In accordance with notice to member of the Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council, a virtual meeting was held on Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 6:00 p.m. located in Conference Room A, of the Administration Building, One Capitol Hill, Providence, RI.

Members Present
Raymond Coia, Chair
Donald Gomez
Jerry Sahagian
Ronald Gagnon, RIDEM
Trish Reynolds
Joy Montanaro

Excused
Lindsay McGovern

Staff Present
Jeffrey Willis, Executive Director
James Boyd, Deputy Director
Richard Lucia, Environmental Engineer IV
Tracy Silvia, Sr. Environmental Scientist
Ross Singer, Sr. Civil Engineer
Anthony DeSisto, Legal Counsel
Mark Hartmann, Legal Counsel
Laura Dwyer, Public Information and Education Coordinator
Lisa Turner, Office Manager, Recording Secretary
Cindy Tangney, Court Reporter

1. CALL TO ORDER

Chair Coia called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m.
Chair Coia recognized Council Members and Staff as present.

2. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING

Chair Coia called for a motion regarding the minutes for the October 19, 2021 Semi-monthly Meeting.

Motion: Mr. Gomez
Second: Ms. Reynolds

Motion carried on a unanimous voice vote to approve the minutes from October 19, 2021 meeting. Mr. Gagnon abstained from the vote as he was not present at the October 19, 2021 meeting.

3. Subcommittee Reports

Mr. Boyd reported out to the Council that a Subcommittee Workshop would be held for the Raso Subcommittee on Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 5:00 p.m. before the next Council Meeting.

4. Staff Reports

Mr. Willis updated the Council on the burial of the export cable on the Block Island Wind Farm.

5. Applications which have been Out To Notice and are before the Council for Final Decision:

2018-12-037 JON JANIKIES -- A residential boating facility consisting of a ~4’ x 85’ fixed timber pier leading to a ~4’ x 20’ fixed terminal L section. In addition a 30,000lb boat lift and a jet-ski lift are proposed. The facility is proposed ~111’ in length, extending ~72’ seaward of the cited MLW mark. This design requires a 22’ length variance to RICRMP Section 1.3.1(D)(11)(l). Located at Plat N-B, Lot 1; 166 Waterway Drive, Narragansett, RI.

Ms. Silvia gave a brief overview of the proposed project and explained the lengthy CRMC review process for this application which included three different public notice mailings due to plan revisions and citing of variances. Ms. Silvia explained that the project could have been reviewed administratively. Ms. Silvia stated that the dock and the boat lift were to be considered separately. Ms. Silvia stated that there was a letter of no objection from the local Harbor Master and confirmed that two moorings were in the area but that one was Mr. Janikies’ mooring. Lastly, Ms. Silvia explained that CRMC staff were in support of the dock in this area but deferred to the Council due to numerous comments received during review of the application.

There were no questions for Ms. Silvia from the Council.

Mr. Willis explained and affirmed that because the boat lift was an accessory structure to the dock, the Council had to consider if the dock could be permitted at the site prior to approval of the boat lift.

Christopher D’Ovidio, Attorney for Robin Squibb, abutter; raised a question regarding the posting of the Agenda which led to discussion on the validity of the Agenda as posted and whether the review of this application should continue. Mr. D’Ovidio questioned posting due to absence of two of the variance criteria. After citing several similar cases, Mr. DeSisto stated that the Agenda, as posted, correctly identified what was to take place with enough particularity.

Mr. DeSisto asked that if any member of the Council was uncomfortable with the meeting continuing on this matter to make a motion to continue and a new date would be selected. Hearing from no one, Chair Coia stated the Council would proceed with the matter.

Joseph DeAngelis, Attorney for the applicant, addressed the Council on the merits of the case and introduced his witnesses, Warren Hall, PE, Project Designer and Jonathon Janikies, owner of the property.

Warren Hall, PE was sworn in and identified himself for the record. Mr. Hall testified to his experience with dock design in the state of Rhode Island and his experience submitting dock and boat lift applications to the CRMC.

Mr. Hall testified about the design of the dock stating that the pier, extending from the stone deck, would be a 4’ x 85’ fixed pier leading to a 4’ x 20’ fixed terminal L-section. Mr. Hall stated that the structure would also have a 30,000 lb boat lift and a jet-ski lift to be used as a tender lift. Mr. Hall testified to:

• Area waters having excessive fetch and he recommended a boat lift in lieu of floating dock;
• The outcropping of ledge under the dock requiring dock to extend over the ledge which created the need for a 22’ length variance;
• Dock could not be relocated due to other large boulders in the area;
• Dock would be secured to ledge using rock sockets which require a variance;
• A variance is required as the dock is within 50’ of a town mooring field of which the closest mooring belonged to the applicant;
• The project conforms to the goals and policies of CRMC regulations with no cumulative
  adverse impacts or use conflicts;
• The regulatory standards would create and undue hardship, not created by applicant or
  predecessors;

Mr. DeAngelis finished questioning his witness.

