Town of Scituate PLAN COMMISSION 195 DANIELSON PIKE NORTH SCITUATE, RHODE ISLAND 12557 IEFTREY CHANSON, CHAIRMAN NICHOLAS 1 LAMPE NO WILLIAM R JASPARKO, VICE-CHAIRMAN DAVIDE. HANNA. IR, DAVIE. PROVONSH WERENIAH ALLEN IT LISTER YOUNG November 24, 2006 Town of Scituate Zoning Board of Review Town Hall ~ 195 Danielson Pike Scituate, RI 02857 Aun: Mr. Forrest R. Sprague, PE, Chairman RE: Zoning Board of Review Case #987 Hope Mill Village Site Plan Review Dear Chairman Sprague: This project involves a Special Use Permit request, Dimensional Relief and Variances for Multi-Family development of the old Hope Mill and surrounding properties, Under the provisions of RI Land Development and Subdivision Enabling Statue RIGL. 45-23-61, the Plan Commission has reviewed this proposal and granted Conditional Approval of a Conceptual Master Plan. The Plan, as prepared by Robinson Design, Inc, of Smithfield, RI, dated October 4, 2006 and revised as of November 21, 2006, depicts 155 apartment units and one commercial unit (museum) within the Mill building and up to 52 condominium units ~ detached buildings — new construction on the surrounding property. Our Approval and comments herein do not infer any recommendation on the proposed density, dimensional relief or variances requested. The Approval is subject to the following: 1. Approval from the Kent County Water Authority be obtained 2. Approval from the Scituate Town Council, West Warwick Sewer Authority and Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management be obtained for a municipal sewer connection from the Mill project to the West Warwick Regional Sewer System. ‘The design and construction of which will be at the developer’s expense. Also, at the developer’s expense, connection will be made to the Mill Street Hope Sanitary Association, Fire & Police Stations, Hope Elementary School and laterals will be afforded to anyone abutting the sewer line. ‘Telephone: (401) 647-5901 + Fax: (101) 647-7935,Town of Scituate - Zoning Board Page 2 November 24, 2006 3. A suitable sewer maintenance fund will be established to offset anticipated long-term maintenance of the sewer. 4. A study must be provided for the remaining flow capacity in West Warwick Waste Water Treatment Facility 5. Submission of Stormwater han Town of Scituate guidelines. 6. Consideration, design and/or provisi ite raflic improvements — as determined ~ for the Mill driveway @ Rt. 116 and the Rt. 116 intersections with Hope Furnace Road and Main Street (Rt. 115). 7. Adequate on-site parking in accordance with the Town Ordinance utilizing altemative technology for suitable hard surface, for overflow, or additional parking, 8. Minimum 16 Affordable Housing units; the Commission would like to see more 9. The 60+ parking spaces in Coventry must have Town of Coventry approval 10. Land dedication in accordance with the representation to the board and as described in a letter dated October 25, 2006 (attached herewith). ig system in conformance with RI DEM and | wish to further advise your Board that, should the Zoning Board grant any approvals, Final Site approval would be required by the Plan Commission. Should you desire any additional assistance from us, please let me know. Sincerely, : . ho - Hanson Chairman JCH/cam Enclosure ce: Vineent R. Coccoli (Hope Mill Assoc.) Gorham & Gorham Town CouncilAy. 4, MI7C, +yrrd. SOGUVE. (freer No 2, Zeeg, »% Major Land Development - Hope Mill Village: Master Plan — Continued From August 15 & October 4, 2006; Multi-Family/Mixed Use Attomey John Mancini explained that he would be representing the applicant. Mr. Mancini gave an overview of what has taken place so far with the application. The project consists of 207 residential units; 155 apartments in the old mill and 52 luxury detached condo units. ‘The applicant is intending to bring sewer to this project. Mr. Mancini stated that they have submitted a more detailed maintenance agreement. He also explained that the applicant has submitted an application to Zoning. Mr. Mancini stated that for the applicant to move forward to the Zoning Board, they must receive Master Plan approval Mr. Mancini stated that the plan they have this evening and for the Zoning Board of Review shows all the dimensions. Chairman Hanson asked for a unit breakdown. Mr, Mancini explained that there is going to be 207 residential units and 1 commercial unit, which will be the museum, Mr. Michael Desmond of Bryant Associates explained to the members the Amended Traffic Study, which was done for this project. Mr. Desmond