wardav, and Anderton Aav. They provide immediate access to the neighborhood from the major roadways and to this site. Beardav is approximately 2,000 ft long. It uh and 24 ft wide and it's posted at 25 miles per hour in several locations. Um the roadway is in in good condition. It typically doesn't have any um sidewalks except for in the immediate area of of uh our site on the opposite side because it individual property owner put in a a sidewalk along our property frontage. Um the pavement extends right to the building area where parking was uh provided for the business. That pavement will be removed and landscaped with with

landscaping and grass. So all the parking site will be to the rear of the building. Uh Andrew Denav is approximately 1,200 ft running from Power to Beard that provides access in and out of the neighborhood uh from from Power Road. There are only two locations uh in the grid of of streets that provide that. So Anderton is major uh entry exit uh within the neighborhood. That road is is a wider road uh the widest road within the neighborhood. It's 30 ft wide. Uh parking is provided on on both sides of the street and stop signs are located at the five intersecting north south streets along that that stretch. So speed start stop and start stop and start along that section of road which abuts our property is approximately 900 ft um extending between um the uh Dorman and Garfield Street. It is that road provides the only east west link uh in the neighborhood between Power and Charles. That one section between Beard and uh Garfield is the link uh that provides access uh east west access through the neighborhood. Mr. Beta, what's the width of the pavement? The width of the pavement on um Ward on Ward is a variable. It's uh 22 to 32 feet wide. The 32 foot wide section is between Beard and Garfield. How about beard? How about beard? Beard is 24 ft alone. 24 ft. Yes. Um, as I noted, um, 48 hour traffic counts were were conducted on WAV. WAV services along our property frontage

approximately 415 vehicles per day. That translates into roughly uh 20 to 25 vehicle 25 to 30 vehicles per hour during the midday period. In the peak hour, it's roughly 40 vehicles in that one hour. What is that again? Peak what? 40 during the peak. During the peak. So when you take total, when you talk trips, you mean back and forth, correct? Total total traffic. Yes. So it varies, you know, roughly, you know, 20 to 30 vehicles per hour um along that stretch. Uh Mr. Man, can you stay for the record whether or not um there's existing sidewalk or pedestrian um rightway on on beard a on I'm sorry on on Ward Avenue because I don't believe there is no sidewalk on ward only on the corner that corner lot on the northwest side of the intersection they have sidewalks and curving but other than that no throughout the neighborhood um there are intermittent sidewalks and because property owners put them in the town Thank you. Uh for safety, uh we reviewed accident information that was provided by the town. Typical uh analysis period is is a three-year period when we do studies. Uh during that three-year period, there were a total of five crashes. They were minor in nature involving, you know, parked vehicles um going through a stop sign. uh and no in no location had multiple accidents which would indicate that there would be an issue with that location. So relative to safety we feel uh there's no safety issues within within the neighborhood. Mr. Bannon at these intersections for example Ward Avenue and Beard is there any traffic control signage? It's a four-way stop. It's a four-way stop. Correct. And as I indicated along uh Anderton, each of the five north south

streets that run between Beard and Power all are four-way stop signs. So there are a lot of stop signs within the neighborhood in an effort I believe uh to reduce speeds. uh looking at future traffic conditions, use the IT trip generation manual which is the IND industry standard uh for uh estimating tra uh trips for new developments project of this size and type for the morning and what we look at is the peak hours because that's the highest generator from the site uh and typically during the uh for this land use and adjacent roadway. So we look at that worst case condition uh relative to how many trips would be generated in combination with the roadway peaks. During the morning peak we would estimate a total of 19 trips. That' be five entering and 14 exiting. And then during the PM we would estimate a total of 25 trips. That would be 16 entering and nine exiting. That's on top of what exists right now. That would be new traffic, right? So what would the totals be with existing conditions and proposed conditions? Well, we looked at that and analyzed every those intersections and they all operate at a level of service uh A or better in C or better. But at that intersection, it's all uh level of service A during existing proposed conditions. And you got to look at it that that was an active business there. So if there were 10 or 15 employees that work there on a daily basis, you'd have 10 employees coming in the morning versus our 16 total trips and then 10 leaving versus our 25. So Mr. Bin, at peak times, are you saying with the new project there'd be 65

cars? No, no. 19 in the morning and 25 total cars. But you said previous there were 40 vehicles at peak time. Uh people in the public um that's what I understood. I just request that you uh calmly keep your comments um for the time in the meeting when the public can address the board. It's for the board's benefit and also the public's benefit that you do hear testimony from the applicant and the applicant's uh presentation team which consists of um experts in their own distinguished areas. Thank you. Thank you chair. Uh the 40 was existing total volume on board. Yes. So we would add but I'm saying that's that was the question I asked too. So you you mentioned the existing AM peak. You you you spoke about the existing PM peaks and you talked about the proposed PM and AM peaks with the so what would the I think that's what Steve was asking was what I asked. So what's the cumulative effect? Well when you all the all the trips the 19 and the 25 don't get added to Wart. They're distributed based on how where people are going. They go into Power, they go into Mineral, they go into Charles. So, it's distributed within the neighborhood. So, there isn't a focus of all that traffic at one location except the beard in Ward because that's where our access is. Uh, looking at that intersection, it there's very little delay. There's typically one vehicle waiting to get through the intersection at a time. So, it's operates efficiently because it's a low volume roadway. When we talk about peak hours in trips, everybody assumes that there's 48 units and everybody leaves at the same time.

That doesn't happen. Um that peak hour that we're projecting is the that would be the peak. Somebody may leave at 6:00 in the morning, some may leave at 10 in the morning or they work at night. So that number of units would typically generate that amount of traffic during that worst case period of traffic on the day. be clear that in the post build scenario the P the AM peak would be 19 that's with the post project and the background activity going on correct okay sir so with that you know assigning the the site related traffic under that future condition uh all the intersections will operate efficiently so we feel safe and adequate access can be provided uh to this property without adverse impacts to the neighborhood. Uh we also did look at its speeds on ward is part of that uh 48 hour count. Uh the 85th percentile speed is which the speed at which we typically used to post a roadway at the speeds in both directions were 24 miles an hour along that is it posted now? It's posted at 25. Okay. Um Mr. B, in your um study of the the traffic, did you account for um vehicles that are uh parked on on the roads in the in the neighborhood and how those vehicles reduce the um width of the road and could potentially impact the Yes. traffic? Um as a traffic engineer, I encourage people to park on the street in front of their house. That's how you slow traffic down. You require people to travel at proper speeds throughout the neighborhood just like if you know uh when we do traffic calming we narrow the roads. Um so basic application in a neighborhood is um you know people parking on the street if someone's

parked in your lane in your lane you have to wait for someone to come. So that in itself uh calms traffic within the neighborhood. Thank you. And one other question related to that, the um the existing widths of uh the particular roads that you studied. Um I'm assuming that the parking is allowed on both sides of the street. Yes. And in the event that there's um there are there are cars parked on each side of the street um would that result in reducing the vehicular traffic to one oneway pattern or can two cars still simultaneously pass? No, you you would have to alternate if you came upon a situation where two people parked opposite each other. So that that's a typical application or occurrence within a neighborhood. Okay. And is that um is that for all the roads in the neighborhood or anyone in particular or can that logic? Yes. All all the roads are typically 24. Again, the largest or widest road um is Anderton, which is 30 ft, which in itself when you drive it other than, you know, the other streets within the neighborhood, you see, whoa, this is a wide road. So, people may tend to go faster, but because they have stops at every side street, uh that slows down that that traffic or potential speed along that segment of road. Thank you. Does anybody from the planning board have any additional questions related to uh Mr. Bannon's testimony? Yeah. Uh in your study, did you find any sight distance uh issues? No, there are no sight distance. The road beard is straight and flat. Um and

you know our drive we're again we're at a four-way stop uh within short distance um and that intersection is stop controlled in all directions so sight distance is not an issue. Okay. Thank you. David, can I ask a followup? Yes. Mr. Bannon, did you submit a stamped traffic study to the B board? Excuse me. Did you submit a stamped traffic report to the We can submit a stamped one if we we submitted a study. It's not stamped. It can be stamped. Typically not. Could you stamp it? Yes, absolutely. You could just when you get a chance you could forward that to Brent, please. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Warren, do you have any questions for Okay, Steve. Not for Mr. Bon. Okay, thank you. Just to summarize, so in your professional opinion, would this project? Uh, as stated in the in the report of findings and conclusions that we believe that uh adequate and safe access can be provided and there will be no detrimental impact to traffic within the neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. The next item I spoke with Brent with during the hiatus between February 12 and tonight is he um he was asking about um the fact that the property is in a flood zone. And I know the and and I suggested to Brent that those specific issues on flooding and flood zone will be more appropriately addressed at the um preliminary stage of um the application process when we get the engineering done. Um but I do have uh Tim here. He previously testified. If

you had any general questions concerning the de development standards provided in the ordinance, specifically section um 3177 um that has development standards relative to property that's in a flood zone. And this property, as you know, is is in a flood zone. Um so I can bring up Tim. Um I know Brent may have had some questions. I'm not sure if he discussed this matter with you, but um we're here to answer any questions that you may have concerning flooding, but like I said, I think those type of discussions are probably more appropriate for preliminary stage at at this at this time. I would welcome um Tim and uh to provide his um his input um specifically because in in February um the the applicant was seeking a combination of master and preliminary uh plan review which I I think um was the um triggered the the board to have so many questions related to um studies in in engineering. Uh I do know that um uh the board that is the board members that are here today I don't believe all of them were here on February. So I I think Tim it's more than appropriate for Tim to come up and testify. Thank you. Can I ask a question of Jack Dave? Do you want me to wait till Tim finishes? Is it related to the flood? No, the environmental study. Um why don't we Yes, you can ask. Why don't we um stick to the um the topic of the the flood zone and then we can come back to that. Steve, absolutely. So may perhaps since everybody tend to go through the plan issues on the property address the elevation on the on the

in the flood in the flood zone. how you're going to raise the uh floor. Yes. Uh for the record, uh Timothy Behan, professional engineer with the firm Commonwealth Engineers and Consultants, Providence, Rhode Island. I'll just uh walk you through the site plan. Tim, before Tim, do you have an existing condition plan at all that we can reference first? Thank you, Tim. I'm going to bring that a little bit forward so they we lose you when you go uh too far straight. Get closer to the mic. There you go. All right. There we go. All right. So, just for the public, I I um I know you you you cannot see this plan right right now that's being presented to the board, but the the plan that we're looking at right now is existing condition um uh site plan um of the the property right now. and all the drawings that are being sorry that are being presented to the board and facing the board right now um can and will be available um for the public view as as well after the the presentation. Thank you. And and just for the record, it is sheet number three of seven of the plan set. You can see here the dark uh line is the perimeter of the subject property roughly 3.2 two acres in size. Uh we have two buildings. Those are the uh brownish colored structures. There's one at the corner. There's going to be six units in that building and the the larger building is going to be 42 units in that building. Uh the existing site obviously is already developed in the past. Uh much of the site historically has been paved. It has impervious surface. So that's this

hatched area. So, this is the uh the pavement area. You can see much of the site is paved. And what we're proposing to do is to actually remove the portion of pavement that has that cross-hatching. You see the solid here? That will be new pavement for the parking. So, this cross area will be removed. So, there's going to be a substantial amount of pavement removed on the property. Tim, can you um quantify the the term substantial? Do you have a percentage of what the um imperous material presently on site is um compared to what the previous material proposed is? Let's see. We got some numbers over here on the right. It says existing pavement area is 59,211 square ft. And under proposed, the pavement area is dropping to 24,490. And Tim, that doesn't include the footprint of the building, correct? That's just as pavement. That's just the pavement area. Okay. That's pavement alone. Yes. Thank Thank you. Okay. So, that's what we call substantial and uh that also helps in runoff. There's a tremendous less runoff because of that. And um what else do we have here? So we have parking. We have a total number of parking spaces. I believe that's on your title sheet. Sheet one, there's parking calculations and we're proposing 65 parking spaces. So, the adaptive reuse ordinance through the state law requires one per unit. We have 48 and we're

providing 65. Are those 65 parking spaces limited to the occupants of the building? No, no. I think he means like is that for visitor parking as well? No, that's but what I meant. Yep. question. What is that? You have any intent of renting out spaces that anybody other than people actually be occupying the premises? Yeah, thank you. You know, I was thinking that you that wasn't even in my mind. I'm thinking just for visitor parking. Yeah. Yeah. I I took that. And just uh regarding storm water, I mean on the left side of the title sheet, there's a uh storm water redevelopment calculation under the DEM storm water code for an application such as this when you remove so much pavement uh they give you credits and uh under that since we're moving so much water quality and storm water retention is not required because it's obviously much less than existing conditions. All this data has to be reviewed by DM through a storm water permit. Even though we're not providing much for storm water, it's still being reviewed by DM. And we're also in the flood zone. So DM is it's highly regulated. They want to see all the cuts and all the fill areas throughout the site. It's got to be documented and it's going to be reviewed by DM to ensure we're not adding any additional fill in the flood zone because that would raise the flood elevation. So that once again that's part of the DEM permit process which is going to come at a later step but that's all going to be done part of this project. Can you generally describe what the topography of the site is now

compared to what the site the topography of the post will be? This sheet number 407 shows that the best. That shows the existing topography faded in the background in the proposed topography um uh shown darker contour lines. essentially the existing conditions. It's it's higher in front of the building and it's almost like this building's a walkout. It's lower in the back and um this area back here is generally lowline and sheds off towards the wetland which is situated at this direction here. And currently there's like a low poorly graded area here forms a puddle and we're going to regrade that off. So this site sheets constantly in that direction. So there won't be any puddles created. And we've also have some uh compensation area. That's the grading over here to balance that grading out. Since there's going to be a little fill here, there's going to be a little cut here. And all those numbers balance each other out. So there's no impact to the flood zone. Okay. So in generally the the property slopes to the north to the wetlands right now. Correct. Yes. And the proposed use will maintain that um that general slope continuing to slope to the north. Yes. It would slope towards the north towards that wetland. Okay. And regarding the um comment on cut and fill um it did you state that it's a net zero? It's it's balanced. We're not increasing the flood compensation we call it for any interval. DM makes us break it up into

