RI Coastal Resources Management Council
...to preserve, protect, develop, and restore coastal resources for all Rhode Islanders
...to preserve, protect, develop, and restore coastal resources for all Rhode Islanders
In accordance with notice to member of the Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council, a meeting was held on Tuesday, June 13, 2023 at 6:00 p.m. located at the Administration Building, Conference Room A, One Capitol Hill, Providence, RI.
Members Present
Raymond Coia, Chair
Donald Gomez
Ronald Gagnon
Patricia Reynolds
Stephen Izzi
Catherine Robinson Hall
Staff Present
Jeffrey Willis, Executive Director
Laura Miguel, Deputy Director
Amy Silva, Spv Environmental Scientist
Anthony DeSisto, Legal Counsel
Mark Hartman, Asst Legal Counsel
Lisa Turner, Office Manager, Recording Secretary
Cindy Tangney, Court Reporter
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Coia called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
2. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting
Chair Coia called for a motion regarding the minutes for the Tuesday, May 27, 2023 Semi-monthly Meeting.
Mr. Gagnon asked for a correction on page four which was given to Lisa Turner.
Motion: Ms. Reynolds with edits
Second: Ms. Hall
Chair Coia polled the Council:
Ms. Hall Aye
Mr. Gagnon Aye
Ms. Reynolds Aye
Mr. Izzi Aye
Mr. Gomez Aye
Chair Coia Aye
3. Subcommittee Reports
No Subcommittee Reports.
4. Staff Reports
Mr. Willis updated the Council on the following:
5. Applications requiring a Special Exception before the Full Council for Review and Action on Final Decision:
2022-02-065 TOWN OF NARRAGANSETT -- To construct a roof over an existing deck located at the North Beach Clubhouse, which is currently serviced by a removable tent. The project requires the issuance of a Special Exception to RICR-Redbook-650-20-00-01 Sections 1.2.2(B)(1)(C)(3)(AA-BB) as well as Section 1.1.9 and Section 1.2.2(G) for new construction located within the dune setback on a moderately developed barrier beach. Located at plat B, lot 6; 79 Boston Neck Road, Narragansett, RI.
Michelle Kershaw of the Town of Narragansett Parks and Recreation Department was present along with Frank Karpowicz, Architect and Joe Amitore, Town of Narragansett Engineering Department.
Ms. Silva gave a brief overview of the application for the Council stating that the Town of Narragansett was requesting to change the town owned North Beach pavilion from a removable tent structure over the deck to a permanent wood framed roof structure. Ms. Silva explained that this proposal required two special exceptions for prohibitions for expansion of recreational structures in a V-zone and all activity must be confined to existing footprint. Ms. Silva explained that the variances pertain to the 50-foot setback from the dune and the coastal features. Ms. Silva stated that the staff did not object to the granting of the variance and would defer to the Council for the special exception.
No questions of Staff from Council.
The applicants and consultant were sworn in and identified themselves for the record.
Michelle Kershaw
Joseph Amitore
Frank Karpowicz
Ms. Kershaw explained past practice tent rental for this area so that when rented for an event, inclement weather is not an issue. Ms. Kershaw also explained that problems occurred such as tent collapsing and the dropping of tent causing damage to the permanent structure.
Chair Coia asked Ms. Kershaw to explain compelling public need required for the approval of a Special Exception. Ms. Kershaw explained that the building generated revenue for the Town but provided a wonderful experience to the person using the venue.
Ms. Hall asked for clarification on explanation for compelling public purpose and how the project would provide a benefit to the public as a whole. Ms. Kerson explained that the venue is available to anyone, not just town residents.
Ms. Silva explained why the permanent roof would add to the structural lot coverage of the structure based on Redbook regulations which state that roof structures are considered structural lot coverage.
Mr. Karpowicz explained that with the roof coverage, the structure would still be open on all sides.
Ms. Kershaw added that there were events held at the clubhouse that are free to all, such as the Narragansett Lions Club Annual Thanksgiving and Christmas dinner; the Annual New Year’s Day Plunge, as well as Fire Departments and Police Departments using the venue for meetings and annual trainings. Ms. Kershaw also mentioned the annual summer concert series as well as the annual RI Philharmonic concert that was free to attend and provided a cultural outlet.
No further questions from the Council
Chair Coia opened the Public Hearing on Special Exceptions and with no comments heard, closed the public hearing.
Chair Coia asked for a motion pertaining to the Special Exceptions with Mr. Willis clarifying that there were two special exceptions that needed to be voted on, either together or separately.
Chair Coia asked for separate motions with the first being Section 1.2.2(B)(1)(C)(3)(AA).
Mr. Izzi motioned for approval of the first special exception Section 1.2.2(B)(1)(C)(3)(AA) based on the staff report and Ms. Silva’s presentation as well as the testimony of the applicant. Mr. Gomez seconded the motion.
Chair Coia polled the Council:
Ms. Hall Aye
Mr. Gagnon Aye
Ms. Reynolds Aye
Mr. Izzi Aye
Mr. Gomez Aye
Chair Coia Aye
Motion approved.
