Planning Board - Regular Meeting

The town of North Smithfield Planning Board meeting for Thursday, July 9th, 2026 is called to order at 7.01.

First item, roll call.

Dr. Benoit?

Here.

Mr. Hammond?

Here. Mr. Gasparro?

Here.

And the chair is here. Mr. Porter, Mr. Menard are not here. My understanding is that Mr. Menard may be showing up later.

Yep.

Yes. Okay. Okay. We have no minutes to review at this meeting. Does any member of the planning board have any conflict of interest that needs to be disclosed on any matter in front of us this evening?

the pre-application hearing on zero, Buxton Street, I'll be recusing myself for that.

Okay, that's fine. I think Mr. Menard asked on that one also, which is fine.

Okay, anything else? No?

Okay, disclosure notice. Any planning board member need to disclose any ex parte communications about any contested or material judicatory facts or opinions concerning the merits of any application before the board this evening? Hearing none. All right, so our voting members for this evening, with the exception of any item where someone has to recuse, Dr. Benoit, Mr. Hammond, Mr. Gasparro, and myself. If Mr. Menard arrives, he'll be a voting member as well.

Okay, so first up.

Request for extension 300 Buxton Street.

Good evening, members of the board. Attorney Dan Ardente for the applicant, Mr. Frank Jackson, Jack's Farm 1 LLC. This is just our simple request for an extension of the previously granted master plan for the property located at 300 Buxton Street. This is just a by right second extension, so this is all we're asking for.

Mm-hm. We're good?

Yes, Mr. Chairman, this is a project that received its master plan approval. I believe in 2025. The master plan was good for two years. They received one extension. This is the second by right extension. Okay. This is a project that was also before the planning board for pre-application, I think last time around. And I think the owner is preserving their right to protect their master plan as it exists. If they submit another project, that project will proceed rather than this project at this point.

Understood, okay. Any questions or comments from the board? And if not, may we look for a motion to grant the extension?

I'll make a motion to approve the one year extension. Second.

We have a motion and a second. Dr. Benoit?

Yes.

Mr. Hammond? Yes. Mr. Gasparro?

Yes. And the Chair votes yes. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Okay, next up, public hearing unified development review for 3 Greenville Road.

Hi, good evening Mr. Chairman, members of the board. My name's Elizabeth Noonan. I represent the applicant and owner of Greenville Realtors. Regarding this matter that was before you last September on a master plan approval along with some zoning relief. Tonight we are scheduled to move to preliminary plan. along with zoning relief. We have been advised there's an objective, there's been some additional information submitted to you, so I have two requests for you tonight. The first is that we move the preliminary plan hearing to the August 13th meeting. I have spoken with objectors council this afternoon, advised him I was doing that. That'll give us time to review the objectors traffic report which was delivered yesterday afternoon. I was at a funeral for the last really 24 hours, waking funeral. I haven't even had a chance to look at it. allow our people to review it and provide you some meaningful context. So that's the first thing. And the second is that we have signage relief. Again, if you recall at the master plan, we had withdrawn our signage relief. I did forward correspondence to the board through Mr. Carullo. asking to withdraw that signage relief again. I ask for it without prejudice in part. I think your signage regulations changed in the interim from when we filed this application back in April. And so my client wants to take a chance, not take a chance, take an opportunity to see if the revised ordinance fits and is enough for his project as it will. So those are the two separate things to withdraw the zoning relief. without prejudice, understanding you have a repetitive petition ordinance. However, like I said, I think the ordinance changed while we were under application, so I need to look at that a little bit more. And then obviously put the preliminary plan to August 13th.

Mr. Krueger, does it have any impact on the overall time frame and timing requirements?

No, they're actually asking for continuance, so this is a continuance at the request of the applicant, so it's an automatic extension.

Okay, great. Any questions from the board? Comments? Well, there is a chance for a public hearing for this, so I'll look for a motion to open a public hearing.

The attorney has withdrawn the application for a public hearing. If the board decides to take public comment, if someone's here to speak, you can- I would like to speak.

Well, we need to make a decision on that, because remember, we are talking about moving this to August 13th. And there will be a public hearing at that, correct, there will be a public hearing at that August 13th meeting, Mr. Carrillo?

It would be the public hearing, the requirement for the public hearing at the preliminary in this particular instance was because there was relief requested for dimensional variance, which would have brought it under the unified development review. A preliminary approval coming back before the planning board under the new statute is actually a public meeting. It's not a public hearing, so there's no notice served. So the aspect that is the public hearing is being withdrawn or requested to be withdrawn. And the aspect that would be a public meeting is being requested to be continued. I would defer to the solicitor. None of that. stops the board from accepting a comment, if they choose to accept comment.

And also, if I might add, Mr. Planner, I believe under the regulations, and we are all still learning these new regulations as they pop up, I believe we may give notice to the direct abutters under the regulations.

That is correct, direct abutters, I apologize, yes.

So I would take one piece at a time, Mr. Chairman. Yeah. First, if the board's going to, there's been a request to withdraw their application for zoning relief.

Mm-hm.

If you grant that request without prejudice, then that goes away. Mm-hm. And then their request to continue the public meeting until August 13th, that's to a date certain. Yeah. And although it becomes a public meeting, the board's certainly well within their rights on that day to allow anybody and everybody to speak. Right.

And that would be our intent.

Absolutely. You always do that anyway, Mr. Chairman. Yes. The public should be aware of that.

I may raise legal arguments to it, but I will not stand in the way of that happening, so.