one foot intervals. Say between elevation 50 and 51. We got to calculate all the cuts and fills 51 and 52. We got to calculate all those cuts and fills all the way up throughout the site and that's presented to DM and they review and sign off on it. Okay. Is there do you foresee any impacts um to the existing groundwater table uh that the site construction would um would result in? No. No adverse impacts? No. No. Thank you. And generally speaking, um the proposed site design, um will it increase or or decrease um any sheet flow off of the the property? the the runoff rates will be less than existing conditions because of all the pavement that's being uh eliminated, removed. Does that do any members of the board have questions? Uh you're proposing to increase the first floor elevation to get it above the flood plane elevation, correct? Yes. the living living spaces in those two buildings, okay, are above the flood elevation. Will the distance from the uh floor elevation to the ceiling uh be would it be adequate by increasing the floor elevation? Well, I'm not the architect. I don't have that bit of information. I'm not sure if Armen you have that you're talking to the ceiling. Yeah, the from the floor to the ceiling. you're increasing the first floor elevation. So you're losing, you know, foot or two. The height of the building is allowing us to

have and we want with a one foot first floor between the second floor and the first floor. ceiling of the first floor, the floor in the second floor in it allows us to have 8 and a 90 from the top of the cinder blocks. So we have so the clear distance would be 8 8 ft. We have eight. Okay. If we call first Thank you. Uh Tim, any uh any reason why there isn't a a second access to the site proposed? So you've got a one entrance. What's that about? Maybe 20 feet wide right on beard. Correct. So um was there any thought given to a secondary access? Well, we've coordinated with the fire marshall and they were fine with this layout. So just to reduce pavements and have more green space. My question was was there any consider was there any thought given to a second access though? Yes or no? Well, I mean, there's always options. I mean, but we coordinated with the I mean, we we fine-tune projects as as we go along. All right. So, no other plan showed a second access for the fire department. Said one's good enough. Correct. Okay. Um Gary, just for the um clarification for the for the record, um Brent facilitated Well, I don't know

if it was Brent or the applicant, but um we did Yeah, find it. We did receive I saw the letter from the fire. Yeah, for the fire marshall. Yeah, I saw that. Correct. Um um are these going to be uh condominiums, rental units, leased units? Um just curious. Not that it matters. I just cured leasing units. Jack, I have a quick quick question. Are any of these units going to be affordable? From from the strict sense of being affordable, in other words, making them affordable and putting restrictive covenants on them by by state, no, they're not. Um they're going to be u moderately priced um properties. But my client, as we testified in the previous hearing, um I think the price point for these rentals will will actually fall into the affordably priced um numbers as set forth by Rhode Island Housing. But no, we're not putting a restrictive covenant on them requiring them to be affordables. So the density bonus though with adaptive reuse comes in with Right. We're not looking for a density bonus. Okay. No, but to your point um see within I don't think we could even take advantage of a density bonus because we have to stay within the container on an adaptive reuse. So, it's not as though we could throw some more affordable in here and then all of a sudden throw some buildings in the back um because you have to stay within the container. What's the average size of the units? I'm sorry. What is the average size or the range of units? Hi, my name is Almond. Um the average size they they're going to run from about 560 square ft up to 800

and they'll be all all different sizes. Um about bedroom count. Yeah, that's on the plan. I saw the plan. Yeah, I got the bedroom count. So, got another question. I'm looking at this photograph here. This rendition, it shows parking. It shows a massive retaining wall. So, I'm looking at this rendition, trying to figure out with this site plan how these measure up. You're talking about the retaining wall where those cars are right there. Well, there Yeah, there's a retaining wall right in front of the the structure. I'm trying to line that up. The site plan. That's Yeah, that's that's the old one. Um that's actually going to be all grass in front of the building. All right. So, this is irrelevant then. just what you That's just kind of showing you. Yeah, but I need to know what it's going to look like. So, you can't show something that it's not going to look like. Well, that's that's sort of what it's going to look like. Saying it's going to be all grass. So, then there's no retaining wall end. No. Okay. So, then that's not what's proposed. There's an existing retaining wall. Tim, I'm looking at this. So, right in front of the building, there's a huge retaining wall. So, I'm asking I'm trying to line this up with your proposed site plan. They don't line up. He's talking about this right here. This right here.

So where's this? That doesn't exist right now. Okay. All right. So then where's the structure up to? All right. Um, I'm probably going to make a site visit. I don't take it with me. Okay. Yeah. Um, I recommend we take a step back from the architect the proposed architecture of the building. Um, right now Steve, I know you had a question. Um, yes. Uh, Jack, uh, you said the title search follow no environmental restrictions. But the board asked you in I believe it was February for an environmental study. Are you saying I know you're you're not required to do it, but the board requested it? Yes. I'm wondering if you're going to do it or you're not going to do it. No, we're going to have an environmental study done and it will be available at preliminary. Um but just to satisfy the requirements of um uh section 203 number two eligibility. I think in order for you to make a decision relative to master plan approval at a minimum we have to show that there are no recorded um restrictive covenants preventing us from having a residential um project there. So I needed to make that um assertion and that's why I submitted the title policy. But we're going a step further to get a phase one environmental to make sure there are no issues. Um I mean quite frankly if we go to borrow some money most lenders would require us to do a phase one anyway. So that will be done and will be available at preliminary. Okay. So we I don't understand that um um sorry that

uh the land title um search is the applicant's um means to uh comply with um Q to the eligibility that there are no environmental land use restrictions recorded on the property preventing the conversion to residential use by Rhode Island DEM. or the US EPA. Correct. Yeah. The the only way I could see is is supporting that statement is to issue a title policy which we did anyway when Armond purchased it and we disclo there was no uh restrictive covenants uh placed against the property. Thank you. um related to uh eligibility. A adaptive reuse development must include at least 50% of the existing gross floor area developed into residential um units. Um and so a question related to the to the footprint that is shown on the site plan submitted to us. Is that the current footprint of the of the building? Yes. Does it include any additions to the building or buildings? Actually, because no additions. Okay. Is there any um uh sections that are proposed to be demolished? Are there any sections of the existing structure that is proposed to be demolished that decreases the existing footprint of the building? No, you you cannot increase the footprint. That wasn't his question. wants to know, are you decreasing the footprint? Are you No. No. I wouldn't say they're decreasing it. No. Okay. Um, have you gone to um LA last presentation you did have uh an architect here um on on behalf of the client presenting um wondering if the applicant has

um gone through a process to deem that the uh footprint of the building um is structurally sound. Well, that would all be Yeah, that we haven't taken that step yet. But again that would be done at preliminary preliminary. Yeah. Okay. So for for for major I'm sorry for master plan right now you have you have deemed that the footprint is adequate to support the number of units that are being proposed today. Yes. Um we're not commenting on the structural viability of the footprint or anything like that. That that'll uh we'll we'll spend the money on that um at at that point in time. Okay. Um, can you all also acknowledge that when you do start to floor plan and spa space plan your um uh your your layout um when you start to introduce uh building elements such as mechanical spaces, any structure that is that is needed. Um it it's possible that um those elements could start to reduce the number of units that you're you're proposing. Well, let me just we submitted a plan already that that shows the layout. I believe it shows the mechanical location of the mechanicals. Um, so I I don't, you know, just on what we've submitted so far, um, it doesn't seem to me like there's there's going to be any need to reduce unless, uh, engineering wise we run into something in the building, um, that would require us to rethink um, plan that we've submitted. Um so for so for right now um the applicant is proposing up to 48 units within the existing yeah 48

units. We're not up to we're proposing 48 units. Do you recognize though that there is the chance that once you do start getting into the further into the design of the building there is there is the chance that you may have to reduce the number of units. Yeah there's there's always that possibility. Yes. Yeah, thank you. Um, in adaptive reuse projects, number one, permitted use adaptive reuse for the conversion of any commercial building, including offices, schools, religious facilities, medical buildings, and walls into residential units or mixeduse developments is a permitted use under the criteria described below. Under eligibility, we have two structures on the the property. Correct. Let's start with the small one. What is the existing or pre-existing use of the small structure? How was I believe it was an office related to the cement company. Okay. Yeah. And then the large So right now under the interpretation that that is a commercial use building. Yes. Um and what is the use of the larger the well the previous use of the larger structure on the property? It it was a cement block company. I believe they made cement blocks. They made the cement blocks. So there's manufacturing. Yes. Okay. Um uh Brent, for um the record, can you relay to the board and applicant and the the public um the interpretation that you received? I think on on manufacturing and how that fits into being defined as the interpretation was actually an interpretation for I'll let the commercial use of the p the original use was a commercial use of the property. I'd like to go back Jack to the ordinance section 203. Before you do

that, sorry I stole your thunder. So um so council is is interpreting that the um manufacturing use of the the building applies to um the adaptive reuse eligibility of any commercial building. Thank you. Okay. Going back to the ordinance, Jack, you you have your eligibility requirements. Mhm. 203 Q. You go through your eligibility requirements and then your density calculations are based on certain factors. One of them is that the development includes at least 20% low to low and moderate income housing. If you go to section Q 3 and A2 and our ordinance mirrors the state law, right? And you're not I I think we we we said that it was the the price point will be low and moderate, but that's that's different than I thought you were asking the question about whether or not we were going to put restrictive covenants on this. No. Okay. So, the density the density to 15 units per acres comes in with your eligibility and a number of other factors. One of them being that the development includes at least 20% low and moderate income housing. Miss Yeah, we understand that. Yes. Okay. Yeah. The p our price points will meet more than 20%. So then how will that be memorialized? How would that be monitored? How would we know that? We have to go to Rhode Island Housing. I think we have to get a

monitoring agent. Yeah. Um eligibility letter. Yeah. An eligibility letter and a and a monitoring agent on board. Um and that would be in perpetuity so that those units every year as they change hand from one to another that that have to be monitored to ensure that that right affordability 10 years from now is transferred to the next tenant moving in. Yeah. You pay a fee to I just did one a few weeks ago. You pay a fee. I use the Naraganset affordable housing. um they they do statewide and you pay them a fee and they monitor and anytime there's a change um the new people if they're selling the if we were if they were to we were to sell these units converted it to condos and they would have to go through and pay another fee to the monitoring agent. Um so that that's how that works. Well whether you you pay whether it's a condo but if it's a lease or rent it's the same thing. It's just the rent or the lease would be then affordable at that time the next tenant before the next tenant moves in. Yes. So then um was that then that rent factored into the proposed improvements? So not sure I understand the question. Sure. Good. Yeah. So for example, given I'm going by again this rendition and I won't I'm not going to necessarily hold you to it right now, but I do want to make a site visit. So um there's a certain amount of money that the developer is going to invest in this project to bring in, you know, um for the 48 units. I don't know if these are going to be furnished with appliances, but given the the the quality of the facade, whatever that was going to be, if there's going to be any brick built into it, my question is the fact that our council has brought to your attention that 20% of these units have to be um affordable by some kind of a a restriction. um whether or not when he ran his proformer that the function of these improvements takes into account that 20% of the units there's only going to be a certain amount of income that he's going to pull in from the from the development between the market rate units rent and the affordable unit

rents. So, I'm just asking whether or not his performer ran that based on a 20% affordable rate or though did he run his performer on um 48 units of market rate, which then backs into how much he's willing to invest in this project to bring it up to a specific aesthetic quality. So, that that application that you're talking about is an application that gets filled out with Rhode Island Housing and they do ask for a proformer and we'll need to present that at preliminary. Um okay. To to show that we meet that requirement, we're going to have to show up with a letter. um from from Rhode Island housing and they have an application that requests a proformer and my client's numbers to make sure that um you know he he can do what he's saying he's going to do. All right. So, a question for for Brent. Brent, does it um state law that each town have a certain percentage of um lowincome housing? Yes. Uh yeah, they do. Uh it's 15% as of a few weeks ago. It was 10% before. Okay. Um the town of North Province is exempt. It's one of three cities in the state that's exempt from meeting that that thresh. What what's the what's the reason why we're why why North is exempt from I believe it's the density. Even if we developed every single available lot, we couldn't meet the the minimum. Okay. What were you going to say? But the provision of our ordinance relative to adaptive reuse in the 15 units per acre requires requires 20% 20% of it Yep. I understand. Um yeah, again back to your comment related to

um one way in and out of the property um which uh Tim commented that there's always options and last time this um applicant was heard uh we we had requested we had we had concerns um about that as as well. Um number one, the the property access is off of a a existing deadend street. The dead end um as it exists to now, I don't believe has a has a culde-sac um at the end of it. Um I don't know the the exact length of the road, but it is uh of between Ward and um the end of Bird, but it is fairly long. Um, so we we did ask the applicant to review the proposed plan with the uh town fire marshal and just kind of digging through my um stack of information here. We we did receive a letter from from the fire marshall um that is in record. I'm just going to read it for the public that it is dated February 28th uh 2025. Um on North Providence Fire Department letter head uh Mr. Cordalo, the fire prevention division has reviewed the draft for the development of the property listed at 114 Beard Avenue. The North Providence Fire Department deems the preliminary plans drafted on February 5th, 2025 acceptable. uh regards um Lieutenant Fire Marshall move again. Thank you. Um the plan the preliminary plans that are referenced um in the fire marshall's um letter dated February 5th. Um are those

the plans that are submitted for record for that we're reviewing tonight, Brent? So what you're reviewing tonight is the same plans that were submitted for combination master and preliminary that were deemed not fully sufficient as far as engineering goes. Correct. So yeah, essentially what he looked at what he's calling preliminary plans are essentially what's being presented as dated February 5th. So what we're reviewing tonight is the are the same plans that the fire marsher reviewed for correct firefighting activities should should they occur. Yes. or be needed for this property. Mhm. Thank you. I if if I could just you caught me off guard with the question about the low and moderate income. I I'm just reading that again. Density calculations. It's a two-part process. There's A and there's B. It says A for projects that meet the following criteria, it'll be no less than 15 dwelling units per acre. But then it goes on to for all other adaptive use projects, the residential density permitted in the converted structure shall be the maximum allowed that otherwise meets the standard of minimum housing and has access to public sewer and water such as bubble, you know. So, I'm not I'd like to give this a second thought. I think we testified and we we advised the board that on a practical level um it's going to be affordable, but I don't necessarily agree with the statement that we're required to have the 20%. It's a either one or when they're talking about density and it's one or the other. But just from a practical point of view, we I think we're falling into B, not A. But just from a practical point of view, we would um we we're going to have some affordable housing there that meets the numbers. But I don't think I'm I apologize. You caught me off guard, but if we do need to do the lower affordable housing, we will get the uh the monitoring agent. But I don't think we're going to need that because I think we fall under B, not under A. Well,