also explained the trip generation that was prepared for this project. He explained that the roads within this Traffic Study are Main Street, Hope Furnace Road and Rt. 115, The traffic analysis and trip generation does not meet the requirements for stoplights. Mr. Desmond went over the parking for the proposed development. The plan has proposed 257 parking spaces and 50 2-car garages, The museum will need 6 parking spaces. With these spaces provided, the project is deficient 63 spaces. Nicholas Piampiano questioned if there has been any research on the parking use on the Coventry land? Atty. Mancini stated that applicant will be seeking a Zoning Certificate; but it is their contention that the parking use will be permitted because itis an accessory use to the primary use in Scituate. If the Town of Coventry determines that our interpretation of the code is incorrect, we will seek a Dimensional Variance/Use Variance from the Town of Coventry. Mr. Mancini stated that the code is rather clear that if it is an accessory use then it would be provided as storage or parking, That would be different than if it were paid parking, storage or garage, which is identified as a separate use in the table of uses in the Town of Coventry. David Provonsil asked what the land in Coventry is zoned? Mr. Mancini stated residential — R20 single-family residential with 20,000 sq. ft lots. David Provonsil asked if the paving the entire area would be a permitted use? Atty. Mancini stated that the parking would be an accessory use to the Mill. David Provonsil stated that accessory uses are only permitted within the same town. Atty. Mancini referred to a state statute that allows for a parcel of land that straddles two Towns; the parcel that is the majority, the use of that parcel would dictate over the use of the other parcel, If there were manufacturing in one zone and residential in the smaller parcel, the manufacturing would govern even over the residential, smaller parcel. David Provonsil asked if Scituate’s manufacturing zone would supercede the residential zone?’ Mr. Mancini stated yes. Mr. Provonsil asked if this is in the “enabling act™? Atty. Mancini stated that itis in the enabling act and ease law as well. David Provonsil asked if the applicant has received a zoning certificate? Atty, Mancini stated no, they think itis a little premature at this time, because they havenot received any approvals from the Town of Scituate. Mr, Provonsil asked how many parking spaces are on the Coventry land? Atty. Mancini stated approximately 60+ spaces, Mr. Mancini quoted from the Coventry Zoning Ordinance Section 12.2 “except where such parking or storage is directly related and accessory to permitted use or a lawful non-conforming use on the premises. Mr. Provonsil stated that that is 20% of the needed parking and that the applicant would have to obtain a “use” variance” through Coventry. Mr. Mancini stated that they would either acquire a Zoning Certificate from the Town of Coventry or apply for a “use” variance from the Town of Coventry, If Coventry doesn’t grant the “use” variance, the project will be deficient 120+ parking spaces, Mr. Provonsil also brought up the fact that the driveway for all the units Coventry and the applicant must receive approval from Coventry for this driveway. William Jasparro questioned if the letter to David Provonsil dated October 16, 2006, was to enlighten us or was it to make us follow a certain path? Atty, Mancini stated that it two-fold; one was because Scituate’s code does not provide for the “precedence of approval”. Since the code is silent in respect for a “precedence of approval”, the state statute would mandate, This state statute sets forth how the applicant proceeds through the Planning and Zoning Boards. By state statute the Plan Commission is to give a recommendation in regard to the variances we are seeking. We are asking for a recommendation of the variances that we are requesting and conditional Master Plan approval of the overall layout of our plan. William Jasparro stated that this is all Mr. Maneini’s opinion. David Provonsil explained that we have not heard from Gorham & Gorham regarding this. David Provonsil explained that the statute that Mr. Mancini is referring to says that when an applicant requires a Special Use Permit under the local Zoning Ordinance and Planning Board approval. Mr. Provonsil further explained that in a different section of that statute there is another provision that explains what an applicant must do when they need a variance