Mr. D’Ovidio cross-examined Mr. Hall regarding:

• The reasoning behind using the coordinates to determine distance of mooring field from dock.
  • Mr. Hall stated that the means of determining distance was not defined in the Narragansett Harbor Management Plan (HMP)
  • Mr. Hall stated that he revised plans to show mooring field C at the direction of staff in February of 2021
• Mr. Hall confirmed that the dock design is due to the ledge outcropping and that the dock could not be designed differently due to large boulders in the vicinity and the wave activity against the boulders could impact the integrity of the dock.
• Mr. Hall stated that the dock would house a 44’ Boston Whaler and confirmed that the mooring could be utilized during storm events.
• Mr. Hall confirmed that the jet-ski lift would be used for tender not jetski
• Mr. Hall answered numerous questions regarding the width of boat lift and if the intended boat would conform to regulatory standards for boat lifts.
• Mr. Hall testified that he was unaware if there were any other 30,000 lb boat lifts in the area.
• Mr. Hall testified that he did not do a specific survey of types of use of area waters
• Mr. Hall explained that the dock was elevated to provide lateral access along the shore

Mr. DeAngelis re-cross of Mr. Hall regarding the 50’ distance to the mooring field and verified that no matter what method was used to determine distance, it would still require a variance.

Jonathan Janikies was sworn in and identified himself for the record.

Mr. DeAngelis questioned Mr. Janikies:

• Living in the area for 16 years
• Experience in boating
• Buying a Boston Whaler with center console – no superstructure
• Jet-ski lift to be used a tender lift (picture shown of type of boat to be used as tender)
• Only mooring near dock location is his mooring

Mr. DeAngelis finished questioning his witness.

Discussion on 7-day rule in regards to Mr. DeAngelis’ exhibits.
Mr. DeSisto stated the picture of tender could be offered de bene

Mr. D’Ovidio cross-examined Mr. Janikies regarding:

• Ownership of boat similar to de bene exhibit, Mr. Janikies stated he owned a dinghy
• Mr. Janikies stated that the jet-ski lift would be easier to use as pulling a tender/dinghy across the rock on shore is a challenge
• Mr. Janikies confirmed that a dinghy could be tied to a smaller dock

Mr. D’Ovidio completed his cross examination.

Mr. DeAngelis readdressed the Council stating that the applicant fully supports the staff recommendation and that the proposed dock met all required variance criteria.

Chair Coia polled the audience for those in favor and in opposition of the project and asked if people could keep their comments to information not contained in record.

Mr. D’Ovidio expressed concern that in Ms. Silvia’s staff report, it stated that the Narragansett Harbor Commission gave a tacit approval to the Janikies dock application. Ms. Silvia stated that the staff report was amended after calling the Jill Sabo who stated that if the commission votes “no objection” and place the vote on file, it can be determined as a tacit approval.

Mr. Sahagian stated that if the applicant did not have local approval, the application would not be before the Council that evening.

Mr. D’Ovidio called his witnesses.

Gordon Perkins was sworn in and identified himself for the record as an EDR Visualization Practice Leader with Environmental Design and Research and gave an overview of his qualifications and experience in the field.

• Mr. Perkins, using Exhibit 1, explained the document with the visualization of the dock.
• Mr. Perkins explained that he used GIS skills and LIDAR data to establish MLW elevation to determine distance to mooring field and placement of the dock. Mr. Perkins stated that many states accept simulations as accurate project descriptions.

Mr. DeAngelis expressed concern and objected to Mr. Perkins questioning the testimony of a professional engineer, Warren Hall.

Discussion on use of Mr. Perkins testimony to determine visual impacts.

• Mr. Perkins testified that a 43’ boat would be seen at the end of the dock due to no other shoreline development in the area.

Mr. DeAngelis cross examination of Gordon Perkins.

• Means of determining distance from shore to mooring field by measuring 50’ from MLW to
  mooring field using FEMA LIDAR surveys
• Type of Boston Whaler used in visualization of project had superstructure which is prohibited on boat lifts.

Mr. D’Ovidio called Peter Alarie who was sworn in and identified himself for the record. Mr. Alarie’s education and experience was established as a large vessel operator with Coast Guard Captain’s license and boating instructor.