before we go, I wanna Yeah, I want to make I want to know what the answer to that question is before we make a decision. I mean, I'm not saying you have to do Fair enough. Right. So, if it does fall under B, what is the um Yeah, I don't think what is the density then per acre? So, I believe it could be any as long as it meets the minimum health and safety standards. really it's how Kelly interpreted it in previous applications. Okay. Says on the title sheet, sheet one, right hand side, density, overall density, 48 units divided by 3.2 acres is 15 units per acre. That's under adaptive reuse. Well, that's the actual density. It just is a coincidence. It's the same number as the code, but this site is 15 per acre. I agree with Gary. We should absolutely get a um interpretation on on the applicability of um both A and B. Not like that. The law council, correct? Do you know if there's any case cases that have been uh ruled on the research? I mean, it's very new, so there might not be. Yeah. I can't. It's just I I thought my mind had the thing resolved, but now it's confusing me quite frankly. We'll figure it out. So, but to answer the question, if we need to do the 20%, we're going to do the 20%. um as a practical matter, we're going to have more than 20%. That's what his price points are. So, um so it's it's

not a problem for us either way whether we determine that it's an A or a B. Um but um either way, we'll we'll comply with the density calculations. Jack, out of out of curiosity, if if your client's willing to share, any idea what the the rents would go for? What the rent rent will go for? The rental will run in here from about 1400 to maybe 18. Um the last step uh the attorney that was here the last time we we gave these numbers to her and she says you're you're in automatically because the affordable is higher than that and that's on your record. Um, in terms of any nuisances to the should the project get approved, should the project get approved um during construction to minimize any type of nuisances to the public? Just curious, is this going to get all built out in one building phase or are you going to build it out in phases where if you're going to do it in all one time, it might take you a year, year and a half, but if you build it out in phases, maybe it'll take you longer. So, in an effort to minimize nuisance to noise, one shot, it's all okay. You're going to be probably five and a half, six months. Probably five and a half, six months. Yeah, I thought you said weeks. All right. Months. Okay. Yeah. I wish. Um, question for Brent. Brent, has the applicant um provided us with information that the property has access to uh public sewer and public water service? So, I believe I do have a Province water letter in here and subitted. Yes. Yeah, I believe I have both of those. So, I think I read that the water was adequate, but um the question for sewer

still outstanding. Did I read that correctly? Let me see. Do you have them available? The big file. So, this is the Proidence Water. We're working on that. We We have the six unit and we're working on the bigger one. Yes, we have the six unit. Oh, we have the permit for the six unit for Nagans and we're working on the larger unit. Brent, I think I read in your report that they're okay with water. I think it said 76 pounds per square inch gauge for was the pressure. Um but I thought it said the jury was still out on the sewer. So yeah, I I don't think I have a uh sewer letter um saying adequate sewer, but I believe we have a letter saying that it's available on the street but not Yeah. Well, we need to know if this is avail. Yeah. So um generally that's required. Um so between master and preliminary you usually get the state permits and the every one of the permits they give in between before preliminary. Right. But to deem this project eligible for adaptive reuse um it it does have to meet the criteria that um public sewer that the development has access to public sewer. Um and Brent, it does look like in the staff report uh F narans at Bay Commission has not yet confirmed adequate sewer capacity but will be required to um say to prior prior to final approval. Um, however, if we're reviewing this this project, even under master um uh master approval tonight, I think we need to deem whether or not it's eligible just based on the criteria of whether or not sewer is um public sewer

is accessible to the project. Um well, I I think there's a distinguishing between available and capacity. So, it is available at preliminary. We're going to have to make sure we have the capacity and that's that's what um our engineers job is to do. It is available. Yeah, but it's available based on information that it's in the street. Yes, it is. Thank you. I I think the implication is that there's capacity and that's the fact that that it's available. Which what section are you reading that? No, you said that you make the distinction between capacity and availability. The fact that it's available, right, to me doesn't capacity is I mean you could have okay that you only have the capacity for 20 units as opposed to 50 units. No, I know that's my point that you could have available sewer. It's there. The question that's important to us isn't so much the availability of it because sewer could be available a quarter mile away and you're willing to bring that up. So to me, the question isn't so much it doesn't end that availability. The question is the capacity of that availability. So I'd like to know that the answer that there is sufficient capacity to accommodate a 48 a proposed 48 unit development. Let me just just read it. Let me just read this for one second. Access. It just says access. I'm just reading the words. So now it's access. So we talked about availability. We talked about capacity. Now we're talking access. So you may have access to it and it may be there and I don't doubt that. And let me also say this. We need housing in the town. There's no question about it. You know, there's a shortage in housing. I just want to make sure as the planners that we're dotting our eyes and crossing our tees. So I say this, please understand as not as an obstructionist, but as a facilitator, I

just want to make sure that we make the most sound decision. So that's please understand that's the that's my approach for the question. I'm not trying to pigeon hole you into a corner. Jeff, I understand. But in terms of spending money, um, we spend that kind of money at the preliminary stage. I I we have the access, but we're going to have to show we have the capacity at preliminary. So, I'm not going to repeat myself. I think we understand what my point is. So, I just that's my premise in on the matter of suic. So, I'm not going to repeat myself again. Just so I'll leave it at that. Just one other thing too. I think tonight's meeting was supposed to be initially master plan and preliminary. Correct. So it got changed and now we have everything thrown at us and it got changed like two months ago. So it's not it's not being thrown at you respectfully. No, but we didn't have all these reports and kind of everything is getting thrown at us tonight and well the traffic study was submitted a couple of weeks ago. Okay. Um, I don't I don't know how long he We didn't have it. Well, I it was submitted. Oh, that's that's right. I understand that. That's on us. I can say one thing. No. No. No. Does the team have any other information to present to the board? Uh, not not at this time. Uh, do our board members have any other comments or or questions for the applicant at this time? I don't Dave. I'm I'm good for now. You're good. For now. I am good for now. Good for now. Lou, uh, something that was brought up at the last meeting. Uh, one of the units doesn't have any windows in it, and I believe two other units have windows, only one window on the second floor, no windows on the first floor. Uh, so is anything going to be done to uh, improve on that

situation? Yeah, I think our architect said even acknowledged that that was that would need to be modified and corrected on his plan. Um, again, we don't have him here tonight, but he'll be back for preliminary um to go through those specifics of the of the design of the uh the project. Okay. Thank you. Lou, do you have any other questions? Yeah. Um, Warren, would you like to bring any questions up or comments to the applicant? Um, one of the one of my concerns is that this building has been uh vacant, empty, and basically derelct for years. I know for uh the roof was off of it for a number of years before it was patched up a few years ago. I am and the majority of the building the uh the perimeter of it is all cinder block. I'm just worried about the condition of the cinder block and what has actually happened with cement rain uh thoring and uh I I think we should have a survey and find out how structurally sound that cinder block is. Um, okay. We have a architectural firm and we have a civil engineer and both the civil engineer will look at the structure of the building for its stress, strength and they will look at it or they have looked at it. Oh, no. They they have looked at it just so they know where and all that they need to put the stress points to hold the weight. So, when they make a plan, the

plan's going to tell you what you have to do to the building. And until we get master plan, we just can't do all these things because we don't want to do them all. And then you turn around and say, "Oh, well, no, we we need master plan and we'll get our sewers. We get every single thing we need. Structural plan, architect plan, fire alarm system, sprinkler system, everything will be in it. Right, Mr. Get to one spot first." Yeah. I I I do think that um the the board in our comments tonight is um and I'm just going to speak for the board right now. I hope everybody doesn't doesn't mind. I I think our our comments um are are stemming from uh the the previous applicant or application that you made to combine master and preliminary and and now that we are you have um uh removed that application and and revised it to master plan approval. Um, so the the board does recognize that and I'd like to just to make this um known to the to the public that the the process that this project is going through at least from the planning board's perspective is that um we have a master plan approval and then we have a preliminary plan approval if master plan is approved. So it's basically um and then there's a final approval, I'm sorry. So there's a three-step process here. So just generally speaking, master plan approval relates to the concept of the development of the property. Preliminary plan approval focuses on the engineering development of the property. And there's a lot more information that's provided to the board and to the public on a at preliminary.

It's a little count counterintuitive. Master is first, preliminary is second. And um then should the uh project get approved at preliminary um there is a a final approval process um that can be handled administratively by the town uh planner or should the board choose so um actually can we the law just changed. C can we still have perview of reviewing the MA the final? So the board the board can request that the final uh design be be presented uh to the board. But at at that time um the the applicant would have made all and um any corrections um that uh put the project in compliance with um the regulations that this board has authority over. So, um Warren um do you have any other questions related to the site? Uh the the only concern that I have um I don't see anything that has been donated for recreation over there. Uh there's you where we we can ask for up to 8% or is it 10% of the property for recreational purposes recreational and landscaping. Am I right? Well, can you state that I'm unfamiliar with that? I'd have to go through the requirements. So, we have a 5% landscaping requirement for like commercial zones, but I don't there's I don't believe there's one for residential. This isn't going to be commercial. It' be residential money. Yes, I don't think it would apply to

this. Here's a question. Um, for the the occupants of the of the building, right? Should this move forward? Are will the are you planning on providing uh rec outdoor recreation space for the occupants of the building? No. No outdoor space. We're we're not we're not trying to get children in there. Um we're trying to make mostly one bedrooms um some two bedrooms. And we're we're trying to go at this is for the person that stays home and Rick's at home and has a little office space. We're building them with a little office space in them. We're we're we're trying to pick up the new way. Not okay. So, we're we're not looking for a place for a family. That that that that's fair. But the um I didn't even think about it that way. I just thought about your, you know, your your building occupants having a place to enjoy the outdoors whether whether or not they have kids or or not. That that was just a question. So, the answer is no. Okay. And um one other question or one other thing that um I'm looking at Ward Avenue that has a 50 foot rightway and I'm looking at Barrett which has a a 40 foot right away. you are using um Beard Avenue for all your uh egress into the building. Uh and I'm worried about parking over there on Beard Street that would interfere with we just had a traffic completely done on all of that. I'm I'm just worried about traffic getting in and out and parking additional parking on on Barrett Avenue. Well, that's why we have some more

parking places in our parking lot. We only need 48. We have 65. So, we're not looking for people to be parked on Bad Avenue. We got all landscaping in front of the building. And And your entrances are in the back of the building, basically. Correct. Okay. Any more questions? That's it. All right. Thank you very much for your presentation, gentlemen. Um right the time is uh 7:26. I will um open up the meeting for public comment. I before we do so um I would just like to uh recommend um I just like to provide you with some recommendations. Um we do have um the town council here being represented by an attorney. Um we are I'm suggesting that I'm suggesting excuse me that um the attorney addresses the board um first and after the attorney addresses the board um then we will open it up for further public comment. Now, there are a lot of people here and the acoustics in this room are not the best. I do ask that um you have a good ear to what the attorney and or your neighbors are saying to the board. And if you are thinking like you would want to comment on the same thing, I just ask that um you come up and you state your name and that you agree with whoever stated and discussed a

comment prior to you. Basically, if John Smith came and he talked about um adding a, this is hypothetical, adding a sidewalk and he spoke for three minutes and then he sat down and now Jane Smith wants to come up and she thought that was a good idea. She can come up and she can say, "I love that idea. I'm for it." And then just kindly sit down. We want to utilize everybody's time as efficient as possible. Um so I would I would like to I would like the public to approach the board in that manner. Um, and I do kindly ask that um the applicant um uh actually I'm sorry that the that the public address all your comments to the board, not the applicant and the board will address the public comments to the applicant after uh the public has been heard. Do you have anything else to add, Anthony? Um so with that said um thank you chairman uh Councilman Stephano Familii. Um we have Council President Oello and Councilman Pollock. Uh we were here at the February meeting as you know um due to the uh uh complaints and the concerns of our constituents, many of which are uh are here tonight. Um, as a result of that, we uh proceeded at the council level to hire a uh a legal counsel to provide us with some legal opinions and uh uh in connection with this application because this is all uh new given the new state law. Um the council was uh gracious enough to support the three of us in hiring a legal counsel. That's uh Mr. uh

Tony Disto who's going to be coming up tonight. Um, I know at last meeting where it was just a very brief meeting, there was a brief introduction, but I wanted to reintroduce attorney Disto the board as well as the uh constituents. So, with that, I'll turn it over to Attorney Disto. Thank you. Um, Councilman Feetti, just because you you you brought up, did I hear clear that um the the council has um solicited um Mr. Does those services um utilizing your own funds or correct? We have a a contingency fund that we control and we hired them out of our conting contingency fund for this uh purpose. For this purpose. Yes. Thank you. Um and so the the public is aware um the the board here is comprised of um we we volunteer for this uh position. Um we we we do not campaign. Um it is a process that we go through where we we meet with Brent. We get we are interviewed um by Brent and and the mayor. The mayor um makes a recommendation um for all of us who who are lucky enough to be on this board and that recommendation is reviewed and either approved or denied by the council. So, I just want to make sure that everybody's aware of how um we got to sit up here and in and just a brief review of that process for everybody. Thank you. Go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Anthony Disto. My uh law office is a 450 Veterans Memorial Parkway in East Providence. And uh I will be brief uh but uh as uh Councilman Familii said uh I was uh retained by the council to review this application and

to uh make comments not only to them but also to the board too and I have reviewed uh the application. Mr. Wagan was um kind enough to uh send me uh documents even today uh to review on this and based upon my review and I know you're at the master plan stage uh for this um application uh but it is adaptive reuse and um I know that you actually made some uh good questions the board made good questions about how uh this gets to be an adaptive um reuse application. on this and you know the application is based on the first part. The application calls for 15 units per acre. That means there has to be 20% affordable units and that affordability is defined in the statutes title 45 chapter 53. That means that in order to ask you for that now, there should have been a letter of eligibility for Rhode Island housing. There should have been uh a uh proforma showing the uh financials for this and how everything goes and all of the other documents that you need, who's going to be the monitor and things like that. That's not for preliminary. That's for master plan. That's if you want to have uh an adaptive reuse project to get 48 units on these 3.2 acres. That's not part of this application. And I think that's one of the reasons. There's other reasons, but that's one of the reasons why the application has to be denied. You can't wait till preliminary for that. That's something that has to come in on this. 48 units. That's a major project. It is a major land development on 3.2 acres. That's not something that can wait the later stages. There are things that need