So you'll be raising legal arguments?

That's what we get paid for. Okay. That's fine. That's fine. What can I tell you?

So I'm inclined that since we're moving this, well, we need to talk first about granting the- Withdrawal. The withdrawal. I'm sorry. So is this two separate votes then?

Yes. Okay.

So let's take care of those first.

um looking for a motion to accept the withdrawal the withdrawal of zoning right of zoning so move okay yeah second second great those in favor

Opposed? No. And Mr. Chairman, that was without prejudice?

That was without prejudice, right. And what's the wording for the second one?

To continue the preliminary plan meeting until August 13th is what I hear the date is.

Okay. So moved. Second.

Second. Before we vote, is that date currently open?

It is. That's our regular August meeting date. Agenda was already- Yeah, no, no. That's why they had recommended we go with that, so.

Okay, any discussion before voting? No, Dr. Benoit?

Yes. Yes. Ms. Hammond? Ms. Gizbaro? Yes. And the Chair votes yes. So the meeting is moved to a date certain of August 13th. With that, this topic is sort of put to bed for the evening until August 13th. But I can assure you that the public input will be, we will open up for public hearing, as is our- On the 13th. On the 13th, yes. Just keep in mind, you need to keep track of that date because, as the attorney pointed out, There's no special notice put out because it's a public meeting instead of a public hearing. Correct. Correct?

No, there is special notice, but it was already given. Oh, well, okay. And because you continue it to a date certain, a re-notice is not required.

Yes, but that's what I mean. There won't be any further notification after this evening, okay? Great. Thank you.

Great. Thank you so much. I'll see you next month.

Thank you.

Okay.

Next up, public hearing, major land development project for three, no, that's this one. We already took care of that. That was the second part. Next up, Amendment to the North Spitfield Zoning Map, Chapter 340. Nope, no, there were two, 3 Greenville Road was items eight and nine. Yeah, that's right.

I apologize.

Chapter 340, Article 9 of the Historic District Section, designation of historic districts. So can you give us a little background on this?

Mr. Chairman, this is an application from a property owner through the Local Historic District Commission to zone the property at 309 Eddie Dowling Highway. As a historic overlay to provide protection to this historic structure. I think the applicant as well as representative of the historic district commission is here to speak on behalf of the application.

Okay, if you could come up, please. And a map would be helpful if you've got one.

We have one. There we go. Well, you should have a, I sent a ton of stuff to- I do, but this way everybody can see it. Yeah, I got you. This is fairly simple in terms of, the way it goes about, in my initial Jeff Harris Chairman, Historic District Commission. I sent our letter of recommendation, and I'll just read that a little bit briefly, so it's essentially what Mark just said. We're recommending the designation of J.H. Bradford House as it's referred to, an historic designation, which is at 309 Eddie Darling Highway as a historic district. We firmly believe that this is an important architectural and cultural resource of North Smithfield's 19th century development and agricultural development as it went through. This house was constructed circa 1845 as best we could get. It's hard to find much deeper information on this unless we start to go to where the major, if there is anything in the Central Falls repository to find any more information. We haven't gone to that extent. There is some sources that suggest this house was started around 1776, so it does contain some really deep historic roots. And of its architecture, it really displays some great details, Greek revival style. And we're looking to simply, as part of a recommendation from you, to present to the planning board, to recommend this house be listed as part of the historic district zoning.

I think I heard you say to the planning board. You mean to the council?

Yeah. We're presenting to you, which is making a recommendation to the council. Yes.

Right. Mr. Krueger, anything you want to add to that before we move on?

No, I really have nothing to add. I mean, it's clearly a historic structure. It's been there since the start of the 1700s, possibly, and since the 1800s. Certainly qualifies for historic district overlay. The applicant is the property owner, so the applicant has requested that their property be protected. And the recommendation from the planning office to the planning board is for a positive recommendation to the town council.

Okay, just for clarification, what are the abutting properties north and south?

Do you have?

Is it abutting this storage facility or?

No, it's on the other side. There's no storage facility on the other side.

The storage facility is way down.

Yeah, on the other side.

Well, there's two. There's U-Haul and then there's the other one. Right, this is on the- Are you across from Taco Bell?

not directly across, but where the gas station's going.

Ah, you're across from that. Right now, yes.

Right, where there's a small church or something. Yeah, it's small.

Okay, thank you. Rhode Islandese of describing locations.

Well, we didn't put where something used to be. That would be very Rhode Island, right?

That would be historic. Yes, yes. Was there anything before it? Because it used to be there since the 1700s.

Yeah, in this case, you know. No, that's right. It's from what used to be. Yeah, okay. That's helpful.

Thank you. I'll make a motion to send a positive recommendation to the North Medfield Town Council for the proposed zoning map amendment. Second. Okay, any discussion? No?

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Chair votes yes. Thank you. Thank you very much. Easy. Now you need to see if that building really is where the foundation is 250 years old. okay next up um okay item 11 public meeting pre-application concept review comprehensive permit for buxton woods i believe you're accusing yourself mr confaro yes i have a conflict of interest so i'm going to recuse myself from this okay so with that you you're willing you're welcome to participate as in the public hearing as a resident thank you

Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Catherine Norman on behalf of the applicant, ENB Development Corporation. Tonight we're here to have a pre-application conference and concept review pursuant to state law and local regulations. As you know, the purpose of this meeting is for the applicant to meet with the town for the purpose of soliciting advice. input and sharing information about and discussing the concepts of the project. Before I share some background information about this project, we just wanted to provide the planning board with a check for the appropriate amount and to confirm that the previous check has been destroyed. Is the applicant here?