and Planning Board approval. ‘The statute does not make provisions for an application that needs a Special Use Permit and a Variance combined. David Provonsil stated that he doesn’t interpret them to be combined; if the state law meant for that to happen they would have put it in there. They are very clear on what you need and where to go. The Chairman has not asked us to get legal opinion. Mr, Provonsil stated that he wants to make it clear that in his opinion he disagrees with Mr. Mancini. Chairman Hanson stated that he would like to go to the technical aspects of the project. Atty. Mancini stated that they are requesting a conditional Master Plan approval and a recommendation to the Zoning Board for the relief that we are requesting. Mr. Mancini stated that if it is customary that the Board does not give a recommendation, then that is fine. Chairman Hanson’ stated that the Plan Commission does not provide recommendation to the Zoning Board unless the Zoning Board specifically asks for one, Chairman Hanson stated that we do provide determination as to the conformance to the Town’s Comprehensive Plan Chairman Hanson asked Mr. Desmond if his determination of this project is that there will be an impact on the level of service at two intersections; and there is little to nothingthat can be done, The volume does not warrant signalization, Mr. Desmond explained that State has jurisdiction and they are very strict regarding signals, He explained that the State has become more stringent over the years regarding the requirements for signalization. Mr, Desmond explained that the problem is going to be the left turns at both intersections. Nicholas Piampiano asked about “round-abouts”? Mr. Desmond explained that both of these intersections could be candidates and he believes there could bbe 100% federal funding available. Jeremiah Allen questioned Mr. Desmond with regard to his statement of not cnough pavement to stripe these intersections, Mr. Allen asked if the applicant has looked at widening these intersections? Mr. Desmond explained that at the North Road and Main Street there is too much width up there now. To widen the Hope Fumace intersection there is not enough property. Jeremiah Allen stated that if the Town was to go out and assist in the acquisition of property is that something that could improve the level of service? Mr. Desmond stated yes, the possibility of opening up Hope Furnace Road would definitely help. Mr. Desmond stated he doesn’t know the right-of-way widths, but under the current physical conditions there isn’t enough to re- strip. Jeremiah Allen asked if they did have enough to provide an additional lane that would help improve the level of service? Mr. Desmond stated there is a possibility, but isn’t sure about the acquisition of the land by the applicant. Nicholas Piampiano stated that he believes the applicant controls the property on Hope Fumace Road that is adjacent. to the property. Jeremiah Allen stated that the applicant could provide the area to improve the intersection. Mr. Coccoli stated that he has no objection to using the land abutting Hope Furnace Road for the intersection improvements. John Mancini explained that the applicant has provided a sample of a sewer maintenance agreement from the Town of Coventry. Mr. Mancini explained that they are not in a position to execute any agreements or really go into details what kind of maintenance there will be. The last point that Mr. Mancini wanted to address was the request of relief that the applicant is asking for from the Zoning Board of Review. Mr. Mancini went over the relief that they are asking for from the Zoning Board of Review. Nicholas Piampiano asked if the water tower on the property is going to be used for fire prevention or is it coming down? Mr. Coccoli stated that he has no plans of it coming down and they will look at it for fire prevention if need be, Mr. Coccoli further explained that he would like to place signage on it “Hope Mill” and a Verizon cellular antenna. David Provonsil asked Mr. Coccoli about the single-units that they spoke about the other day. Mr. Coccoli stated that they have been climinated. David Provonsil explained to Mr. Coceoli that what he applied for so far will need to be amended to eliminate the single-family and duplexes. Mr. Coccoli explained that he referred the discussion he had with David Provonsil to Mr. Robinson and he thought he was all set. He further explained that the new modified plan has no single-family units, Mr. Mancini stated that they