to be done so that this board can make a proper determination. That's one of them. You can't say, well, you know, maybe we'll go under the uh um minimum housing law and everything else, which is the second part of your ordinance and the state statute. You don't have anything like that. That's something that needed to be presented. That's one of the other reasons why it should be denied. That's issue number one. Issue number two uh as I've taken a look at this uh application adaptive reuse is the adaptive reuse of an existing building. What strikes me about the application is although you have elevations for what it's going to look like. There were new engineered drawings of what it's like now. And you might say why why do we need that? It's going to be it's adaptive reuse. Well, that's what it's all based on. It's the adaptive reuse of an existing building. And I I didn't see anything like that in the application except for the report by Azenus Environmental Services, Inc. And that was the uh a narrative report in site analysis for Beard Condominiums, Beard Avenue, North Providence, Rhode Island. Uh and that was uh prepared on February 7th, 2025. And uh uh later on in the um uh that report is an aerial view uh which shows uh the um existing structure and it seems to me that part of it has fallen in. A good part has fallen in and I think that's why Mr. Richardy's question was so important for the entire application. He expressed concerns about the in the uh structural integrity of this building. Whether or not it's going to have to be demolished and

rebuilt. When it comes to an adaptive reuse project, that's very relevant. Is this building going to be reused or is it going to be demolished and rebuilt? And the statute that was designed for existing buildings to be reused and repurposed for residential is not going to happen. And in fact, you're going to get an entirely new building in an R10 zone and you're going to have a density of 15 units per acre. So, I think Mr. Richardelly's question is correct. That's something that needs to be addressed now, not later. Now, as part of this application, otherwise, how do you get to use the adaptive reuse statute? So, m Mr. Disso, do you have um the the aerial that you you referenced? Would you mind and would you mind submitting that to the board for record? I do. I got it from Mr. Wan. Is that is that on our bracket? It was just one of the long reports that was like 150 pages. Okay. I wasn't giving the 100page reports to you guys because you know I would be giving you a thousand pages for these meetings. Okay. And sometimes you got to root through these things. But, you know, I was trying to find something that showed the existing conditions of the building. And I'll I'll give this to Mr. Wagan because I think it enter it for the record. Could enter it on the record. Thank you. Uh because I I do think it is a a good representation of what's out there and one of the reasons why this isn't really an adaptive reuse project. I just don't think it is. And by the way, I note one thing. There was uh some comments about um the rents for the property and how they were going to be affordable. That doesn't meet the definition under the statute. But if you look at the um um uh initial page of that report, it says that these are going to

be the Bay Avenue condominiums. Which leads me to the next thing. You need to know right now if you're going to vote on this exactly what this is going to be and who's going to be making the representations that the town that this board has to rely upon in the future and if it's going to be a condominia dealing with different people that's a whole different category for affordability and I think those are the things that you need to take a look at not later but Now, I I I I have other concerns too on this and um that would have to do with the fact that uh I guess 80% of this property is in the flood zone. There was a question in Mr. wagon's report as to whether or not any of the um residential uses the resident the residences would be I guess condominiums would be in the flood zone and the reply is that uh the um uh uh um floors would be lifted up a foot on this and I don't know what that does with the height of the existing building uh because I didn't see any elevations for the existing building but again I think that goes to whether or not this would be an adaptive reuse project and that doesn't go to and I think you're going to be hearing from the uh uh residents. Uh, one of their main concerns is the drainage on the property, the fact that it's in a flood zone, and uh uh they sent me uh actually um um Councilman Pollock sent me some pictures of the last uh rainstorm out there and you know that there's a lot of water and I understand that that's something that happens in the preliminary plan review, but because this is an adaptive reuse, I think it needs to be considered as to whether or

not uh 48 units is appropriate for this site. Which leads me to the final thing. Master plan is when the number of units are set for a property. The proposal is for 48 units. The question to me is a whether or not this is an adaptive reuse. And I want to address one other issue which I thought was great by the board, but whether or not 48 units is appropriate for this site given the constraints of the property when it comes to the drainage. And you know, the neighbors will they'll be talking about that they're better at it than I am. They've lived there a long time and they'll go through it. But I do think that that's something you need to consider when you make a determination as to whether or not 48 units is appropriate here. And I go to the final point uh because the board did bring this up and I thought it was excellent and that is on adaptive reuse. Uh this is being um entitled a commercial building and of course there was uh a commercial aspect to it but that includes offices, schools, religious facilities, medical buildings and malls into residential units or mixeduse developments. I only say that because this was a manufacturing use and in fact it was cement and you know I I know that cement can have some um chemicals in there and it's been there a long time now. Uh you don't have a phase one uh uh environmental study here. It was a it was industrial. It was abandoned. There was there was rubbage there and all that type of thing. I don't even think a a phase one is something that the town needs or I think you need to go beyond that to a phase two and perhaps a phase three. Why is that? A phase one is just a study to see uh if there's anything recorded on that. I think you actually

need to have testing done on this site because of the long industrial history for the property. And why do I say that? from a town standpoint, from a liability and risk management standpoint, if those studies are not done and later on there's residents that live there and god forbid something happens to them because of what's on the property, the lawsuit, it's not going to be to the developer, be long gone. It's going to be to the town and they're going to say the town was negligent in approving the property because they didn't get this type of information. And sadly, you know, you have a great solicitor. I'm sure that hasn't happened here. But unfortunately, I've been involved with other communities where that has happened. And I do think because of the nature of this site, no application can be approved until that due diligence is done. Now, for 48 units, that's going to be a profitable thing for the developer, but you need to have the due diligence done. The town needs to have that due diligence done. Sure, there's a financial risk. There's a financial risk in any type of an investment. This is no different, but because people are going to be living there, I think these things need to be done because none of this was submitted to you. Not in February and not now. This application needs to be denied. Be happy to answer any questions you might have. Thank you. I'll open up to the board if anybody has any questions for Mr. D. Yes. Attorney Cisn um during the petitioner's presentation I asked legal counsel um I inquired about the performer I inquired about monitoring and his position to the board was um if we have to provide affordable housing it is what it is we'll get that paperwork secured at some point what I

heard you say is that that information what I brought up during my questioning was um I'd like to see that now so Are you saying that you would agree that that information about how the units are going to get monitored the proform and the whatever those covenants that would retain that as affordability in perpetuity, you're saying that those should be submitted to the board at this time. That's correct and I agree with the statements that you made earlier. Yes. Okay. Um secondly, you brought up the question about adaptive reuse and you mentioned that in your humble opinion you think there might be some demolition. Let's say that the entire building it structural integrity is such that maybe some portion of it needs to be demolished whether 5% or x%. Are you suggesting that it would not constitute an adaptive reuse if any portion of the building were to be demolished or you saying that if everything is demolished? So let's just say that 10% of the building for the sake of discussion needs to be demolished and reconstructed within the same footprint. So they're not going to build more. Are you saying that if any portion of the building needs to be demolished that that in and of itself is a basis to say that it it's not an an adaptive reuse proposal? What I'm saying is if is if an adaptive reuse application is being filed, that information needs to be um put forward to the board so that you can make a determination as to whether or not you think it's an adaptive reuse or if it's a tear down and rebuild. Where that line is, I think that should be to your discretion. If it's minor and it's just a little bit, that's one thing. But I'm looking at that that um area. I'm saying to myself, this this building's falling down. Okay. And if it is, then it's not adaptive reuse. It's something

else. Now it's an R10 application and it should comply with zoning. I appreciate your clarification of what followup, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Um during the petitioner's presentation, I inquired whether or not the units would be rental lease, excuse me, or kind of minimized. I believe council representing the petitioner said after conferring with the developer I think he said they're going to be leased. You submitted a document I think it said uh Beard Avenue condominiums condominium units not a lease development. So could you elaborate on your concern that in one breath I believe the petitioner said that it's going to be at least a development and your con your submission of a document I don't have it in front of me I'm sorry it said that it said Beard Avenue condominiums could yeah we go right on the site plan thank you so yep yep says condominiums they said leased so again I'd like some clarification from you given that the planning board's responsibility ility is looking at land use and that the marketability whether it's a condominium lease or rent I think maybe again unless Brent wants to clarify is not before the board what's your concern whether or not at the time of the board's decision making whether or not it's considered condominiums or if they're considered lease/ rent I just want to understand your thought process what what that distinction how that could impact the board's decision you you've had representations made to you by the developer. One of the representations was there would be rental. The other representations without rent would be affordable, but this says condominium. So to me, that means these units are going to be sold. So it's not a rental. So those statements that were made, they're not correct. That's why I'm bringing that to your attention. One of the things that that I I see with this,

the council asked me to take a look at this is there's a bit of a moving target. It's rental, but it's a condominium. Uh it's 15 units because there's affordable. No, no, no. Now we're going to do minimum housing. There's too much of that. That's why the application needs to be denied. I totally agree. There's a contradiction between what that plan says and what was stated. Um but as part of a um a covenant or the affordability aspect of it um would you be remiss if they concurred to say yeah it's going to be condominium and then they submit the proform and the monitoring and all the documents that submit that that's based on a on a sale versus a lease. Correct. Okay. And the afford the the restriction would be for sale and it'd be a different restriction which you don't have. Agreed. That's the concern that I have. The council wanted me to relate to you. You're missing a lot of key information at this level. Forget the next level. At this level, you don't have it. That's why I'm saying a application needs to be denied. Yeah. They need to do more work on this thing. Thank you. Thank you. No questions. No questions. Warren, thank you very much, Mr. Sisto. Thank you for your time. I appreciate it. Mr. Chairman, members of the board, first thank you for your time and what you do here. By the way, I'm here also in support of Mr. the siso and the council. But let me just uh explain what happened

here. What we're faced with in effort to make a decision 48 units on this property is not something that our office or the council is in favor of or did. And we worked for quite some time to propose which was the maximum of 18 units on that property. And what was proposed was a culde-sac, nine buildings, two units per building because because it's always been our position that we want to make sure that whatever new development here in the town is that we can derive the maximum amount of revenue for the least amount of cost to provide uh uh services so to say. single bedroomedroom units. By the way, why we're here tonight, and I got to get this off my chest, is something that was caused by our representatives downtown. So for that piece of property to have a maximum of 18 units now have a maximum of 48. That's insane to jam that amount of units on that piece of property. And especially for this town, we have the least amount of open space left per capita per community in the state. for these residents or the town

at large to be faced with this situation, please believe me, is a sin. So again, I would respectfully request that this board in the end make the best possible decision. I know you got to abide by the law, but the best possible decision for this town at large. Spoke to a couple of these neighbors and told them, "I'd love to tell you what I love to tell you and what you love to hear, but we can't because if we tell you what you want to hear, then we got to walk by you like this from now on." That's not easy to to say, but I think I can speak for all of us. We're all on the spot here, and we're dependent on this planning board to hold any developer to their to the position that we feel is best for the town. Thank you very much. Thank you. Uh we will now um take comment from the public. If uh anybody present in this room would like to uh speak to the board uh related to the project, uh you may approach. And um yep. And uh just for procedural purposes, when you get to the microphone, just please state your name and your address clearly for the record and then proceed with your My name is Raymond Ryan, R Y an entire life in North Province. I grew up in Centerale. I moved to Marville 40

years ago in that area for one reason, two reasons. We had our own schools, which we don't have anymore. We lost a school and it's all residential. This plan is bad for our neighborhood. It doesn't fit in with the homes. All we have is our small backyards. Now, they want to put all these units here. Forget all kinds of studies they've done. Stop signs mean nothing in my neighborhood anymore. No one stops the stop signs that that if you put a patrol in there every day, we make a million dollars for the time. But I'm not against developing the property. if it can be developed right around the corner that we call it the pit over there. It's called the pit and that thing floods out constantly. I don't care what you how much asphalt you tear up. Water will find a way. You're not going to hold the water back. Right around the corner on Loi Boulevard, it's a level road, higher elevation. They have a pumping station there because it always floods out. That area is developed there. It's going to flood out too. And the same dame same thing over there. I got photos from the last rainstorm. We had one inch of rain five hours and it flooded out. This is the good weather when the ground is not frozen. The winter time it's a scathing rink. There's nowhere for the water to go. That's the biggest problem that it just floods out constantly. I'm sure the neighbors around there saw it too. Okay, I'm not against developing it. If it can be developed, I'm not sure it can. It floods out constantly. Whatever you put there is going to get flooded out. Anybody been down there and checked the property out and the building itself is falling apart. It is. It's all cinder block and it looks terrible. I'm not too sure how you can readapt that to housing units. And um that's all I have to say and I'm in my tife in this town and it doesn't go the neighborhood. I'm not against developing the property if it's

done right. But that this is not the answer of the department units. Thank you very much. Yep. Got a couple questions. Thank you. Can you please stay? Yep. Go ahead, Gary. Go ahead. Thank you. Uh you didn't think we were going to ask you questions, did you? I'm ready. Go. Shoot. Couple of questions. Thank you for your uh your comments. So, you talked about flooding. During the presentation, the engineer made a couple of comments. First of all, he said that the amount of impervious area, the actual pavement, they're going to reduce that by a few thousand square feet. Right. Okay. He also said, I don't know, east, west, north, or south because I don't have a north arrow in front of me, but I think he said that the site currently flows from the south to the north into a wetland, right, in the existing conditions. And then I also believe he said that in the post construction if it were to be built it would continue in that same direction. Right. So my question to you is you said that there's a lot of flooding there right now. Do you or any of your neighbors experience flooding as a result from this site? Not where I live. No. Pardon me. No. Not where I live. I live further away from from the developed site. Okay. But if you go by there Yep. I'm going to go by I'm going to go especially in the winter time when it rains. Pardon me. In the winter when it rains there's nowhere for it to drain. That's the biggest problem. Okay. Water will find a way to flood your home. I understand. But they also said that during the post construction after it's built it would still continue to go in the same direction that it is right now. I just want to state that. Um so we'll take a look at those plans. My second question is this. You said that the site is unsightly. It's or maybe I don't want to put words in your mouth. You didn't say exactly unsightly, but it's falling apart. You said it's

vacant. It's abandoned. Um are you concerned about that building continuing in that state? Continued dilapidation. It could be conceivably um you know open for a fire. Um any concerns from you as a neighbor of the continued incipient decline of that building versus potentially whether it's 48 units or fewer um a residential development where people live there police it and a less chance of crime being there. Just kind of curious u on that counterbalance what your thoughts I'm not worried about crime but okay they have I don't know what's going on. They put all signs around the property now. No trespassing. Never was there before. So maybe they're concerned with vandalism of the vehicles that are parked. I don't really know. But all along the water avenue side, they brought in tons and tons of gravel and built it up there. I don't know why. Well, they're trying to stop the flooding. I have no idea. It looks like an on-ramp around the property. I don't know why they did that, but who knows? But uh besides the water problem, it does not go with the neighborhood. That's not why I moved there. I'm not against developing it if it can be developed, but on a smaller scale, it's just too big for the area. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for your comments, sir. Thank you for being here. Appreciate your time. All right, sir. Thank you. Can you just um say your address, please? Sir, Mr. Ryan, your address. Thank you. Uh, next member of the public for the record, please state your name and your address. Thank you. Good