Just want to make it clear that she's not paying for an approval.

I was going to say- The application fee. It's usually handled a little more discreetly than that.

David just stepped out.

We want to be transparent.

It wasn't even a wink and a nudge. Okay.

I'm not sure if the applicant's here yet. All right.

I appreciate that, thank you. Thank you.

So now I'd like to just briefly give some background about this project before I hand this over to our engineer. So this project called Buxton Woods is for a comprehensive permit to construct ten condominium units with two bedrooms each, in other words, five duplexes. It's located at 0 Buxton Street, Assessors Platte 1, lot 44, in a residential suburban zone, which is an RS 40 zone. The three duplexes would be accessed from Buxton Street, and the other two duplexes would be accessed from Victory Highway. This lot is approximately 15.7 acres in total, of which approximately 8.27 acres are wetlands. Pursuant to the district regulations, in an RS-40 zone, the minimum lot area is 40,000 square feet plus 6,000 square feet per bedroom. So for this particular lot, the applicant could get by right a yield of approximately 45 bedrooms, but the applicant's only proposing 20 bedrooms.

Okay, could I just interrupt for an administrative item? Yes. Mr. Menard did just communicate with me that he's not going to be able to make it this evening, okay? Sorry.

No, no problem, thank you. So this applicant is seeking an adjustment from the town of North Smithfield district regulations table for frontage. So the applicant is proposing 116.83 feet of frontage, where 200 feet is required. So as of right now, it would be 83.17 feet of relief requested. And approximately 25% of the units would be affordable at 120% area median income. Eventually the applicant will be coming back for master plan review and then eventually preliminary and final. And you'll see in the submission materials, there's the application, the aerial site map, existing conditions plan prepared by our engineer at Insight Engineering, proposed site layout plan, the letter of eligibility from Rhode Island Housing, wetlands report, soil map, and other maps showing the adjacent lots. Can I ask you a question?

Yes, certainly. You mentioned coming back for mastermind, is this a unified development project?

This is going to be before the board under a low to moderate income, so it'll be affordable. Right. So as part of that process. they're allowed to request zoning relief under a separate statute for the LMI. But so- It wouldn't be unified, it'd be an LMI before the board, in which case- And does that mean it still is a master plan before the preliminary? It actually, the statute allows them to go right to preliminary.

That's what I thought, the new rules allow that.

Excuse me?

Like we can do the pre-application. You can do pre, that's why, yeah, so that's one of the things that the board. Yes, that's correct. Okay, that's what I meant.

But if they choose to submit master, I think we should accept that.

Absolutely, okay.

Yeah, I believe the applicant would like to opt for master plan eventually, but that's a little bit down the road.

Okay.

All right, and with that, honestly, I would just like to hand it over to the engineer, Mr. Louis Gentile of Insight Engineering. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Okay.

Good evening, members of the board. My name's Louis Gentile from Insight Engineering, located in Fall River Avenue, Seekonk, Massachusetts. I've been practicing engineering for about eight years now and got my professional certification approximately two to three years ago. There was a wonderful introduction given to the project already, so I'll keep my discussion brief. this project proposes five new structures those structures are each all duplexes the duplexes both have two bedrooms so we're presenting uh proposing a 20 bedroom development spread out across five structures three of those structures are located over on buxton street um yeah if you want to tab two more sheets so buxton street's over on the left half of the street and then one more sheet There we go. So you got three of the units on Buxton Street, two of the units located over on Victory Highway. Approximately half the site is a wetland area, so it's about an 18-acre lot. Half the site is wetlands located in the center of it. It's a relatively flat site. Wetland delineation was recently done, but we will be conducting another wetland delineation by... as a Venice environmental science. Following that delineation, we're going to have that wetland ed certified by Rhode Island DEM just to make sure that no discrepancies come up for the wetland down the road. The both. sites are serviced by public sewer. So we'll be extending the sewer down a driveway that accesses both buildings. So there'll be two sewer extensions. As far as water is concerned, the domestic water will be provided by wells that are located Either 2 wells, it might be 1 in 1 or 1 for each unit. So 5 wells. I think that's still up for debate. That's strictly the domestic use as far as fire protection is concerned. Cisterns are going to be installed along the driveways of both. developments. Those will be 10,000 gallon cisterns for any fire suppression or fire protection demands. The units are about 2,000 square feet a piece. They'll have garage parking as well as a driveway parking space for each unit as well. I think in general that covers most of the general review. If you guys have any questions, I'm happy to answer.

Start with you, Dr. Benoit.

Will the low-mod units, are they all low-mod units?

No.

Four, three?

Yeah, I think it's 25%, but he's doing three, which would be providing 30% technically.

Will they be indistinguishable from the market rate units?

I'm not the architect. I can't speak to that. Do you know?

Will they be interspersed or all in one spot? No.

I think we're open to recommendations if you have recommendations on that. But at pre-application, the engineering and the design hasn't really been completed. But happy to take your input.

Yes, absolutely. We're open to input. I don't think there's a plan in place right now. I do know that under the statute, the units, the affordable units and the market rate units do have to be kind of indistinguishable. They have to blend into the neighborhood, be cohesive. So as of right now, we don't have a plan, but we would probably be planning for that. And we're obviously open to any feedback.

We want to meet the regulations. Yeah.

Exactly.