Mr. Gomez motioned for approval of the second special exception Section 1.2.2(B)(1)(C)(3)(BB) based on findings of fact and the application meeting the necessary criteria. Mr. Izzi seconded the motion.
Chair Coia polled the Council:
Ms. Hall Aye
Mr. Gagnon Aye
Ms. Reynolds Aye
Mr. Izzi Aye
Mr. Gomez Aye
Chair Coia Aye
Motion approved.
Chair Coia stated that both special exceptions were approved.
Mr. Gagnon motioned for the approval of the application with the two variances based on testimony and the report from staff. Ms. Hall seconded the motion.
Chair Coia polled the Council:
Ms. Hall Aye
Mr. Gagnon Aye
Ms. Reynolds Aye
Mr. Izzi Aye
Mr. Gomez Aye
Chair Coia Aye
Motion approved. Application approved.
6. Continuation from CRMC Semimonthly Meeting, January 24, 2023:
2017-12-086 PERRY RASO - Consideration and action on proposed modifications, as reviewed by CRMC staff, to the three-acre oyster and bay scallop farm using floating and suspended gear in Potter Pond, Narragansett, RI.
Chair Coia introduced the matter explaining that at the January 24, 2023 meeting, the Council voted to send the matter to staff to place a modification with the area and report back to the Council for further discussion.
Mr. Willis began by stating that the Aquaculture Coordinator on staff, Benjamin Goetsch, did not participate in this staff review of the Council’s directive as Ben had a previous professional relationship with Mr. Raso which ended many years ago.
Mr. Willis explained the Council directed staff to look at a particular reduction of the originally presented application for Mr. Raso. Mr. Willis explained that the motion for the modified plan was for the reduction of the size of the originally presented footprint of the project with a couple of other definitive recommendations that ultimately failed. Mr. Willis further explained that a second motion was made and passed that directed staff to look at that previous motion with those conditions and report back to the Council on whether or not the conditions in the motion could fit within the parameters of the request.
Mr. Willis’ report contained six key factors from the motion:
Mr. Willis stated that the Math did not work with 39% reduction of the original footprint for an 80,500 square foot approval. Mr. Willis stated that based on the fact that the motion specifically expressed 80,500 square feet, that is what he based on reduced footprint to see if it would fit inside the originally presented three acres.
Mr. Willis presented three figures to the Council in the Director’s Staff Report. The first being the configuration that the subcommittee reviewed. Mr. Willis explained that Figure 2 provided a simple rectangle that fits within the original footprint and that rectangle is moved all the way to the east so that the eastern borders lined up on the original footprint. Mr. Willis stated that the rectangle from Figure 2 could fit in within the original three-acre site an infinite number of ways.
Mr. Willis stated that he then referred to the record which primarily focused on recreational aspects of Segar Cove and the safety of which the activities could take place within the cove. In Figure 3, Mr. Willis stated he reconfigured the 80,500 square feet to show that similar to what the subcommittee looked at as a revised footprint of the original three acres. Mr. Willis stated that with this reconfiguration, some of the recreational and safety issues were addressed. Mr. Willis also explained that by modifying the northeast corner of the revised 80,500 square foot footprint by approximately 50-feet, the revised 80,500 now has a border or buffer with the shoreline of approximately 50-feet all around. Mr. Willis also used this in the southwest corner.
Mr. Willis stated that he felt that all six criteria were met in accordance with the motion that the Council approved and directed staff to look at.
Mr. Willis then went on to explain that the last of the six conditions of the Council’s motion from the January 2023 meeting, was that the floating gear needed to be removed leaving the only allowable gear as the suspended lantern net gear.
Mr. Willis finished by stating that he felt, as staff, that the motion that the Council approved on January 24th, given the conditions of the motion, could result in a reconfiguration that would fit within the originally presented three-acre footprint.
Chair Coia asked Mr. Willis if, based on his understanding of the original area that was being sought for approval, it is his opinion that what is depicted in Figure 3 adequately satisfies the motion.
Mr. Willis stated that it satisfies the motion, but it is not a substitute for the subcommittee’s deliberations and recommendations.
Mr. Gomez stated that the modified layout looks good and asked about bottom gear for oysters. Mr. Willis explained that there was no need to look at bottom gear because the motion only allowed for one type of gear – suspended lantern net. Mr. Willis confirmed that an SAV study had been conducted in the course of the original application.
Ms. Hall asked about the reduction in aquaculture gear which would fit within 1.5 acres and what will be done with the remainder of the three acres. Mr. Willis stated that the 80,500 sq feet translates to approximately 1.5 acres and the suspended lantern gear would fit into that. Mr. Willis confirmed that only scallops would be grown in the lease using the suspended lantern gear,
No further questions for Mr. Willis from Council.
At the request of Chair Coia, Mr. Hartmann explained the parameters of the Council’s actions stating that based on the public notice that was posted for this meeting, the actions or decisions needed to be confined to the modifications. Mr. Hartmann further explained that no decisions could be made regarding the original application as it would be an Open Meetings Act violation based on the meeting notice. Mr. Hartmann further explained that if the modification was denied, the Raso Matter would need to come before the Full Council to determine whether the original proposal could move forward.