evening. My name is Mary Lou Petruchi and I live at 80 Meadow Road, North Providence. And um, based on the previous comment, I have like an additional question. Um my property is we're talking about the wetlands over there and the flow of the uh I guess the uh flood from south to north. Part of my property is in that wetlands area in that flood zone and it has I've noticed significant changes in flooding increase over the last couple of years. Uh my concern is that with this project, I don't know how it's going to impact um further um increased flooding in that area and I don't know if this is something that DEM would be looking at because it's wetlands or how that would all work. Yep. So just to generally um answer your question Mary Louu. So this this project because its proximity to a wetlands um is applicable and required for a DEM wetland review and um at after uh we uh take all questions and comments from the public. The the applicant we'll give the applicant a chance to um the applicant and their experts uh a chance to address or answer any of the the questions that you may have. But yes, this project as um it was stated by uh the applicant civil engineer, this this project is um required to go through uh DEM wetlands and storm water review. Thank you very much. Town the town also has a flood zone ordinance that was adopted in 2014. It requires review prior to the issuance of any building permit. A flood hazard mitigation actually. Yeah, it's a flood hazard mitigation permit needs to be taken out. Okay. Uh pulled with the town and that's reviewed by either the

building official or the or designate which could be an engineer. This is going to have multiple levels of review. Okay. Uh one additional question if I may. We're talking about sewers and it sounds like that hasn't really been thoroughly like decided yet. Correct. But I'm wondering if this project were to tie in, where would it tie in? Again, I've experienced issues in the past my property with tie-in of sewers. So, is there any way of knowing how how that would all work? Um, at at this time, um, I'm not sure if the applicant knows where the property would tie into the existing sewer, but this is a question that, um, we'll ask the applicant to, uh, respond to if they have the information um, available tonight. Great. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mayor. next member of the public. Thank you. Take it. Take your time. I thought you just would. My name is Norma Tetro. I live at 234 Oreal Avenue on the corner of Dorman and Oral. Thank you. Which is called lower well we call it lower Dorman because it's lower in the ground. Okay. Um my problem is when he did the traffic thing, he didn't even address the top of Ward. You know where Ward is? The the piece of property lives on the corner of is on the corner of Bard and Ward. Okay. Nobody goes down Anderson. They all come up ward and they go over to Dorman and

down to lower Dorman between Finch Avenue and Oakdale Avenue. There was a Puck right on the Pucket North Proidence line. Okay. They come down that way. My road where my part of Dorman Avenue is is significantly smaller than the top part of Dorman Avenue. It goes down at least narrows down to at least maybe 10 feet less, maybe 20 feet less. Um it's so small that only one car can pass at a time. We have school buses that come by here. there. They have to wait for the other car to come by to go by. Delivery trucks stop. Nobody can get around them. Traffic stops completely when there's like an Amazon truck, you know. So, or UPS, the traffic just stops because nobody can get through that part of the road. So when he did the the study, they didn't even consider that part any further than like he said they go from power road to Anderton. No, they'll come down the other way down to Orman up oral or up Oakdale. That's the way it always goes. That's the traffic path for that area. Okay. How long have you lived in your 35 years? Thank you. I've lived there a long time. We've had two children hit on my corner because cars don't pay attention. You know how it is, right? I live right in the red house on the wall. Okay. Any questions? Yes. So, Matra, you mentioned that you thought that the traffic study was probably not properly prepared because it didn't look at the intersections. So you suggesting that the the traffic generated by this

project Yeah. would would have a adverse effect where you live for traffic? Oh, definitely. No doubt. So I want to understand what your what your opposition is. So it's traffic congestion. My traffic conditions definitely traffic conditions. Thank you. And and just to what what I also heard was that the um your knowledge and experience of of living in the neighborhood um lends itself to um observing traffic patterns in addition to what was presented in the traffic study. Yes. because because people want to quote unquote I may be uh speculating here but continue to cut through the neighborhood as far as they can before they get to Power Road, right? Which means they will travel down Ward down Dorman and then hook a right on or Oakdale. Oakdale. Yeah. to get to Power Road vers versus um continuing on Ward and then going down Finch or um which is addressed in the traffic study by the way. It's labeled or um coming from Power Road and getting into the neighborhood through Anderton. What it is is um Finch is a oneway. I'm sorry. You're correct. Yeah. Part of part of the road is one way. So they choose my street. Yeah. It's just the way it is. And that's Yeah. Yes. And it's gotten worse and worse because before there weren't so many delivery trucks and after CO it really got so it was bad. That's a good point. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Anything else, guys? No. No. I I agree that CO caused a lot of delivery trucks um traffic. Next from the public, please state your name and address clearly for

the board and for the record. Thank you. Hi, my name is Deborah D O R A H I'm Mundy. I live at 53 Beard Avenue. I've been there for 36 years. And um consequently, I also I also oppose this for the reason of the density. I believe that 48 units is way too many to put down at the end of a deadend street. I am kind of upset that there's only going to be one means of ingress and egress where I think there they could be maybe on the on the other side on Ward Avenue put more, but as was previously stated, they have kind of filled in the bank there. Again, not sure why. I'm not against um having a place for people to live. I am also a commissioner on the um Royland Housing Resources Commission. So I understand that people low moderate working class need a place to live and that in North Providence per the Rhode Island uh excuse me the University of um Raj Williams University does a fact book every year and according to the 2004 fact book North Providence um is at 6.37% of our overall low moderate income housing percentage. We would need another 576 units to reach 10%. I um I realize that people need a place to live, but with that density, I'm

concerned about the traffic. I heard the traffic study and how wide the street is, but I can tell you day in day out, people are parked on both sides of the street. I can also tell you that it's not uncommon to have a rescue or fire truck come down that street. And I am concerned that somebody will not be able to get the town services they need for fire or rescue if there are more people down at the end of the street. if there are not I understand that there's enough per unit per the new um regulations that were passed last year for zoning one parking space for each unit and there obviously will be more than that but often if you have a two-bedroom house there might be at least two people living in there with a car I don't know where they're going to park that other car if there aren't enough spaces and people do have company from time to time and where will those people park? Um, I also don't know if pets are going to be allowed here because now a lot of people are out walking their dogs day and day and night and they often use my front lawn as their bathroom. Um, but people are walking children, they're walking dogs. Um, concerned about a lot of traffic on that road that's going to severely impact the quality of life that we have had there up to this point. There are a lot of stop signs on Anderton Avenue and a lot of people blowing right through them constantly and I understand that's another issue for traffic enforcement but I just feel it's just going to exacerbate the issues. We also have a rodent problem in Mville. And uh once things were done to, you know, clear out the clutter there,

um I had visitors under my porch. Uh big rats. So there's a lot going on down there. I know with the the flooding that's happened. I live now on Beard Avenue. I used to live I grew up on Lincoln Avenue, which was on the other side of Gillan Pond. I had skated on the pond. And I realized that by filling in that pond, um, all that water seemed to go at the end of Beard Avenue. So, I understand there's flooding issues there. I don't think they're going to get any better, um, under what's proposed. Thank you. Um, just before you you leave, I uh was wondering if you heard the um me read the letter that the town fire marshall provided. um for the for the record and the the board's review of the property. I heard it referred to okay that it was going to be okay. But again, there have been a lot of issues where where parties have gone on. It's summer barbecues and the people parked and it can be very difficult um to pass through. Any other questions? No. So, thank you very much. My name is Mike Film. I'm at 53 B Avenue. Been there since January 3rd, 1955. The property that the gentleman wants to develop where was Cinder block once was. And I can assure you that myself and my friends that was our playground. I can tell you about the hazmat that's buried

there. Uh but that's the way it was done in that day when those people used to work on their own equipment. and just dump the oil. There was a swamp there. That's where we used to go after all the bullfrogs and you could see it all the time. That's one point. What Mr. Richard Telly brought up about the integrity of the building. I'll tell you about the process and what they did down there. They made concrete block. Part of that process was to dry it. They had ovens that were they use steam. That building has been subjected to more moisture. Okay. I remember I remember how humid it was in that building cuz I used to go in there when they were making the block and of course Mr. Solomon used to chase me out. But um so I know that that building is that's not a strong building. Concrete back in the day, okay, it would get to its maximum strength in 28 years. You do the math. Concrete technology today is far more advanced, but not back then. So let's consider that. On the subject of traffic, I don't know where that man got his figures from. I don't know what time that they compiled those figures, talked about peak time in the morning, peak time in the afternoon. Fine. Did you factor in the people who are trying to avoid the power road middle street avenue traffic light and reverse it when you're trying to get people who come down beard avenue to get over to Ward to get over to Garfield to get over to Lowhigh to get over to Adams to get to

Gillan to get on back onto Charles Street to avoid the light at Middle Spring and Charles. Okay. And the same thing, like I said, happens at Middle Spring and Power Road. And people blow through those stop signs at Anderton and Bad. I don't know how many times I've dropped death bombs. Okay. We have a lot of neighbors, a lot of young neighbors that are pushing their kids around in strolls at night. A lot of people are walking their dogs at night. A lot of people are just walking There's a gentleman across the street who just moved in. He was here for last week's meeting. His name is George. and George couldn't make the meeting tonight, but he told Debbie and I, okay, that the reason he moved to North Proidence, out of Providence, is because of the traffic and he could couldn't walk with his kids and his wife at night. He can do that on Bed Avenue. So, that's my story. I'm glad you brought up, Mr. uh the telly about the structural integrity or lack thereof, but uh I've worked in the construction business and we have a saying and I'll end with this. Water wins. Good night. Thank you. Thank you. Before you leave, I just encou sir, um I just encourage you to um have your neighbor George if he if so. Thank you for sharing his his comments to the board. Um but you can encourage him to um actually write he can he can write his comments in a letter and and submit that for record if he if he chooses to do so.

I will do that. Thank you. You're welcome. Any other good questions? Thank you very much. Thank you. Good evening, Councilman Chuck Pollock. I just have one question regarding the fire marshals interpretation not seeing an issue. Does that interpretation pertain to just the building itself? Does that not take into account the traffic around the building? And if there is an issue at that building where the accessibility is there's no accessibility to the rear. If I'm not mistaken, that's probably a 10 foot drop from from uh Ward over by Finch down to the driveway. I believe that's probably an 8 to 10 foot drop with no other means of accessibility. So I think he wrote a a two sentence letter. I have no I haven't seen just you read. I'm just curious. Is that letter from the fire marsh pertaining it to the buildings itself, not take into account the traffic around the buildings? It it it doesn't it doesn't state one way or the other. Um the um I'll just read the letter again. The fire prevention division has reviewed the draft for the development of the property listed at 114 Barrett Avenue. The North Providence Fire Department deems the preliminary plans drafted on February 5th, 2025 acceptable. It it does not comment on whether or not uh the review was of the site of site access or um of the interior of the building. I I cannot comment um or or speculate on um the intention of the letter. I but I what I can tell you is that in February the board specifically asked for um the fire

department to uh review and respond to the site of the building. Um, typically fire prevention reviews of buildings happen at the time when a building permit is um applied for and the fire department reviews either sim simultaneously um or in a linear fashion with the building department and they're they're then looking at um interior layout of the building, fire alarm and um sprinkler systems of of such. At this stage, I I can only guess that this letter was based on a site plan. That's what that that's what the the board specifically asked for. I that's just something I want to point out. There's one means of accessibility to the rear of those potential developments. If there's a situation towards the front of those buildings or even to the rear with the traffic, there's just going to be an accessibility issue. Like I said, you have that one means of accessibility. You look around that property, it's probably going to be a good 8 to 10 foot drop from the streets in the rear of that property down to where the vehicles are. Oh, this just something I wanted to point out. Yep. And I think the the board definitely shared shares your your concern. And I think that's why we specifically asked for it in last meeting, understanding that Beard Avenue right now has four singleuse homes on the um on the west side of it. And this and and this project is is proposing 48 units on the the right hand side. So, so the um uh the number of North Providence citizens that will

need fire department and rescue services on Baird Avenue greatly increases um due to this project specifically accessing the accessing the property from Bayard Avenue because the site design only accounts for one vehicular access onto the site which does bring you behind the building um but no other way to get out. But so there is access to behind the building but to your point in the board's concern of um only one one way in 48 units on a street that's a dead end with no culde-sac existing right now. You have an abandoned building on one side and only four singleuse family homes on the other. So, we share your concern as well. That's why we asked for a statement from the fire. Thank you. I appreciate all your time putting into this project. Thank you. Sorry, I just need to play Just for the record, just Okay. Yeah. Councilman Familii again. Uh just to play lawyer quickly, uh because I'm hearing everything, trying to listen to everything. Um, Miss I Monday came up here and she addressed the concerns that she had and some of the neighbors have about fire apparatus uh and um ambulances coming down especially with increased amount of traffic that would uh uh would be in that area and addressed how it wasn't uh put in the traffic study and somebody responded by saying well there's a letter from the the fire department. Again, I just want to highlight the fact that and you know, Councilman Pollock jumped on that that you have a letter from the fire department, but you don't know if they're signing off on the structure, which seems to be kind of the implication based upon what you were saying. Um, but I I don't think the

board should use that letter as some sort of approval of um uh fire safety uh in in uh for the traffic of the area. In other words, saying that uh the fire department is approving of the traffic that would uh be in that area and and and uh um saying that it comports with their standards. So I would just put a point on that. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. If I may just add something um right ahead, please. So I agree the fire marshall letter is uh a little a little brief, a little vague. Um, but when I requested it from him, he I did point out the swing radius in the parking lot which was brought up at the last meeting as well as the access to the north side of the building which is I believe the the side that Chuck wetland or Councilman Pollock was talking about. Um, that there is no road or parking lot on that side. There's a walkway. Correct. Um, but I believe Fire Marshall Paragian analyzes like the closest distance the fire truck can park and their longest hose for access. And I I believe that's something that he does look at. So those three things I pointed out and he did look at those, but other than that I my comment is more so about the traffic issues that Miss Monday brought up and particularly with fire trucks and ambulances having to go down there. What's the impact going to be on their ability to access that access that if there are additional um 48 units there even though there are 65 parking spots on the site? Um you know could the units have two parking spots uh two cars per unit of the people rented? Well, that already uh takes over that and does not account for visitors as well. So where do they park? that could also increase the density of that area which is directly on point with Miss Imundy's concern about these emergency vehicles being able to access that area. So, thank you. Thank you. And uh Brent,