Yeah, but I, yeah, the consistent, the consistent look is obviously the first thing everybody sees. Well, and that's just that it's not low-income housing, right? This is. Yeah, right. This is. Right. Right. 150%. 120%. Yes. Yeah.

Certainly.

It's just affordable. It's in the affordable, right. And what we've seen is with other developers, they can reduce their cost by having Corian countertops versus granite countertops, things like that, while still providing a very nice place to live. But the outside can look identical. And as such, I guess, to the other question, it's not that Dr. Benoit had, It shouldn't prevent you from intermixing or not. But explain again how many units are required for this, given that they're duplexes?

By statute, the minimum threshold is 25%. What they're proposing is 30%. That's to qualify for the LMI designation as the process.

You'd have to split one of your duplexes.

Right. Half down the middle, yeah. Right. So, you know, it's not like it's going to be third floor or the first floor. It would be separated. Exactly.

Left and right, yeah. Okay. What is that? Is that an easement or whatever for the drive, the driveway on the, yeah, that one right there?

That, I do believe the property kind of doglegs out and does have frontage on the road there. Yeah. Mr. Chairman, that's a 50 foot wide, that's actually the lot. The lot does extend out to the road and it's 50 foot wide and

laid out that way many, many years ago to allow a roadway to come in. But because of the extent of the wetlands, it wouldn't be possible.

I remember us having conversations about flag sticks and stuff. Yes. Okay. So it's actual property, though. So it's not an easement. It's a clear part of the property. That's good.

Okay.

Open up for questions.

There will be no variances, there's no variances requested for any of the roads regulations? Are we doing that all up to regular, or are we, because some have come before where they want smaller roads, so we're just trying to see.

I'm not aware of any variances. I believe we're proposing a 20, yeah, it's even a 25 foot driveway, so I think that's well above, normally it's 24. We're definitely not going for smaller at this stage in time.

Okay.

Thank you. I'm not sure if it would qualify as a road, or if this is, I think this might be a driveway.

I think it is.

More than a specific road.

Right. Dr. Bernard, you have something? Yeah, I'd just like to comment that I think it's a very creative use of the difficult parcel, and you are bringing us housing, and you're bringing us the LMI. Good job.

Thank you. Thank you.

Toe's luck. Oh, without, is anyone here for a public hearing on this project? Is there anyone? Okay, we'll need, do I have a motion to open the public hearing?

I motion to open the public hearing.

I have a second. Dr. Benoit?

Second. Opposed in favor? Aye. Okay, public hearing is open at 7.29. You're welcome to come up.

I have nothing to say.

I'd like to get the vote.

Oh.

Yeah. Okay. Ms. Valenz. Yes.

You should step up to the microphone, please.

Scott Lentz, 474 Buxton Street. This drawing is not what's on the website for what's being proposed tonight. The drawing that's on the website for this site shows two units on the left-hand side on Buxton Street and three on Victory Highway. I looked at this before I came. Shouldn't I be seeing the same thing tonight?

Hang on.

I emailed to the planning office to get the documents, and they gave me the link to the site on the website from North Smithfield. The North Smithfield website. I downloaded it. I didn't print it, unfortunately, so I expected it would be the same.

Were multiple plans presented?

You know, I'm getting involved in this. There's certainly more of a recognition. It's possible you're looking at a previous rendition, but our intent, this is our intent, is to present the development.

Yeah, I understand. But I did look. It should be the same when I'm here. Yeah.

i i appreciate what what mr lentz is saying this is a pre-application it's not so you know and we'll get it corrected it will be corrected and we apologize for any confusion as to what was posted on the website everything we have here documentation is is that um i can give you a copy to take home with you if you'd like mr lance i have that no i want to be on the website yeah we will we will correct it on the website i don't i can't understand how that happened but okay okay thanks thanks for pointing it out sorry

No, no, no, it's important that we have the right stuff out there. Is there anyone else from the public that would like to speak?

No? Move to close the public hearing. Second. All those in favor?

Aye. The public hearing is closed at 7.31. Is there anything else you'd like to add? The applicant is here now. I didn't know if you wanted to ask anything else.

No, I'd just like to thank you all for your feedback on the project, and we look forward to seeing you again as the project progresses. Sorry, that's stealing your thunder, but I do appreciate your feedback very much.

Okay, thank you.

I would just echo those sentiments, and if you have any other feedback, we'd definitely be welcome to hearing it right now. But if not, then I thank you for your time and consideration.

Okay, thank you. All right, so with this, there's no voting. Okay for me to move on or? Okay. All right, next on the agenda, we'll be all set. Thank you. Thank you. Next on the agenda, a public meeting pre-application concept review, major land development project, Costco LLC Zero Quicker Highway. Hang on one second. All right, Mr. Grill, can you just give us an introduction to the Costco project?

Yes, Mr. Chairman, this is, again, another pre-application. Before the board for property located on Quaker Highway. I think it's pretty close to the town's public works department. It is for an industrial use on a MU2 property. And I believe the applicant is Costco, fence manufacturer installer, and the applicant's engineer is here to make a presentation to the board. It's pretty straightforward.

Okay, great, thank you.

