North Smithfield Town Council - March 18, 2019

Town Council Meeting Summary — March 18, 2019 | North Smithfield, RI

Meeting overview

The Council held the first reading and public hearing on a comprehensive rewrite of the town's comprehensive plan, last approved in 2006, along with 23 associated zoning map changes required to bring the map into conformance with the updated plan. Town Planner Tom Kravitz presented a scaled-back version of the rezoning effort — down from 62 areas identified in 2006, most of which were never acted on, to 23 more targeted changes — covering open-space corrections, several small "up-zoning" areas intended to enable modest infill housing near village centers, one "down-zoning" area to preserve rural character, and a consolidation of the town's Professional Service zoning district into Business Highway. Discussion centered heavily on the town's affordable-housing shortfall (8.18% of housing stock, against state benchmarks) and the pending Andrews Mill redevelopment, which could add meaningful ground toward that target. Several property owners facing rezoning of their own land objected, particularly around the loss of large-lot rural character. The hearing was continued to April 1, 2019 to allow further comment. The meeting also included routine business: two waived-fee licenses for a North Smithfield Heritage Association fair, payment of bills, board/commission appointments, and an early-stage community garden proposal.

Agenda at a glance

Item Summary Outcome
Open Forum Resident Ann Lilley asked the Council to broaden a proposed senior-center study commission into a general recreation-center study covering all age groups, arguing the town has a strong record on youth athletics but a weaker one on adult programming. Comment, no action
NS Heritage Association — Entertainment & Victualing Licenses Requested for a May 27 Heritage Fair at Heritage Hall following the Memorial Day parade, with a fee waiver requested and granted. Approved, fees waived
Comprehensive Plan & Zoning Map Amendments — Public Hearing First reading and public hearing on the rewritten comprehensive plan and 23 associated zoning map changes. See detail below. Continued to April 1, 2019
Payment of Bills Approved combined general fund, sewer/water, and departmental payments totaling approximately $4,923,885. Approved
Consent Agenda Prior meeting minutes, board/commission reports, and several other-town resolutions (education funding formula, blood donation support, utility emergency response, municipal tobacco licensing) accepted as a bloc. Approved
Board/Commission Appointments Philip Gasparro appointed to the Sewer Commission (5-year term); Asset Management Commission and Senior Citizens Advisory Committee vacancies left open pending candidates. Gasparro appointed
Community Garden Proposal Early-stage resident proposal to establish a community garden on town-owned lots on Milton Avenue/Onondaga Avenue or an unused St. Paul Street parcel, framed around food security, civic engagement, and community cohesion. Introduced, no vote

Key issues and discussion

The Comprehensive Plan Rewrite & 23 Zoning Map Changes

Kravitz explained the state requires zoning maps to conform to an approved comprehensive plan within 18 months, and that the town was addressing both simultaneously rather than waiting. Of 62 potential rezoning areas identified in the 2006 plan — most never implemented — staff narrowed the update to 23 areas, color-coded by type: open-space corrections (properties already owned by the town, land trust, or conservation groups that were never reflected on the map), several small "up-zoning" areas near village centers intended to allow modest lot subdivision for infill housing, one "down-zoning" area in town's most rural eastern section to preserve larger lot sizes, and a business-highway consolidation (below). Kravitz noted zoning intensity changes do not loosen separate environmental setback requirements from wetlands or streams, in response to a resident question about a Slatersville Reservoir-adjacent parcel. The town mailed 793 notices for the changes at a reduced bulk rate. The hearing was continued to April 1 rather than closed, in part on a councilmember's suggestion that opposition could grow as more residents became aware of specific parcel-level changes.

Affordable Housing: 8.18% and the Andrews Mill Project

Kravitz presented the town's current low/moderate-income housing share as 8.18% of total housing stock (413 units out of roughly 5,000), below the state's 10% benchmark, and reviewed the town's existing 2008 municipal ordinance requiring 20% affordable units on any residential development of six or more units, town-wide with no geographic limit. He highlighted the pending redevelopment of the former Andrews Mill on St. Paul Street — then owned by nonprofit affordable-housing developer NeighborWorks and newly listed on the National Register of Historic Places — as a potential single project that could move the town close to 10%, though no formal application had yet been submitted. He also walked through HUD area-median-income figures underlying the state's affordability thresholds (80% AMI cap for restricted rental housing, up to 120% AMI for restricted for-sale housing), noting that even households earning close to those caps often struggle to afford a down payment given elevated post-2008 rental costs.

Consolidating the Professional Service Zone

Staff proposed eliminating the town's Professional Service (PS) zoning designation, which currently cuts irregularly through the Stowley Village retail area, and folding those parcels into the existing Business Highway (BH) district to match the area's actual commercial use pattern. Kravitz confirmed office uses would remain allowed by right in the resulting district, so the change would not restrict existing professional office uses. A related request from the attorney representing an "anchor superstore" property owner asked that one non-frontage parcel it owns, currently a small non-conforming residential lot surrounded by parking, be included in the same zoning change; staff did not object.

Public comments

Speaker Summary
Resident, Slatersville area
Objected to RA-65 to RS-40 rezoning of family property
Argued the proposed up-zoning of the family's rural-agricultural land near historic Slatersville threatened its rural and historic character, retirement plans, and future income potential (leasing to a farmer, keeping animals), and asked who would compensate the family for the change; described several potential future uses (a museum, community garden, petting zoo) the family had discussed for the property.
Resident, Main Street/Slatersville
Slatersville Reservoir-adjacent parcel
Asked whether an RA-to-RU20 change near the reservoir would loosen wetland/stream setback requirements; town planner confirmed environmental setbacks are independent of zoning density and unaffected by the change.
Resident, 49th Street area (former Planning Board member)
Process questions, comment procedure
Asked how and when written comments on the plan would be accepted, requested acknowledgment for a resident who authored the plan's original community chapter in 2015, and asked which sections of the rewritten plan represented substantive changes worth residents' attention — town planner said changes were mostly organizational/simplification, with the affordable-housing ordinance and Andrews Mill project being the most substantively significant items. She also asked about the status of a previously discussed solar overlay district near Wood Oak/Berry Hill, which the planner confirmed had already passed in 2018 and would be reflected on the updated future land-use map.
Resident, Victory Highway
Objected to RA-65 to RS-40 rezoning; agricultural use questions
Raised concerns about whether existing animals/agricultural uses on the property would be grandfathered under the new zoning, whether that status would transfer to heirs, and how the change might affect property tax assessment; also asked about the unfinished, unpopular Silver Pines development bordering the property. Town planner confirmed legal non-conforming uses are grandfathered as long as their intensity isn't increased, and that assessments generally would not change unless a lot were actually subdivided.
Summary prepared from official meeting transcript · North Smithfield Town Council · March 18, 2019
This is an independent summary and is not an official town document.
Previous
Previous

North Smithfield Town Council - May 05, 2025

Next
Next

North Smithfield Town Council - March 4, 2019