thank you for clarifying um the context in in in which um uh the the fire department was requested to um review the the plan. Yeah. So, we did have discussion. Um, anything further than that, I'm not sure the extent of his review, but those three things, um, we did speak about briefly. Thank you. Good evening. Michelle Dosta, 45 Beard Avenue. Um, I want to reiterate the structural of the building. As few weeks ago, we had a really big wind and rainstorm. Part of the big building that's down there fell off the building. I'm not sure if the town if the board is aware of that, but a few weeks ago, part of that structure fell off the front of the building and it is decaying because it's been there forever. My other concern is around Sorry, when when did that happen? A few weeks ago during a rainstorm that we had and windstorm part, I think it was the sign that used to be on the building of the concrete block place. It did fall off the building. It's been cleaned up. It was there for a little bit and it's been cleaned up now. Um, my other concern is regarding the traffic issue on Baird Avenue. When you come out of Ward, Baird Avenue is directly in front of you. There are no side streets on Beard Avenue on the right hand side of the street. The exits out onto Beard from the left. There are no stop signs on Baird Avenue. So, people fly down Beard Avenue where the adjoining streets there are the four-way stops that are noted in the traffic studies. But on Baird, there's stop on the other I can't remember the other two streets at the moment. Um but because there are no streets that come out on the right hand side, people blow through those stop signs and there are no stop sign on Beard Avenue from Ward to Mineral Spring Avenue. Thank you. Atwood. Yes. So those are some of the stop streets. I will also say with Linda that

we have seen u the applicant has been cleaning out the back which I know he's allowed to do. There have been um an increase of little critters around the neighborhood since that has happened. Thank you. Thank you. Hi. Um I'm Stacy. S T A C Y Lantine. L A N T A G N E. I was I'm at 77 Dorman Avenue. I was born in the neighborhood almost 45 years ago. So I was raised there still. I've come and gone, but I'm still there. My sisters live there. They're raising their families there. Um I wanted to reiterate about the traffic. Um and one thing I wanted to notice note about the traffic study is they measured the traffic on Ward. I'm not entirely sure of my dates, but I just want to say I walk that all the time with my dog and I feel like it went up the Friday before April vacation. So, I'm not sure how typical a time that was to be measuring traffic because it was weird. But anyway, they didn't, as far as I can tell, measure Baird, right? Like the amount of traffic on Baird. And so, I think one of you asked the question about, okay, so at peak times are we at 60 cars? And the reply was, well, no, because not all of those cars will go up Ward. and I agree, but we don't have any information about how many cars were on Bear during those peak times. And I think that that is relevant. Beard is a narrow street. There are often cars parked on both sides. I will reiterate what all of my neighbors have said. I walk my dog. I'm sure they've seen me walking my dog. And it is and there are not sidewalks as has been mentioned. So if there's cars parked, I'm walking in the street and it's a constant sort of like and if I walk with my nieces who are all young, we're like car, we all have to like run over and we're like between cars and we're hiding and I've got the dog on a tight leash because there's just not enough room for all of us to be there at

the same time. And so I just wanted to reiterate that. I also kind of wanted to echo the mayor's comments um because I don't want to make it seem like I'm not in favor of adaptive reuse. I actually think it's awesome. I would love to live in an adapted church. I think that sounds cool. I think that the reason that there's so much discussion about this particular project is because I really do think these buildings in comparison to the buildings that the statute is envisioning is like comparing apples and oranges. And so that when you look at the statute, it lists offices, schools, religious facilities, medical buildings, and malls. All of those buildings are buildings that at one point were open to the public. So they were built to accommodate large numbers of people. So you don't have this situation where you are going from a very small industrial building in a corner of a neighborhood suddenly becoming a huge number of units. You're going from a situation where you had a major building that was built to accommodate a lot of people and then you switch it to a different use that's built to accommodate a lot of people. And so I think that's why it just feels like a mismatch for our neighborhood. It's just a ton of units. And I think that's also betrayed by how small these units are. When you look at the I tried to do math with publicly available information, but if you look at the size of the acreage of sites that something like Emerald Square Mall sits on or even like St. Anony's Church, those are huge acreage sites with huge buildings. So when you do 15 units per acre, it's like, yeah, these buildings are like the units are like 1,600 square feet. Like that makes total sense. here the unit is tiny, right? Because of how we are cramming it into a relatively small building that really wasn't necessarily built for this public infrastructure. And so, totally understand the law, totally understand the reading of the law. I just wanted to kind of point out that I don't think we are being necessarily um obstructionist when we say that it just wasn't intended for this type of

situation that we have here. The building's already zoned residential. They don't need any kind of exemption. It's zoned residential, right? we can just like put residences in there. Um, so thank you. I appreciate that. Thank you. Okay. One. I have a follow question. Go, go right ahead. Good. Please. Uh, you say it drains from south to north. The drainage. Yes, that's what I believe that What does it What does it drain into? An actual storm drain or a pond? I'm sorry. What? Does it do does it drain into an actual storm drain or or the pond back there into the wetlands? Into the wetlands was what the civil engineer stated. We can we can have him confirm after the um after the back there was a pond back there. Yep. Way back. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any other members of the public that would like to um approach the board and speak about this project? I see two hands. Come on up, Red Hat. How about you? Save the best for last. The Yankee fan, come on up. You raise your hand. Do you want to come up? Uh, for the record, just state your name and your address, please. Thank you. Robert Elementi. I live at 215 Finch Avenue. I didn't I didn't plan on coming up here, but a bunch of people wanted me to. So, I just have a few things written down, and forgive me if I get a little lost. Um, the number one thing I wanted to talk to you about tonight is the possible air contamination, land contamination. Um, I'm the only person that actually

borders this property. I share a border. I see everything that's going on. Um when they started doing construction, um it has disturbed a lot of whatever's down in that pit. What construction are you referring to? Uh they've been in there with earth moving uh dump trucks, front end loaders, back hose digging the grounds up. Um it's they've taken a lot of construction debris from one side of the property. They dumped it all along the Ward AB side. Um and it's kicked up an enormous amount of dust day after day so bad that my neighbor's house disappears in the in some of these dust storms. And I stayed inside a lot, kept my windows shut, but I happened to have my mother for the weekend at my house on Easter weekend and I wanted to take her outside and it was a beautiful day. It was a beautiful day. I She's 85 years old. Does not move well without a walker. We were in the driveway and one of the the wind just kicked up. I could not get her in the house fast enough. I was choking. She was choking. Um, and my neighbor was out in in the driveway with us and she had to run home. It was It's bad. And this happened quite a few times. I don't know what's in that dust. It could be just sand particles, but given the history on this on this property, is it as best? Did I just get doused with

asbestous or or worse? Um, I've lived there for 25 years. I've seen everything that the prior uh owner dumped down there. Um, I mean, truckloads of tar, like unused asphalt. Um, if you look down the embankment and it's not like you have to go searching far, you just stand at the edge of the road, you can see portions of vehicles that are half buried. Um, there's just trash down there. Um, I've seen them like you move regarding the previous owner and your witnessing um uh um uh dumping. Um did you take any action at that time? I I went out and I yelled at him. Okay. But there was no there was no um I don't I don't photos that was probably uh 20 years ago. Okay. Um they would my house is the last house on Finch. Yep. And it's on the corner of Dickinson. Yep. So they would routinely go up and down Dickinson and back up and dump down the embankment construction debris, all kinds of stuff. Okay. But at at that at that time you you made nobody aware of um that activity? No. Okay. Thank you. Um kind of lost my place. Uh so that's that's a big thing. Um there's been no effort to control the the dust that kicks up. Um the other thing is uh that place historically flooded. I mean if the sky opened up and just sneezed, that place flooded in the

winter. It it was I think even the the previous owner said in the first meeting that he would have water up to the doors of his truck and it would it would look like a barge. He would drive the vehicles through there. It looked like a barge and the wake of of the water. Before they sold the property, they did some things, renovations to that building and like closed in the roof. They also did some uh heavy equipment and tree clearing down in the corner at the end of Baird and all of a sudden that place never flooded anymore. But I've noticed that my neighbors around the area have said in the last few years the water's gotten worse. Well, that's because tens of thousands of gallons of water were dispersed. And I know that behind my house for decades I would see in the spring that behind my house it's all wetlands that it would it would collect water and maybe you'd have some ducks in there and then you know by the early summer it was dried out. It's a pond. It is now a pond all the way on two sides of my house. Um, so the water's going somewhere and these people that are saying, you know, the water seems to be getting worse, they're not imagining things that it's real. They've dispersed all the water from that pit into the neighborhood. Um, and I heard them say tonight that it's this is a flood zone and you're not allowed to fill it in. I've seen I stopped counting. I stopped counting after

31 like not pickup truck dump trucks, giant dump trucks came in and they filled all along that that uh area along ward. So it it seems like are you not supposed to fill it in, but you're filling it in? What? What's I don't I don't understand what's going on. And was that the previous owner, sir? No, that was the new owner. Okay. So, um I don't know. I could I'm I'm going to start babbling after this, so I'm going to stop. But if you have any questions, um I I think a recommendation um and we we can we can I think maybe address this later on in the meeting, but um if if if you are um uh concerned about your safety, health, welfare regarding activity that is happening on another person's property. Um I think you should feel encouraged to um approach that person to ask what they're what they are doing and or um you could reach out to town resources that will help facilitate um a a solution for for everybody. Well, at at that time I I told you I went out and I yelled at them. I basically I'm standing at the corner and there is a sign posted on the on the uh the electric pole that says no dumping. Please take notice. And the guy's trying to dump. And I went out there and I'm like what are you doing? He's like oh it's all right. Um my boss owns the the property down there. I'm

like look at the sign. You're not supposed to be dumping. And this is the previous owner. What's that? This is the previous owner. Yes. Okay. Um Yep. But I mean All right. I'm sorry. Go ahead. That's what that's what I did. Okay. At that time, but I've since these big uh dust storms have been kicking up and I'm very concerned. Um, I've talked to the different councilmen. Um, Stefano, and I call him Stfano out of no disrespect, but I can't pronounce his last name without bot watching it. So, Stfano um urged me uh to call the EPA. And I did put in a dust complaint. They took my name. I I I put in a dust complaint and they said they would look into it. Okay, good. That's who you should definitely follow up with then. That was that was like two months ago and and nothing's been nothing's been done. So, I uh recommend maybe you contact them and to see where where your complaint stands in their in their process. Thank you very much. All right. Thank you. Thank you. All right. One last member of the public and then we are going to um break for a short recess. We've been at this for 2 hours and 40 minutes. Good evening. Um, James Piccolo, 47 Beard Avenue. Um, I just want to say that I listen to everybody tonight and I'm not trying to say the same thing as everybody. I did a little research while we were in the meeting and I counted about 37 properties on Beard Avenue alone. So, that's including the uh condominiums or the little townhouse condos they have right by the um ice cream parlor. So, pretty much this project will be doubling the amount of people just on Beard Avenue

alone. Um, that will bring a lot more traffic and not to mention my fiance's car has gotten totaled in front of my house. If I were to show you the amount of alerts I get from my security cameras, it goes off about every 4 seconds. So, you could call me an expert on the topic as well because I do observe. I I'm in the neighborhood every day walking my animals. I spend a lot of time outside. I do make frequent trips down the street because her family lives there and that's right across the street from the 114 Beard that is um in in question. To me, it doesn't make sense to put 48 units on a dead end street. That's something you would put on a main road near a bus stop if especially if he's talking lowincome housing. A lot of people would need transportation. So that's just going to lead to more cars going up if it's an Uber or a taxi or whatever. That's going to lead to more people coming up and down the street. Um and the last thing that I wanted to say, I was waiting for someone to mention that there's only one stop sign on Beard Avenue and that's at the dead end intersection. So that's all. Thank you. Thank you. Um All right. Thank you very much. Um we've heard um I actually am encouraged by the number of people that that showed up and um that would like to participate in um uh planning board meetings. Um I encourage you to come to more of them whether or not they are uh hearing projects that are in your uh local community. Um with that being said, I will um like to break for a fivem minute

recess and after this recess um we'll hear from the applicant um any answers or responses they may have for the uh the public's concern and um we'll move on from there. So uh the time is 8:42. Oh, 8:43. Everybody gets about five minutes for a break. Thank you. All right. Nice job, Dave. to my office. I like this. I've seen so much I think she's saying that's the minimum eligibility. So she said she argued that which I thought was against what I thought. I read it as if you're going to meet says there reuse

project over there and density based on me. Yeah. So she said okay. Yeah. But this is no 15 acid. [Music] Yeah, that doesn't Right. Right. That's one of the I mean I go to them. I don't I don't work them, but I I'm excited for Anthony to leave though so I can get the comfy chair. This chair is killing me. Well, there's a big empty one there, but same. It's almost over, I think. Right. Yeah. That second property is not going to be as um what second property? The second item on the agenda. There's another minor. I thought that was the only one. Did they not move the Did they kept Oh, I think I have the old agenda. Yeah, I have the old agenda for the other. Yeah. Yeah, it's just tonight. See? Oh, perfect. Oh, we didn't do the minutes.

Okay.