Go ahead. Good evening, members of the board. My name is Mike Zavalia, Commonwealth Engineers and Consultants. I'm a registered professional civil engineer, and I'm here tonight on behalf of Costco LLC. As Mr. Carullo indicated, Costco is a regional guardrail and fencing installer. You've probably seen a lot of their work if you've driven on any of the state highways in Rhode Island and Massachusetts. They have a very large operation. They have the statewide contract to install and repair and maintain guardrails all over. Their current home is in the CVS Business Park in Woonsocket. They have long since outgrown that space for what they are typically doing. And so they would like to come to the town of North Smithfield. They think it's going to be a very good fit for them and their business model. Could you back it up to sheet three? Thank you. That's it. the parcel is located on assessor's plat one lot 59 it has access to quaker highway and it doesn't have access to 146 but 146 is on the east side of the parcel right i'm not going to be climbing up on the table tonight to point things out for a variety of reasons So Quaker Highway is down on the lower left portion of the site.

We have frontage.

on that that leads into a large 18 acre parcel the frontage is narrower it widens out as you go further back into the lot the lot is covered with wooded vegetation healthy dense there are two wetland complexes on and adjacent to the site one of them is on the north side of the parcel it's a smaller complex has a 50 foot associated buffer The larger wetland complex is located toward the eastern portion of the site. Those complexes have been flagged and the edges have been verified by DEM at this point. So we're looking at where they actually are and we're looking at the associated buffers with them.

Okay. What is the existing structure top left there?

Well, the big one or the, you know, whatever. The town DPW is a town facility, two doors to the north on Quaker Highway. I am not certain what those two structures immediately adjacent to it are. They are both in the MU district, but I'm not certain what those are.

I believe the southerly one is MTR. And they have the shooting range, I believe. And the next business up, if I'm not mistaken, is Atlantic or something used to do shoes, et cetera.

That's what I know of it. Okay. So it's a shooting range. I'll make sure the buildings are low. Yeah. A significant portion of the parcel falls into a wellhead protection area that originates to the southeast of the site. And there is a dashed line non-community wellhead protection area. go up, up, up, a little bit more, a little bit more, right there, that one that sweeps across in a nice curve all the way across the site. It's a non-community wellhead protection area, which means that groundwater protection is a priority in that zone. We do have proposed development that will fall within that zone, and we will be complying in our design with all of the treatment requirements that go with wellhead protection area. Does anybody have any questions about the existing conditions before I move on?

I'd like to correct one thing. The shooting range is indoors, totally safe. I don't like to take any chances.

Could I have the next sheet, please? Sheet four. There we go. As I mentioned, Costco is a regional large contracting company, and they do a lot of work throughout the state and also in Massachusetts. I don't know if they – I think they might work in Connecticut as well. Their intention is to move the headquarters for their operation to this site and also to run their business, a significant portion of the Rhode Island business, out of this site, this facility. To that end, they're proposing three separate buildings. The top left-hand building, the office building, and that's going to house their administrative staff, their salespeople, management, They anticipate a full build-out of roughly 25 people on a regular basis, although many of the people that will have their offices there are out on the road as salesmen. So there will not likely be 25 people there all the time, but there could be at certain times.

Right now there's no anticipation of needing any type of relief from ordinance, like for the height of the building or any of that kind of stuff?

We're not that far into the architecture of the building, but I would say for the type of use that they're proposing, we shouldn't be running afoul of that. And I'll describe the other buildings and kind of probably give you a better context of if we're gonna be approaching that threshold. Gotcha. The second building, which is down below, it's the largest building on the site, would be a drive-through warehouse. Costco has some materials that they can keep outside, guard rail, some of their fencing. There are other materials that they use that they have to keep inside and in a closed space for a variety of reasons. And so the drive-through warehouse would be used as a combination of housing that, but also loading. Vehicles would be able to pull in and we're not depicting it at this point, but the doors would be on the north and the south exposures of the building. Vehicles would be able to pull in off of the driveway, drive through, drive into it, get loaded, drive out the other side, make the circuit, and leave the site. There would also be loading of the larger materials that can be stored outside in the parking area or the loading area to the right hand side, the east side of the warehouse building. So there will be loading going on in both locations. The third building is a little further up next to the office. That's going to be a maintenance facility. Costco does maintain a fleet of vehicles that do the work. That's where they would do routine maintenance, oil changes, break jobs, things that they can do and need to do on a fairly regular basis. It's not going to be a full-service auto or vehicle repair shop. If something gets to that point, they will sub it out, take it to a different facility. But it will have the capacity to do the routine maintenance they need to do on their fleet. So that would include...

oil changes and things like that in which case there needs to be a way to prevent any contamination for the for the fluids that's correct and um when i spoke to costco i said you guys have a spill prevention plan and

a spill management plan and they do, they actually have one on record and they observe it. And as part of the design, we would obviously incorporate proper containment and mitigation measures as well. One other aspect that it's difficult, I think, to read on this screen, but we are proposing 2,000 gallon above ground fuel storage tank for diesel fuel. It would be immediately adjacent to the maintenance building. and that would again be for them to be able to fuel their vehicles, their diesel operated vehicles on site.

How will that be protected from maybe someone not being quite as careful as they need to be when they're backing up a truck or something like that?

Bollards, baby, bollards. We would have containment around it, but we would also incorporate vehicle protection around the space to ensure that if there is somebody that is not paying enough attention, the vehicle encounters the bollard before they encounter the tank.

Also, obviously, that tank will periodically be refilled. So something needs to be done, and we've dealt with this on another project, to contain any spillage. Correct. Including significant spillage, right?

You're saying it's a 2,000 gallon tank. I would anticipate having a concrete slab with containment berm around the tank that would be capable of accommodating any kind of a spillage. And certainly we would design in accordance.