have asked for more relief than they ultimately need should we redesign that portion and eliminate the single-family units. John Robinson stated that from the original meeting with the Village Overlay Commission there was one structure near the front of the property, which they have reviewed with the State Historic Preservation Commission about rebuilding that as a unit. There is also a foundation, which we have indicated tobe rebuilt. All of our submissions have included those two units as part of the Historie Preservation. Jeremiah Allen asked the applicant, based on the number of parking spaces you have available, how many units will that give you? Atty. Mancini stated that they are providing 356 parking spaces, so based on 2 per units that would make it 175 units. Jeremiah Allen asked if itis a project at that amount? John Robinson stated that as the architect of this project we first looked at the Zoning Ordinance which states that there be 1 parking space for each dwelling unit, but then we were told it should be 2 parking spaces per unit. We feel that we have a basis to appeal to the Board regarding the 2 parking spaces per unit because of a few different factors. One factor is that there are 16 affordable units that are one-bedroom units; which makes it $5 one-bedroom units. Mr. Robinson stated that the likelihood of one-bedroom units having the requirements of 2 parking spaces is not as good as the three-bedroom units, Mr, Robinson stated that they could cram in the other parking spaces. Mr. Robinson wants to appeal to the board not to require that because every time we pave an area that is more runoff that we have to contain; not that they couldn't deal with it. However, environmentally it is more runoff and also the less paving you have the more green space the project will have. Jeremiah Allen asked what the sizes of the parking spaces are? Mr. Robinson explained 9x18, Jeremiah Allen asked if they have looked at the alternative technology for the paving? Mr. Robinson stated that they have done that “grass-pave” on a few projects, in Smithfield and Cumberland. Mr. Coccoli answered Mr. Allen question that with the concessions he has made to the Town Council, Pawtuxet River Authority, Hope Associates, (16 units affordable, sewer, etc.) the numbers are tight at this time. If we needed space to squeeze the parking in on the site, we will. If it were an issue of parking it would be an on-site issue, it wouldn’t be on Rt. 116 or Mill Street. Mr. Robinson stated that the shortage of parking is for the units in the Mill, not the condos because they have their own 2-car garage. Chairman Hanson stated that he disagrees with Mr. Coccoli statement that if there were a parking issue, it would be on-site. If there are no parking spaces available for the tenants where are they going to park? They are going to look for the first available spot and it may be on Mill Street or parallel parking on Rt. 116. Mr. Coccoli stated that they have discussed this issue and he thought they would park on the road going into the development. Chairman Hanson stated that that would encumber fire apparatus and emergency vehicles, Chairman Hanson stated that with the shortage of parking for the people who live in the development, what about visitors. Mr. Coccoli stated that he couldn't lose any units, so he will put in the required parking Jeremiah Allen made a motion to grant a conditional master plan approval with condition that all the utilities, traffic improvements at the intersections of North Road & Rt. 115 and Hope Fumace Road and Rt, 116, With regard to the amount that the project is currently short of parking spaces a suitable overflow area be provided for that amount of parking. Hard suitable surface alternative technology can be substituted for asphalt paving. There will be 16 affordable units, higher if possible. A sewer maintenance agreement is provided to the Town. The sewer line and infrastructure upgrade of themain sewer line, now or in the future, will be at the expense of the developer. The sewer line will be extended to the Hope Elementary School, Police Department, Hope/Jackson Fire Department and Mill Street-Hope Sanitary Association and all abutting properties will have a lateral to the sewer line, A study will be done of the Town's sewer capacity left for future use. The 60+ spaces in Coventry are approved by the Town of Coventry All land dedication is in accordance with the representations you have made to Board. Seconded by William Jasparro. Approved with a vote of 6 to 1.