How you doing? phone. That's why he didn't even bother. I got an hour's worth response. Have you taken the training yet? The three-hour training? Well, not for pro, not for yet. I do. We have to do it every uh every month in Massachusetts. So, I've done that one. Can you I just finished my uh my uh tax filing reform. I just finished that over this weekend. Okay. I was late. The guy he sent me an email some guy the ethics committee. Yeah. No, not from the ethics. No, from department of I was supposed to file a 2024 financial file because you're on this. So I guess I was like two or three days late. So the guy said he was kind of sent me an email last week said, "Mr. Asian, you know, you're late." He said, "Can you find me $100? I want to give you a little more time." I said, "No problem. I'll do this week." And which I did. I filed it electronically. And then I sent them an email Monday morning. He said, "I'm all set." He said, "Thank you very much." But I haven't done the effort. I got to do that. Brent sent me the email, the link. I haven't done it yet. I did it. I did it last night and um I I was like engaged. I I thought it went

by like I I was writing notes down and I'm like I'm asking question like I love you have to answer any questions. What's that? You have to answer any questions. No no we have they make you keep your camera on and they they they encourage questions that create dialogue. I think I was kind of creating too many questions because we running out of time. Oh yeah I think good. No, you did not. Yeah, no test. That's funny. The uh the difference of interpretation and the solicitors. It's funny. Kelly argued there was noility and not a I argued with her for a while. Oh, members. Interesting. Ready. Okay, everybody who remained here tonight, I thank you. Um, we took a 10-minute break. I think it was welld deserved. Um and uh thank you again members of the public for um coming up and participating in tonight's meeting. Um so now we'll um provide the applicant um with an efficient amount of time to respond to uh some of uh your concerns and and questions. um that I don't know how many you you you wrote down um but I have a few here that um that came up um and I'll I'll just read them off. Uh drainage flooding of site will it

compromise the use of parking the parking lot? I don't know if you guys know that yet. I I did make my own list if if you wouldn't mind, Mr. My list and then if if I missed one of yours, I'll I can can go back. Thank you for taking notes. Um um so I I just wanted to respond to a a couple of attorney Deysto's um observations um and his push for denial of the master plan application. Number one, he talked about condos versus rentals. I mean, again, this is master plan. It's just a condo. the form of ownership is irrelevant. I know this has come up in other applications we've had before the board, but quite frankly, this could be rental or this could be condo and we can convert it to rental right after we get all our approvals. I mean, there's no prevent preventing the application. We can tell you today it's going to be condos, it's going to be condos and then we decide right after right after we get all the approvals, you know what, we don't want it to be condos. It's just a form of ownership. You know, I I'm assuming he wasn't suggesting that condo people are the better types of people than rental people. I know that issue came up before this board and it was soundly pushed back and saying that that's not up for consideration. I'm not sure if that was the point. We would we wouldn't we wouldn't look at it um in a um uh we would we would we review projects non-prejudice, right? And um my interpretation of the density calculations 3A2 is the development includes at least 20% low and moderate income housing. So I I do think that at this point um the the definition of housing um implies ownership. The definition well Mike my my the definition housing implies ownership. I would think so. I'm sorry. again. I can't hear. So, so it's the land use.

So, it's the land use is housing. But to follow up on uh Mr. Pary's comment, I agreed whether it's condominium today or lease, but I think Mr. Systo's point was um during the presentation I when I asked the question, I believe you or your client said it's lease. Your site plan is condominium, right? So, I So, true, you could select whichever one you want. You could change it 6 months from now back and forth. But for purposes of our review, the implication is that we need to have those documents, the performer, the monitoring agreement or the covenants that we need to have the Let me finish. Let me finish. I'm just shaking my head internally. Okay. All right. Well, I thought you're saying no to me. The implication is that we should have those documents now and that that's required as part of the approval process. However, if a year from now after the gentleman is done with the construction, you then choose to go to say lease instead of condominium, then you'll have to get those documents at that time. But for purpose of our review and should this board contemplate approval, we need to have those documents now. So the question is, are they going to be condominiums or lease? Your plan says one thing verbally you said something else. Right. Again, my the point of my the point I'm trying to make is I I think you got two two things involved. You got you got the issue of affordability and then you have the issue which would include this monitoring agent and also let me finish Armen and which would include the monitoring agent and perhaps a letter from the Rhode Island housing versus the condos whether it's a condo or it's an apartment the same rules apply and it shouldn't make any difference and and I'm not sure why the board would need to know that and if it says condo because we were thinking about condoing it and you It may go back and forth. He may conduit it and still rent them and not sell them. That's a possibility. I'm not sure why. You need to explain to me why is important for you to know one way or

the other. Whether it says condo on the plan and then I say we might be renting them. What what what does that bring to the table that would make you make a different decision? Well, first of all, it's a contradiction. I'd like to know which one it is because we can't. We're planners, so we'd like to know what it is. Moreover, as I said earlier that we'd have according to Mr. Disto, he suggested or it uh suggested that those documents are necessary to be submitted for this board to make a determination. I then said, I'd like a deep dive of that through our city solicitor determine if that's the case. So, if that's the case that those documents need to be submitted as part of our review process and our approval process, then we need to have those documents. So, if it's a condominium, it's going to be a it's going to have a particular context to it. If it's a lease, it's going to have a particular context with what the rents would be or if they're a condominiums, what the sale price would be. So, let me just respond to that. I'm not going to we'll agree to disagree. I don't believe you need to know and it's not going to have any impact on your determination. Now, just so you know, as an aside, we received an our application was deemed complete. I know this adaptive reuse statute is new to everybody. There was no check mark on you need to have a letter from Rhode Island Housing or you need your um you need your monitoring agent in place as part of our application. Now, if that's what we need, then we'll produce that we'll produce that as part of our um master plan application. We need to do that. You say we don't need it. Mr. Disto thought we did. So, I asked our city solicitor to do a deep dive and make that deter. I don't need it. I didn't say we didn't need it. All I said was we don't need it at master plan application. Now, if the board is saying we want it, we'll produce it. Sure. Let me correct myself that we need it as part of the review process for the approval. I think he said that we need that as part of the review process for approval. Right. You disagree. That's why I asked the city solicitor, do I disagree and I believe your town planner

disagrees because it wasn't part of the checklist for a complete application. Okay. So, we're going to ask the city solicitor to apply on that. But just so you know, the the solidicity solicit doesn't have to do anything because we will produce it if you want it as part of our master plan application. It's not a heavy lift. It'll take us a couple of weeks to get it. Not a heavy lift. Well, I'd still like to know if it it's required for us as part of the approval process. So, we can still ask them that question. So, thank you. If you're going to support the issue the submit the document, but again, just to answer the question that condo right now, it's our intent. We we'll we'll remove the word condo and put apartments if that if that's so it's consistent with what what our testimony was tonight. But again, um I won't debate that subject any further. Others that's what we'll do if that's what the board is looking for. We're not asking you to change wording. We're asking you to or I think what we're asking you is to ensure that your wording on your documents and your presentation are consistent to the board. So it so it removes any sort of confusion for us as we listen to your presentation and review your documents. Would it be fair to say to you if I told you right now, we haven't decided whether or not we're going to do condominiums or apartments. It could go either way. That's up in the air. We haven't decided what form of ownership. We may rent these things. We may sell them. If we rent them, we have to comply with the affordability element, the cost of rent. If we sell them, we have to comply with the sales price. either way, but we don't have to decide that right now. And we certainly don't have to decide that at master plan application. Well, then don't Well, then don't put them on your on your document. We'll remove the word condo. It wasn't We're trying to not trying to be deceptive, believe me. And I'm telling you right now, um most likely it's going to be rental, but um initially we were thinking condo. We're going back and forth, but I did not appreciate the fact that that was such an important element to the determination to make this an a master plan application. really I didn't

and I still don't believe it's pertinent but but we'll agree to disagree on that point. Um number two phase one I don't think Mr. the system heard us, we're going to have a phase one. Um, if we don't get if we have a phase one in the preliminary approval, again, if we have the phase one and it comes back with some issues, we have the right to go and spend the money and fix the problem. And if we can't, the town's going to deny us and we're not going to get the approval. Why? There is no need. Back then on our first meeting, we were looking for a master plan in preliminary. Today, we're only looking for master plan. We will provide a phase one environmental. We'll do that. Um, but we don't need to have that. This is just a concept plan right now. This is not a deep dive into engineering phase ones, that sort of thing. That would require that document as a condition of master plan approval. Number three, we talked about capacity. Let's assume we don't have sewers here. We don't have sewers and we're going to have to do an ISDS. And ISDS is always presented at preliminary, not at master plan approval. So for the sake of argument, I'm going to say we don't have sewers and we're going to we're going to need to get ISDS and we'll present that at preliminary. Well, then I got to tell you that I look into groundwater. So you you're talking about a septic system. So what I'm getting from you, with all due respect, is you want to slide by with the bare minimum of information to the board that has to make a determination about a 48. Let me finish. I'm not saying anything. Well, it's my face. No, I can't help myself. All right. Well, I'm reacting to your mannerisms. Look away. So, yes. So, with all due respect, it seems like to me, at least for me, I'm not speaking on behalf of the board. Just to me, as an individual board member, you just want to get by by the most bare minimum, checking off the box. I did this, this, and this. We're planners. We're entitled to ask you these questions. And part of

the questions we're asking, it's part of the question of doing business. If the board is asking for a reasonable amount of additional information, I don't understand what all this resistance is for. The the resistance quite fr it's it's all about money. That's why you have these two phases. You have master plan which is conceptual and if we get the master plan, we're going to invest the hundreds of thousands of dollars to get to preliminary and that's where you spend the money. It's not that we're trying to hide anything. We want to get by the bare minimum. We just want to know that we're going to get a thumbs up on this project and then if we can't produce we can't produce a phase one. We can't do an ISDS or a septic system. You shoot us down at preliminary. That's the way it works. That's the way it works in all towns. That's that's the way of I've always presented master plan versus preliminary. That that that's why they have the two steps. Otherwise, they say get rid of preliminary master plan. We want preliminary. We want all the builders to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars upfront with the possibility of not getting approval. Yeah. Maybe. So this is North Providence. I don't know what other towns do. So I can speak for the town of North Province. If there's some additional information that we consider to be a reasonable amount of minimum information, I'm not sure what the resistance is. Again, again, it's the cost of doing business. You have to spend some money to convince this board to get you to that excellent. I think it's just like you want to get past the the past the first round without really giving the board as much information I think that we deserve in order to get to the second round. So again, I think there's a bare minimum of information that this board considers um that you need to submit that I don't think you've done so far. So it's your position, just so I'm I'm clear, that you think that my applicant should be required at master plan approval to submit an ISD approval. That's what you're telling me? No, you said you're going to connect to the sewer line. You said it's available. My the reason why the reason why I did that was to make the analogy to draw you to the point that it's talk we're talking

about spending money versus concept. And you're saying you're suggesting to me that that that's the reason why I made the analogy about the sewer thing. We're going to we're going to you're going to know by preliminary whether or not we have sewer. So why in my mind would it make a difference to you whether we produce that information at master plan which is just conceptual versus preliminary? Yeah, that's that's that's where I'm I'm having the problem. So let me tell you, I'm a professional land use planner and I can never conceive getting to a preliminary plan without knowing about sewer, water, and drainage. Those are very fundamental building blocks of looking at a site plan. and you're saying it's irrelevant at this point. We we don't think you need to know about. So, we're going to get to that next point. I think we need that now. So, I'm not going to beat a dead horse. I'm going to submit my comments through the chair. I think this is some additional basic information that we need to consider. If you choose not to submit, that's fine. We'll leave it at that. And then I will I will submit it if it was if it was on a checklist to to to tell me because I know this is adaptive again. That's why I said adaptive reuse. It's a new it's a new animal, right? So, if if it's the board's requirement that you should have um an ISDS, for example, or if you should have um a letter um of approval from Rhode Island Housing, or you should have um a a monitoring agent set up, it should be on a checklist so I know that you that's what you want as part of the master plan approval. Simple as that. If that was on a checklist and you said that's what you needed, I'd have it here tonight before we even got here. So, I'm kind of guessing as to what I think I need um for master plan approval. That's why we have a public hearing. Okay. We'll submit my comments through the chair and whatever the group as a planning board thinks is a reasonable list, we'll pass that on to Brent and then Brent will

share that checklist with you. That's at least my suggestion to the board. Understood. And just so you know, I talked to my client. I mean, if we have to produce this, we're going to produce it. Um, we're not trying to say we're not drawing a line in the sand and saying, "I want an answer yes or no." We're not going to do that. Um, let me just move on. So, I I I know people want to get out of here. Um, definition of adaptive reuse. Uh, attorney Deisu suggested that, well, you have to start knocking walls down and this is going to turn it into a 10. It's not going to be an adaptive reuse. I just looked at the definition under article 13 definition. adaptive re reuse. Quote, maintain the elements of the structure. Um, that's what it says. Doesn't say anything about we can or can't knock down or or rebuild a wall. Um, it doesn't say anything along those lines. So, I mean, again, it's a new statute. There hasn't been any litigation on what the definition of adaptive reuse is. I think the clear statute that the statute says uh conversion of any commercial building. I think that's what it is. Um, and then within the definition of adaptive reuse, it says maintain the elements of the structure. What does that mean? Does that mean I can't cut out windows? Does that mean I can't rebuild walls that need to be rebuilt because they're falling apart? Um, I suggest no. But, um, I think that's above all our pays. And if that's going to get litigated someplace, if someone's going to take an appeal and saying this doesn't constitute an adaptive reuse, then so be it. We'll be in superior court. But at this point in time at the master plan stage, I don't think you have to take that into consideration. Um just just my my position. And then finally, um density. Um as you know, density, this is a permitted use in in in this in this zone. Um I know it doesn't um it's in conflict with the comprehensive plan. I know the mayor when he was here, he was talking about 18 units. That was probably part of that comprehensive

plan. And quite frankly, I mean, the state shoved it down every town's throat that because they're looking for more housing, right? They did that. And my client based on the law, he goes in, buys his thing. So, he he's not he's playing by the rules. So, adaptive reuse, if there's a conflict between the statute and the um master plan, as you know, I've said this before at other meetings um and and that the zoning orders trumps the master plan. We're now looking for any relief. We're entitled to the density of 48 units because we meet 15 units per acre. Did you clarif clarification? Did you imply or or or mean to say the zoning ordinance trumps the comprehensive plan? Yes. Did I say the opposite? No, you you instead of comprehensive plan, you refer to it as master plan. Oh, yeah. No, the comprehensive plan. That's fine. Thank you for clarifying. Thank you. And then um and finally, like I said, just just to wrap up that um if this board determines um that we need any of those items like the phase one, if we need a letter showing that more than just sue availability but capacity or if we need um uh a letter from Rhode Island Housing or a letter from a um monitoring agent, we we will provide all of that. Um but my position is that I don't think we need to at Massa Plan. But that concludes my my response. Thank you. Um there was one um public comment related to the the traffic pattern um in in observations of having lived in the neighborhood for a certain amount of years that the the traffic pattern is Ward Dorman and then Oakdale or vice versa. Um just for clarification purposes um

can the applicant um uh speak on to whether or not the traffic study included um Dormund and Oakdale. I'll have my Yeah, expert. Thank you. That Yeah, that applicant expert. Yes, we looked at all the neighborhood streets and that would constitute a a very minor volume. Finch is one way and if you're going north on power, you may go that way. If you're going south on power, you would do the Anderton. So your your your study took into account account the traffic pattern um on Ward, Dormund, and and Oakdale. Yeah. When you're talking about, you know, um you know, 15 to 20 cars in each direction in an hour, it's a negligible amount. And then you add in our traffic and you're talking two or three cars potentially. Okay. Thank you. Was there anything else I um just to the um the gentleman with the red hat's concerned about um activity that's happening on on the site? Um, can they can you guys um on record just state what activity is is currently occurring or has occurred since ownership has transferred when we bought the site back in January. Um, the fell that sold it to us was to clean it out. He had all Uh he had um pallets of brick and blocks and the pallets with the this stuff like if he got done with a job he would save