Dr. Benoist's favorite method is for there to be a containment Below ground with proper, in your concrete slab, you know, with appropriate, you know, not vents, what do they call them?

you know, something to let it run off into that. If I can recall, we had a service station before us and they were right next to a critical water supply. And I had suggested a third layer of protection being essentially a rubberized catch beneath your containment. Okay.

Right. That's a good idea. Well, there's that one, and then there was the other one on Providence Pike, where we also had the exact same thing. It was for refueling their fleet of trucks, et cetera. And, you know, the containment berm is nice, but it's not – first of all, it has limited capacity, but it's not as nearly as secure – um and and as you said this is a sensitive area for wetlands you know the other the one i'm thinking of actually is very close to the river so give give that some some thought as to different approaches for something multi-layer in the ground etc um certainly and we'd actually probably solicit information from those other sites so that we could reach out and find out what was done yeah i'm sure the planning office can help you with that for where we've

Yes, I can provide that information to you, Mike. The other one you're talking about, Mr. Chairman, is M&M Transport, which is right around the corner.

Yeah, I wasn't sure if we're allowed to name names. Yes, M&M Transport.

Sorry to name names, but yeah, it's right around the corner.

It was recently approved. Just up the hill, halfway up the hill on Railroad Street, Providence Pike. By the board, it was approved in the last year. They have exactly the type of scenario you're talking about.

Excellent. So it's M&M.

Yeah.

And this is a public hearing, so that's free advertising.

Exactly.

That's right. That probably works for them as well. Right. So moving across the site, heading to the right or the east, we are proposing to have a large outdoor storage area, roughly two acres. The material on that in the short term would likely be a recycled asphalt or a dense pack or hard pack gravel. At some point in the future, they may decide to pave the whole thing. When we do our design, particularly for stormwater management, we're going to treat it as though it is impervious area. And we're going to size our stormwater management features accordingly for both water quality as well as peak flow rate mitigation.

And we've seen a number of projects now where people, they've come a long way with being able to make permeable Areas this which can have, you know, high weight capacity, etc. With this, everything's honeycomb shape parts that sit in the gravel or whatever, but it's permeable. Yep. And that'd be far preferable to asphalt.

Okay. Practically speaking, either of those two surfaces, recycled asphalt or the hot pack, they pretty much function almost as impervious right out of the gate. So if the board is interested in a more pervious surface, we can investigate doing something like a stabilized crushed stone. perhaps with some kind of a geo grid supporting it so that we maintain, because again, as I said, once you put down that recycled asphalt, you roll it, you run over it. It's packed in tight. It's not going to let very much water perk down through it. Exactly.

Plus it has the oils with it and all that stuff. It brings a lot of stuff with it.

So, again, if it interests the board, there are plenty of geogrid products that are designed exactly for that purpose. They provide the stability for the vehicles running over it, and they keep the stone from doing the little shimmy over time that it will tend to do.

If you do go with the more of a permeable, with the crushed stone or something, what does weed management look like long term with that?

I would need to consult with our landscape architect. We don't have yet. That would certainly be more conducive to the growth and establishment of undesirable vegetation, so we'd have to factor that into the decision-making and yeah see if we do something like a and I know I have this conversation with my wife sometimes we're doing stuff in the yard she's like put down a barrier I'm like it doesn't matter if you put it underneath the seeds will sit on top of the stone and it will grow from there so that will be something we need to think about as we do in the design with the um especially you know we were talking about the fuel storage and maintenance how does that factor into fire requirements for cisterns or water or things like that are those factored at this stage not at this stage but we will be having conversations with the fire marshal at the appropriate time to find the buildings themselves won't have any specific fire protection requirements but given there will be a fueling facility we'll have to find out from the fire marshal if any additional requirements will be in place I'm anticipating there will be at the very least a cistern. The other consideration is any kind of a connection to a fire alarm system, either onsite in the office or to a town system. We're not at that point yet. We haven't spoken to the fire marshal, but we will.

Is there any fabrication of any type done on this site? Because you mentioned storage and being able to load and unload things. I didn't hear anything about building.

Not really. The work they do is out on the roads. So the material that they get is intended to be installed out along roads and highways.

So the guardrails come in already shaped and it's just parts? Correct. Yeah.

Okay. Yeah. This is not truly a manufacturing facility. Okay. in the sense that they're going to be taking raw metal and forming it into the guardrail shapes and things like that or forming posts. It's a very low impact manufacturing use. One other aspect of the operation bears mentioning is down next to the warehouse over a little bit to the right Right above where my finger shadow is. Down, down, down. Right there.

There are two little rectangles.

I probably should start with the rectangles.

A part of Costco's operation is after Friday and Saturday nights when people do a number on the guardrails out on the roads, Costco goes out. They respond to repair them. The damaged material has got to be taken out and they do bring it back to this facility for salvaging and or disposal, not on site, but they will have to roll off dumpsters that will be situated in that location so that when the vehicles do come back with that scrap, it will be loaded into those containers temporarily. And then usually, I said, I think three times a week during the on season, Those trailers will be removed from the site and the material will be taken for final either salvage or disposal That's probably the most intrusive part of their operation because if you can imagine Trucks coming in they're dumping it into a metal dumpster. So when that's happening there can be noise that comes from that Certainly We will be cognizant of that as we develop the design to try to shield the abutting properties. The good thing for this site is that there's a pretty appreciable topographic drop-off from the adjacent So the land itself can probably help with that sound traveling. The only other area where I could see it carrying potentially would be down along that property line towards this area, we have the ability, it's a long distance, we have the ability to do screening for noise somewhere down there in the event that that's a concern or an issue. So it could be a combination of fencing and or vegetative screening.