Chair Coia asked how the Subcommittee Report would be incorporated if the application was approved. Mr. Hartmann stated that under statute the Council has the ability to adopt, modify, or reject the findings of fact and/or conclusions to the Subcommittee Recommendation. If the Council were to vote to approve the modification, the Council’s rationale would have to be stated to modify Subcommittee’s recommendations.
Mr. Gagnon asked if there was a prohibition of sending the modification to Public Notice for input. Mr. Hartmann stated that there is no prohibition. Chair Coia stated that the modification would be contained within the reviewed layout and comments had already been received for this area.
Mr. Hartmann reminded the Council that they were balancing two things, CRMC statute and a Superior Court case, Easton’s Point Association v The Coastal Resources Management Council. Mr. Hartmann stated that in the case it ties in whether the CRMC modification by the Council also makes it necessary for a modified local zoning decision. Mr. Hartmann also stated that if it is determined that the modification is substantial, the belt and suspenders approach would be to send it to Public Notice.
Ms. Hall asks for further clarification on analysis of Easton’s Point relative to CRMC’s obligation to the public for public notice and clarification of CRMC’s statutory authority to permit aquaculture.
Mr. Hartmann explains that under RIGL 46-23-6(2)(B) as well as 6(2)(4)(i) sets CRMC’s authority to permit aquaculture and allows for the Council to modify proposals. Mr. Hartman explained that 20-10-04 talks to the applicant’s desire to permit aquaculture. Mr. Hartman stated that CRMC has strong authority to modify the aquaculture application. Ms. Hall pointed out that at a previous meeting Mr. DeSisto stated that public notice would be required if the project modification was not minor. Mr. Hartmann agreed on Mr. DeSisto’s terminology and to Ms. Hall’s statement that the Council needed to decide if the modification is substantive.
Mr. Gomez stated that he did not see a problem with going ahead with this modification that reduces the project and keeps it within the area that had already been reviewed.
Chair Coia agreed with Mr. Gomez stating that it’s a smaller area, the corners have been cut for safety issues and less gear.
Mr. Izzi stated that the standard that is being looked at needs to be defined and understood. Mr. Izzi gave his interpretation of substantial change being an addition to an application. Mr. Izzi explained that he believed the modifications being made to this application, which will create a smaller layout, reducing the apparatus and species, does not meet a substantive change.
Ms. Hall stated that the term substantial change does not necessarily mean an increase. Ms. Hall also expressed concern because the change involves the submerged area of the water, the water column and a different location of the submerged lantern nets.
Mr. Gomez talked about the scallops that he hoped would repopulate the salt ponds which would be very beneficial to the fishermen and the waterbody.
Ms. Hall expressed concern regarding the staff drawing the modified plan and then having to recommend it to the Council. Ms. Hall stated that the burden of proof that the application meets the regulations lies with the applicant not the staff. Chair Coia stated that Mr. Willis was not making a recommendation but rather completed a task set forth for him by the Council.
Ms. Hall stated that the ultimate issue is the scope of the modification relative to public notice, which was confirmed by Mr. Hartmann.
No further discussion by Council.
Mr. Gomez motioned that the modification be accepted as proposed and that the Council is adopting the findings of the subcommittee and the subsequent incorporation of those in the proposed modification.
Mr. Hartmann stated that the Council would need to provide rationale for the contradiction of the water- dependent uses and activities, the size of the project, and conflict with the CRMP reasoning for denial recommendation by the Subcommittee.
Mr. Gomez clarified that his motion replaced the subcommittee recommendations with the present proposed modification based on Mr. Beutel’s original staff report and the harbormaster’s letter of no objection. Ms. Reynolds seconded the motion.
Discussion on motion.
Ms. Hall made clarifications based on council discussion that more than minor modifications could result in a need for public notice, and that the Executive Director confirmed that gear would be changing locations.
Discussion between Mr. Hartmann and Ms. Hall on Easton’s Point case’s clarity in regard to this application.
Mr. Gomez moved the motion.
Chair Coia polled the Council:
Mr. Izzi Aye
Mr. Gomez Aye
Ms. Hall No
Mr. Gagnon No
Ms. Reynolds Aye
Chair Coia Aye
The motion carried on a 4-2 vote in favor of a modified application approval.
Attorney Christian Capizzo representing intervenors Hunt, Cooney, Quigley, and Latham and Attorney Dean Wagner on behalf of Andrew Wilkes, both ask that their objections be made part of the record.
8. ADJOURN
Motion to adjourn:
Motion: Mr. Izzi
Second: Mr. Gomez
Motion to adjourn approved on a unanimous voice vote.
Meeting adjourned at 8:29 pm.
Minutes respectfully submitted,
Lisa A. Turner
Recording Secretary
Stedman Government Center
Suite 116, 4808 Tower Hill Road, Wakefield, RI 02879-1900
Voice 401-783-3370 • Fax 401-783-2069 • E-Mail cstaff1@crmc.ri.gov
An Official Rhode Island State Website