it in case he might need it down the line or something. It was there for so long that the pallets basically all rotted so you couldn't pick them up with a forklift. They just fell apart. Um, and this was scattered all all around the place. There were a couple of old trailers that um he tried to sell, but he couldn't, so he left them there. Um, there there was a lot of stuff that he left on the site, including a boat that was up on a stand. Um, and there was some debris around the garage. There was never no garbage there. Nothing. Rodents would go there. They don't eat wood or something. They look for food in your garbage actually. But there was no garbage there. There were never no rodents. We didn't see any of that there. We got a permit from the town. I think I paid $1,500 for it to repair and um fix anything on the building like a door that maybe could fall off or something like this. So, we got the permit from the town in North Proidence to do that. And when the fella said he seen a big uke truck in a in a loader, that's because we couldn't we had dumpsters there. Once we picked up the block and all, then the guys would take all the broken pieces of pallet, put them in a dumpster. Okay. So, if you seen this place, look at it from an aerial and go look at it now. It's as clean as a park right now. There's nothing there, right? So, so that's what we did. So, your activity was basically limited to moving

transient objects on the site. You were not doing any sort of um earth work or site work to the existing topography or the ground. And then anything related to building construction um was limited to what is applicable for the permit that you pulled from the town of North Providence. The building inspector came there and told me what he wanted me to do and says I'm going to give you a permit to do what I'm asking you to do. Is there a permit posted? Well, I don't know. Posted where? On your building. Oh, no. Not now. You should do that. No, but no, it's it doesn't have this done. So, Dave, there was a um a complaint about the condition of the building and the uh the building inspector gave him a permit to uh repair and make safe the building is what he gave it for. So, um I believe there was like a hole in the ground that they were worried someone might fall into and other safety issues that he had to repair. So, okay. So, and so we did clean up and all. Um, and we took dumpsters there and we we got rid of all old trailer trucks. Not not motors or anything, boxes where he kept all his staging in and all stuff like that. He's 87, 88 years old. He just left. Yeah. Um, you know, and I understand that. Uh he actually gave me $50,000 to clean it up because he was supposed to have it done. Um cost me a little more than that, but it's okay. Um and the only one I can't tell one more issue if you need I need to. Um I know, but no, I I I just have to say

it. Anytime that I do any project, we design and plan something like this. Actually, just like this. And when we go in for all our other permits, we have to go in with a plant. So we usually always, not usually get a master plan and then we go in with that plan knowing it's a master plan knowing it's all set with the board and we go get all our other permits and dem stuff, anything that we need to do and it's based off the plan. So if we don't have that and we just go get plans on this without having a master and then we come back and you change this, then the plans and everything I just got is no good. I'll do it any way you want me to do it, but that's not the way that I've been doing it for 40 years. I did 200 subdivisions. And the way we always do it is we have a master plan. we go get all our other permits based on what we got approved. Um, in my head, I can't see any other way you're doing it because if I go out and get permitted and then for some reason something changes in here, then my permits aren't any good. No, I got to go back and do them all over again for my preliminary. So, that's that's the only reason. However you guys want, whatever you want, I I'll get it for you. But that's just the way I don't know any other way to do it. But having I have to have a pocket to put money in. If I don't have the pocket, it falls out. Same problem there. If I

don't have a master plan and I go get permits, they're no good. I have to go back and do them again. That's all I'm saying. However you want me to do it, I'll do it. David question for the applicant, Steve. Yes. Yeah. Go ahead. I'm in just one qu two questions. I think the the uh concern on my part anyway, you said you always go for a master plan first. However, you didn't do that on this project. I think Jack and tell me if I'm wrong, you went for a master and preliminary plan. Echo, I can explain to you. Has nothing to do with Okay, that's my first question. My second question is, are you telling us tonight you didn't remove any cars, any vehicles? No, he did. He did though. Okay. Thank you. Absolutely. I did not remove any cars. Okay. But he did. He did. Okay. Um, you said something that was first. A preliminary master plan. Master plan preliminary. That was first. Oh, so that the applicant submitted you submitted master preliminary plan initially. I'm going to explain to you why. I went in to see Brent before this before I ever before we ever came to any boards or anything. And the way that Brent understood everything, sort of the way I understood it, he said to me, you it's your right to get 48 units. And that was, you know, figured out. And I says, okay. And he said, what I would like to do is I need to see your parking. I need to see your landscaping. I need to see your buffers to neighbors. That's what we thought we had to do. That's what we thought, right? So that's

why we came in with both. If we knew we were going discourse, we wouldn't have done that. But it is a little learning stage for all of us. I understand that. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Uh open for the board for for discussion. Well, I'd like to make a site visit. Um, and again, I'll defer the chair. Maybe we could continue the hearing tonight just so that we can all have an opportunity at least for me to go make a site visit. Okay. Um, as a as a uh legal matter, the certificate of completeness was granted at the end of January. the 90day window which within which to approve or deny the project. Will you agree to I think we waved that last time but we'll wave it again. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Plus well I don't want to beat a dead horse but the the applicant modified their the process that they wanted to go through. So wouldn't still under the initial. Oh really? Oh because it has Okay. Okay. So, thank you for waving that. Um, so Gary, you would like to visit the site, please. Um, would the applicant be um permit a site visit? Absolutely. Okay. We love road trips. I Um, I get paid by the hour, so take your time when you want to see.

Unfortunately, we Well, we not unfortunately we we don't. Um, so if uh do any other members of the board um would would they like to have a site visit as well? You would? Okay. Um, so if we, so I'm just trying to work out the mechanics of this. So if we, um, how does site visit? We can't individually, we do not need uh to advertise it or post it. Post it as a what would it be posted as a public hearing? No, just it's just a a meeting the board. Okay. Can we do the Suzies for safety purposes? Two people at a time. Well, I think uh I don't know if two people would two people okay because you're underneath a you're underneath needle as long as you don't talk to each other about it and form a rolling quorum. Okay. Rolling quorum. Yeah. So that's if if he talks to Gary, Gary talks to you. You talk to Warren. That's a role in quorum. And that's illegal. So that's illegal. That's illegal. That's illegal. Illegally, you can't do it. Can't do it. Understood. Okay. Yeah. So, okay. Um, we should just go individually. So, if we go individually, um, do the applicants I'm sorry. Do the board members would they want to go inside the building or just visit the site? I don't need to go in. I just want to visit the site. Okay. Just visit the site. Can we peek inside? Is it is it secured or not? I I don't know. The applicant would have to speak to that. Is there are there are there means to look inside the building from the exterior? Yeah, limited, right? I'm assuming limited to windows.

He'll make himself available. So, if he needs to unlock a gate, I know there's a gate. Okay. I think what I think what we'll do is we'll we'll schedule with you through Brent. So, I think the planning board members will contact you, Brent, and pick a couple of days or times and and float it by you and and Brent, do you mind coordinating this for the for the planning board members? Okay. So, we won't do it jointly. Um or if we just don't talk. So, who exactly wants to site visit? Just so I can So, Warren, do you want to go as well? I'll I'll go as well. Yes. I I always visited I run by the site every day but not on it. Um Okay. During work hours, does that work for you? Oh, not for me. No. So, sometime like after five. Yeah. It's a good time of year to do it. The sun is still up. Um, okay. So, what I'm hearing from the board right now is um additional information um can be uh is requested to be obtained via site visit um in order to um render a decision on the matter tonight. Correct. Well, I I think tonight you basically were presented with a lot of information. Correct. You want the opportunity to digest that information? Yes. And continue the public hearing until the next when is the next meeting. Uh it is 12 I think 11. You want the ability to formulate

findings? Mhm. I don't know if you have any additional questions. Yeah, I do. I was just wondering for the chair. Sure. If it's appropriate to ask you um Anthony for legal opinion on the comment from attorney who emphasized that that the monitoring and the um the performer and the the rental agreement or the affordability documents have to be submitted as part of the uh the application. I'd like an opinion from you. that's okay with the board. I I I agree with that. I think it's it was um well argued from um each side of the coin tonight. Um that's a compliment to both of you gentlemen. Um and we should utilize us as a board should utilize the resources that that we have. Um thank you. Uh so I would be in in favor of that. Do I hear any objections? Not a formal vote. No, but before you take a vote, my only question is is for the site visits, is that going to be posted? No, we're going to go individually. Yeah. Is it going to be a guided tour? Is it going to be a guided tour? I don't know. No, I don't think it it it can't be a guided tour. That's my question. Because if it is, then then I'm going to want to be there. Absolutely. Yeah. No, it we will so uh new term um we will not participate in exparte communications. Thank you. Um yes, we did hear a lot of information today. Um, and I'll go back to um, yeah, I I would like for our solicitor to render an opinion on the um, the matter when it comes to um, the application and of approval for the

proform of the 20% low to moderate income housing in order to meet the the criteria for for the density. Um, do I hear is anybody opposed to that? Okay. Can I can I ask a question concerning that? Yeah. Um, so like I um, sorry you like is that like I had mentioned the the the application to Rhode Island housing includes that um pro-former statement. So if we were to provide um a letter of eligibility from Rhode Island housing and they base their letter of eligibility based on the proformer statement, do you still want a copy of the proformer statement? Why don't we start off with this? Why don't we get the opinion first and see what the opinion says with all due respect? I'm sorry. No, I apologize. No, I'm I'm following you, Gary. Thank you. I understand. Just so you know, we're we're just going to go and get it. Just Just so you know, we're not going to we're not going to wait because I'd like to know what the opinion is at the end of the day to see if it's But we're going to get it. Thank you. It's not a It's not a heavy lift. You are. It's a public record, but I'd like to think the board should see that. I I'd like I'd like to know the answer to that myself. Yes. And um for everybody's edification um this may or may not be the only adaptive reuse that project that the board sees. So um after that interpretation will have precedent to follow um other potential projects. Yeah, you know, it's been a moving target, but the letter of eligibility is just one thing. There's other things that have to have to happen here too, which is what I said originally on this just a letter here or this and that. That's one of the issues I think that the board has in making a decision on this. So, I don't think just going to get a letter of eligibility. So, Mr. We heard you. We understand. But we got to

start somewhere. We we do and and I don't I don't want to turn this into um I don't even know what you want to call it. I just don't want it to be that it's always uh the goalpost keeps moving. They're going to give you this. There's an objection. We're going to give you that. Should have all been done ahead of time. But thank you, David. Yes, Gary. Could we also get just a reminder the P stamp on the traffic report, please? Uh yeah, that's just a reminder. I don't think Mr. Bannon had any issues with that, but yeah, Stamp and signed the traffic report. Uh we we do recognize him as a as an expert and um they don't hand out stamps to anybody. I think the goal of this board was to be to render a decision at the on the master plan at the January at the at the June meeting. Yes. June 11th meeting. So they have the opportunity to digest everything that was presented with them tonight and develop some some findings. Okay. just just so I'm clear. So, the meeting is still open. It's not closed. Public hearing is just going to be continued to June 11th. And um I don't think it would be a problem as I got one of these a couple weeks ago. But in the event that you have you this opinion comes down that says you need the letter of eligibility and we aren't able to get it by that point in time. Will it it's my opinion that you that you need it, right? Okay. So, um, if we don't have it by the next meeting, then, um, can we call you ahead of time and just kick it over until we are able to get it so we can just continue the meeting? Yeah. I mean, it's a condition proceeding to any any, uh, master plan approval. I don't know what you mean by kick it over. Just continue it. We would vote to continue the meeting. So, so I get it to you. I'm going to try and get it to you for the next meeting, but I know how these things work. you know, if I if I I don't have it that day and it'll just be continued, I can call you

up and say I don't have it and we'll we'll continue it. Um I'd like to be able to um and I'd be more than if we if I know ahead of time I can send out notice to the abutters again saying listen so they don't show up. Um I can do that. Um if if I find out early enough that oh no, we're going to need another two weeks for some reason um I'd be more than happy to send out letters to all the abutters so that they don't have to show up again. Um and I and I can run that through Brent so people just don't show up. So once again, let's wait to see what we get and we'll take it from there. I don't I mean there was a lot of evidence. I mean it's that and a few other factors. So obviously over the next at the next meeting you'll be able to address all of these issues and if you don't have it you have it but there's other issues too obviously that were raised tonight right that need to be addressed phase one the there's three or four things you were looking for because the goal would be to develop a findings to either approve or deny at the next meeting. I I think I'd like to see a phase three not a phase one. Well, you always have to do a phase one first and that tells you the necess necessity of needing a phase two. So, it kind of goes in steps. The phase one will say, "We found some stuff. You need a phase two." That's that's usually how it works, which is much more expensive. The phase one's like two grand. Phase two could be 10, 15 grand. So, phase one tells you whether or not you need a phase two. And you expect to have that any day now? Yes. a phase one. Yeah. Yeah. A phase one, if you're not familiar with a phase one, they investigate the records. Um they don't go out and do poor sampling or anything like that. They do a record determination and based on what they find, they'll say, you know what, there was a dry cleaners here 20 years ago. I think we need a phase two. Some that's

that's how it works. So, but they'll tell us right in the phase one if they recommend a phase two or not. Okay. Why don't you just make a motion to continue the public hearing to June 11? So move Well, I don't know. Yeah, you can't do that. You can't make the motion. No, I'm telling you what motion. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So, do uh thank you members of the board for staying awake. Commission. Do I hear a motion to continue um the public hearing for the current applicant um project to the June scheduled June 11th meeting? I'll make the motion. Warren made the motion. Do I hear a second? Second. Second. Lou second. All in favor? I I Any opposed? Hearing none. Eyes have it. Um motion to adjourn the meeting. There's there's no administrator's report. Thank you. Uh motion to adjourn the meeting. So move. Do I hear a second? Second. Second. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Thank you. I think it's I think you're almost there.

Hope they put in enough. They do it all the time. Yeah, they're balancing out the person that has to testify if More than likely more than likely have two So, just want to let you know that's what you guys remember. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Well, we probably didn't even have to testify. If it ever gets contested in court, Steve will be the the party that's going to have to stand behind perfect zone for Dave. Steve, thank you. They will uh