But it could, we've had some sites where we talked about putting up the, because of that very issue of noise, in this case a pretty excessive noise, but using the same type of barrier that you see along highways to keep the highway noise out of people's backyards and stuff. And it's a relatively small area here you're talking about.

I think our client might know some people who are into fencing too, so it probably makes sense.

They might have a connection. Possibly. Are those residences down below in that area you were just talking about?

Yeah, this is an RS zone down here as well. I believe those are residences. That's why I'm saying you can't really see it here, but topographically, it's at about the same level, so if there's a hill next to it, the noise is gonna hit that, it's gonna tend to migrate, so that's where I'm thinking that we're gonna probably wanna consider something down there.

The other thing is that, I mean, they'll need to adhere to The town has pretty strict ordinances about hours of operation and stuff. So, you know, it varies on weekends. You know, they might be working seven days a week, but, you know, so as long as those are adhered to as well, that takes that into account.

They do have long hours, and we're going to need to have a conversation, I think. and review what those ordinances are and see if there's anything that is going to require relief because they do sometimes start at 6 a.m. So it's pretty early. It's probably earlier than the ordinance would allow.

I think the earliest the ordinance allows is 7, correct? Yeah.

Yep, so again, that's something that we're gonna have to look at and identify whether or not we need to request relief or if there are other things that we could do to mitigate the impact of an early start like that.

Because I mean, that's the only entry egress right there, right? On the left. Correct. So all the trucks will be going through there, yeah.

It's staggered. So they'll have people coming to the site early. Generally speaking, it's the employees that are going to be going back out on the road who are going to get there early, get the job truck, and leave. And most of the loading is going to take place. They might be showing up at 6.

But that's just in their regular vehicles. Yeah. Their own personal vehicles. That wouldn't cause any. Correct. People drive all the time, so that's okay. Yeah.

Yep.

It's the trucking noise.

Going back to some of that parking area that you have there, this material storage area, I should say, is there, how is that separated from the rest of the lot? I know they see something in like a oval-shaped elongated area. The tube? Yeah, what is that?

That's the area we're going to set aside for stormwater management.

So is that like a gully or something?

I don't know yet because I'm going to design it when we get to the next stage of the design. So we don't know exactly what the stormwater management treatment is going to be. But it will be running along the entirety of the proposed area so that we can make sure that we capture it, treat it before it then either exfiltrates or goes in a heavier storm than the water quality storm goes into the wetland.

How do you handle snow? Because with this many acres of outdoor storage, I'm assuming that they're going to need to clear it or something for access to the material. Where is that factored into the design?

we're going to have two acres worth of open space so we would have to let them know you need to set aside some of that to if you're going to be running your business in the winter when you do get snow and you need to get to your materials you're going to need to have space set aside so that you can be storing that snow without dumping it into the stormwater management feature

Can you show where that area is? No, it's not on the plan yet. This is just... So you don't have an idea of where it goes? Because everything else seems to be fairly well thought out.

The snow management, the snow storage area?

Right, or just the empty area where you could create snow management area.

Anywhere in that space that I can tell them that they need to put it without pushing it down into the.

So you might end up giving up some of the storage space too.

Okay. It wouldn't necessarily be a different material. It would just be an area set aside so that they don't hem themselves. And that's really only going to benefit them.

Obviously, you can do that seasonally, so yeah.

Right. So that's why it's kind of impractical to tell you this is the spot where they're always going to plow that snow.

I didn't realize how you were going to do it. That's fine. I just caution you against using the term open space unless you mean open space the way the town means it.

It's a whole different animal.

Because I heard two acres of open space, and then I said, you're going to do what with that?

Well, I guess technically the wetland that we're not touching is going to be true open space. So I will clarify that it's going to be open and untouched versus wide open and used for a guardrail. um so again in answer to your question the tube represents an area that we're anticipating setting aside so that we can construct stormwater management that will meet the requirements of dem and the town so we'll be in full compliance with the freshwater wetlands rules Freshwater wetlands, we're definitely going to keep ourselves out of any of the buffers and setbacks. We don't want to have to go to them for any kind of a variance on a site this large. There's no reason to. So I think the division at DEM that's probably going to be the most interested would be the RIPDs folks for specifically what are we going to do, how are we going to handle the stormwater. It's entirely possible when I get into it and start crunching numbers that that tube is going to get a little bit bigger and the disturbed open space will get correspondingly smaller if I need more room in order to get the stormwater management done. So grain of salt, pre-application plan just to illustrate ideas and intent and we'll dive in and get into the nitty gritty at the next stage.

So, Mr. Hammond, Dr. Maroon, I think that's something. Oh, yeah.

I'd like to go back to the fuel storage tank. When you present it, please show us a good cross-section. And are those above-ground tanks, do they contain a double-wall? Their intent is to do double-wall tanks. They are. There's an internal double-wall tank inside this above-ground tank.

That's their intention. Okay, good. Yep.

Thank you.

So it'll be a double wall tank plus a containment barn plus whatever good stuff they have going on at M&M. We'll certainly incorporate those things, particularly because, again, we're cognizant that we're in a sensitive area. We want to make sure that we're protecting that.

Mr. Hammond, you had something?

Approximately how many vehicles will be here? I see a lot of parking spots. Obviously, I don't expect you to know the right thing, but we've got 25 people in the office. We've got some maintenance workers. People, I assume, are leaving their personal cars when they're going out to the site. So do we think that's going to be like 50, 100? Do we have a gauge of that yet?