• Discussed different aspects of an Outrage 420
• Explained challenges in maneuvering a vessel into a boat lift in this water area and would be reckless to try
• Testified to user conflicts in this area on a weekend summer day

Mr. DeAngelis cross-examined Peter Alarie.

• Discussed Coast Guard Captain’s license and size of boats used to get license as well as training needed.
• Training required to navigate a recreational boat into a boat lift and raise it out of the water.

Mr. D’Ovidio redirect of Peter Alarie

• Discussion on experience of training people on vessels similar to that of the 42’ Boston Whaler to be operated at dock.

Mr. D’Ovidio called Stephen Nightingale as a witness who was sworn in and identified himself for the record.

Mr. Nightingale explained how he had researched CRMC files relating to docks in the west passage, Narragansett, North Kingstown, and Jamestown and conducted analysis of assents issued.

Mr. Nightingale assessed how many boat lifts were approved.

Discussion between attorneys on the relevance of the information. Mr. D’Ovidio stated that it may not be a good idea to put a boat lift of that size in this area.

Mr. Nightingale finished by stating that he regretted the controversy brought about by the project and hope that the applicant gets a fair hearing and the Council gives and objective decision.

Mr. D’Ovidio had no further witnesses.

Chair Coia opened the Public Hearing as it relates to application:

Barry Sharif was sworn in and identified himself for the record. Mr. Sharif objected to size of the dock and location on the property.

Mario Sangari was sworn in and identified himself for the record. Mr. Sangari spoke in favor of the application.

Julie Sharpe was sworn in and identified herself for the record. Ms. Sharped objected to the project due to fixed nature of dock, location of dock, scenic impact and use of rock sockets.

Susan Tash was sworn in and identified herself for the record. Ms. Tash objected to the dock due to user conflict – impact on other boating activity.

Irving Sheldon was sworn in and identified himself for the record. Mr. Sheldon objected to fixed aspect of dock.

Robin Squibb was sworn in and identified herself for the record. Ms. Squibb objected to location and style of the dock.

No further comment were heard and public comment was closed.

Mr. DeAngelis closed by stating that staff reviewed the application for 2.5 years and wrote that the facility as proposed and the place it is being constructed will have the least negative impact. CRMC staff stated that the dock would be consistent with other docks. Mr. DeAngelis stated that the applicant is aware that variances are required.
Mr. D’Ovidio closed by asking the Council to consider that the benefit of the use does not outweigh the harm of the aesthetics of the area.

Chair Coia asked if Council had questions of staff.

Ms. Silvia confirmed for Mr. Gomez that and HPHC “NO effect” was received from the Historical Commission. Ms. Silvia deferred to Mr. Singer, CRMC engineer regarding viability of the dock. Ms. Silvia confirmed that the plans showed the dock would be built within CRMC standards.

Mr. Singer stated that the area was not considered to have excessive fetch.

No further questions from Council to Staff.

Chair Coia stated that the Council would take the vote in two parts.

Mr. Sahagian stated that for discussion sake, he would motion approval. Mr. Gomez seconded motion for discussion.

Mr. Gagnon asked if variances needed to be considered. Mr. DeSisto stated that the variances were included with staff report.

Mr. Gomez removed his second.

Mr. Sahagian modified his motion to approve the dock based on staff recommendation. Mr. Gomez seconded the motion.

Roll call vote:
Mr. Sahagian Aye
Mr. Gomez Aye
Ms. Reynolds Aye
Mr. Gagnon Aye
Ms. Montanaro Aye
Chair Coia Aye

The Motion as it relates to the dock is approved.

Mr. Sahagian motioned approval of the boat lift based on the staff report.
Ms. Reynolds seconded.

Roll call vote:
Mr. Sahagian Aye
Mr. Gomez No
Ms. Reynolds Aye
Mr. Gagnon No
Ms. Montanaro Aye
Chair Coia Aye

Motion to approve boat lift carried with a vote of 4 in favor and 2 opposed.

6. Executive Session pursuant to RIGL § 42-46-5(a)(2), update on pending litigation regarding Champlin’s Realty Associates v. Lemont Supreme Court appeal.

Council voted unanimously to enter Executive Session.

Discussion.

Council voted unanimously to exit Executive Session.

Motion to Seal the Minutes
Motion: Mr. Sahagian
Second: Ms. Reynolds. All ayes

Authorization for what was discussed in Executive Order:
Motion: Mr. Sahagian
Second: Mr. Gomez
All ayes

7. ADJOURN

Motion: Ms. Reynolds
Second: Mr. Gray
Motion carried on unanimous vote

Meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Lisa A. Turner
Recording Secretary

 

CALENDAR INDEX