We have 33 employees and we're gonna propose 30, I think it's 35, 35 spaces. And then there would be onsite vehicle, so their fleet would be kept on the site. And we've set aside, you can see those rows indicated. So yeah, that would be equipment and vehicles would be kept there. So yeah, we're accounting for more than would be required. We're only required technically to do 22 spaces, two spaces for every three employees. It's not really practical for what they want to do. So we're going to give 35. And again, that number is certainly subject as we advance the design and say, hey, you know, maybe they want a little bit more parking somewhere for some of the guys that are coming in and then leaving the site. So. Okay.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

We should open a public hearing.

Make a motion to open public hearing.

Second.

Second.

Those in favor?

Aye. Public hearings open at 8.01.

Joseph Fribe.

You have to identify yourself, please.

Joseph Fribe, I'm the attorney for the landowner, seller of the land. I noticed you were suggesting that you're all set with DEM. But aren't you granting some of your runoff into wetlands?

You should be addressing the board.

I'm addressing the board. I'd like the board to ask whether, I mean, the assumption is that we're done with DEM, but I don't think you are if any water is going to wetlands.

I don't believe they're done with DEM, Mr. Carillo.

This is a pre-application. They haven't applied to DEM. There's no design or anything, and they're not even authorized to proceed forward at this point. I understand.

I just thought maybe I misheard him suggesting that he won't try to avoid going back to DEM.

I think you misunderstood.

Okay, please.

So there were a couple of times that I mentioned DEM. The first one was the wetland edge verification, which has been completed. So the biologist flagged, DEM came out, reviewed the flags, concurred. So that is all that means is that DEM agrees with our assessment of where the wetlands are. The second mention that I made about DEM was that at a later stage when we're doing the design, we're gonna be in compliance with all the applicable DEM programs. One of them that would potentially have jurisdiction is the Freshwater Wetlands Program. Freshwater wetlands has jurisdictional areas, and if you do anything within those jurisdictional areas, you need to file for a permit with freshwater wetlands. Under that program, there are different types of permits you can get. If you stay outside of any of the buffers and setbacks associated with the wetlands, then it's a very simple freshwater wetlands review because you're not touching the wetlands themselves. And then, as I mentioned, RIPTI's, Rhode Island Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, say that three times fast, RIPTI's has jurisdiction over the stormwater treatment. We have not at this point made any submissions and we haven't even got a design at this point, at this stage, that we'd be able to submit to DEM for any of the permits that will be required. So what I was trying to say is, we will certainly, with a site like this and the needs of the applicant, keep ourselves out of the more involved freshwater wetlands permit type. We will still, no matter what, be filing with DEM freshwater wetlands. It's just a different type of permit that we're gonna need to get.

Yep. Okay, thank you. Did you have anything? No? That was it? Did you have anything else? Okay.

Move to close the public hearing. Second.

Those in favor? Aye. Public hearing is closed at 8.04. Thank you. Any final thoughts, ideas to share on this project? More? I think we're good. I know, rest assured, we'll be very interested in seeing everything to do with that fuel storage tank.

You can tell it's a, you know. I'm reading it loud and clear. I do have a question, Mark. Next step, are we going to, for major land development, Is it master, preliminary, combined? Do we have to do a master plan stage?

So, depending on the level of your engineering, Mike, you can request either combined master plan, preliminary. You can come back at master plan. I mean, this is generally a master plan presentation. So... I would leave that up to you. We will provide for you the other engineering is public record because it is in the file for the other two projects that were referenced tonight. And then it would be up to you what you decide you want to come back for at the next stage.

and i think a separate master plan hearing isn't really going to provide any real benefit necessarily uh for so i my instinct is we probably want to do a combined yeah so so now that the now that the statute has changed and your state permits are not required until final right um you can move forward with your your design and then

upon preliminary approval or even simultaneous, you could be applying to the state agencies for your permit. You're going to need obviously DEM permits and I believe a DOT permit for PAP.

Correct. Our intention would be to file simultaneously at the very least. I don't like ping pong.

Well, the question is, are you comfortable enough with your submission to the state agencies such that you make a submission here? If that gets approved, it doesn't need to be altered once it's before the state agency. If there's obviously a major, you know this Mike as well as I do, if there's a major alteration, you would have to come back to get that.

Hence the term ping pong. Exactly. I like it when I'm playing it on the table, but not when I'm trying to do permitting. Yeah, we'll consider that. As I said, my instinct is it will probably be back before you for a combined master and preliminary, having submitted to the state agencies at that time, DOT and DEM.

I look forward to seeing the options you have for your surface materials too.

Yeah, that's a big change as far as, because my thought was, do they want a more pervious surface that's gonna allow the stormwater to soak down in within that protection zone, or do they want something that is gonna be less pervious, shed the water into a treatment, stormwater treatment feature, So hearing the board's preference, I'll express that to the client.

Yeah, we can make the argument either way. We're just asking you to look at both methods. Yep, which I'll do.

Certainly the stone makes my life a hell of a lot easier. Unless they ask me to weed it after. There you go.

see you going out there with your little spray dandelions we can't use roundup anymore quick and easy method thank you very much for your time thank you Okay, we have no administrative subdivisions to discuss.

Does Mr. Carullo have anything else? Excuse me? Do you have anything else to add? We have nothing further. I will make a motion to adjourn. Second. Those in favor?

Aye.

We are adjourned at 8.08.