[5:14] Good evening.
I' I'd like to call the uh the meeting
[5:20] of uh September 1st of the planning
board to order. So, if everybody could
[5:25] uh get seated, that would be uh very
helpful.
[5:34] I thought from a uh clarification
standpoint be a good idea to just uh run
[5:40] through the agenda so every everyone's
expectations are the same.
[5:46] » I I was going to say you got to speak.
>> Uh I can't raise the volume. I can raise
[5:49] the microphone but maybe that'll do it.
Uh so um anyway I
[5:57] I too close.
[6:01] Well, we'll see. Um I wanted to uh
review the agenda for everyone just so
[6:06] we all have the same uh expectation of
how things will flow.
[6:11] This is a regular planning board uh
meeting for the town. And our first item
[6:17] of business is anformational meeting
with regard to a five lot subdivision
[6:23] for the Harrison's. Uh and we'll review
that. Then we have uh two other items
[6:29] that have been advertised which are uh
zoning board requirements. a petition
[6:36] for a solar operation and a petition for
a dimensional variance or um
[6:45] de demolition
rebuild project. So, we'll review those
[6:50] five things.
Then we'll go into regular business uh
[6:55] planning board minutes and uh a uh a
special um
[7:04] u motion for the remand of the request
from the young family to review the uh
[7:11] farming accessory use petition.
So, I would um
[7:17] turn the mic over to uh Mark Hartman
just to
[7:23] review a couple things.
>> Mr. Chair, I just want to address item
[7:26] four on the agenda. I I think it's it's
no secret that the reason we have such a
[7:31] a robust crowd tonight is because
everybody wants to hear about the farm
[7:35] accessory ordinance. So, I just want to
talk about what that is and what that
[7:40] isn't uh relative to the agenda item.
First, it's not a vote by the planning
[7:45] board. This is a remand from the town
council. So, it's a uh opportunity for
[7:51] the Youngs to be heard tonight. Um and
the reason for that is because the town
[7:58] council had uh asked the planning board
to review a farm accessory ordinance.
[8:04] The planning board did that, sent their
recommendation to the town council. When
[8:09] the recommendation got back to the town
council, the young family had indicated
[8:14] they hadn't had the opportunity to be
heard at the planning board. The town
[8:18] council sent it back to the planning
board so that the Youngs would have that
[8:22] opportunity to be heard. And that's why
we're here tonight. And it's for that
[8:26] express purpose that we're here for to
for that tonight. Again, there's not
[8:30] going to be a vote on that. Uh but for
the sake of fairness, we'll have anybody
[8:36] that wants to be heard, they can be
heard tonight on that farm accessory
[8:42] ordinance.
Now, when we do have that opportunity
[8:46] for comment, uh we'll limit comment to
three minutes per person, and we just
[8:52] ask that you try not to um repeat the
comments that are uh provided.
[9:02] Now, one last point on that farm
accessory ordinance. Um,
[9:08] we may or may not get to it tonight
depending on how quickly the agenda
[9:12] goes, but for everybody's knowledge, uh,
the accessory ordinance is about a
[9:20] change to the zoning ordinance that
would allow for a special use permit to
[9:26] allow certain activities on uh, farms in
town.
[9:32] the uh the planning board had heard that
prior and made their recommendations on
[9:38] that particular ordinance and that again
is what is up for discussion tonight for
[9:44] the Youngs to be heard. Mr. Chair,
that's all I have.
[9:48] » Thank you.
[10:01] But that doesn't get hurt tonight.
[10:09] All these people here
please don't vote for the whole agenda
[10:18] so we can all hear what's happen.
>> Well, thank you
[10:26] I don't know that we can do that, can
we?
[10:32] » I live across the street.
[10:37] » So, um there's a request to to uh change
the order of the agenda. Uh I can put
[10:44] that before the planning board. Um
>> I'll make I'll make a motion that we
[10:49] move that item to the top of the list.
>> Really?
[10:55] I have a second.
>> What happens to theformational meeting?
[11:02] » I'm not trying to make it.
>> We can move it below theformational
[11:07] though. It's second on the exam.
I think the the theformational
[11:13] hearing has to be uh
and I think that we can um we have two
[11:22] uh zoning uh requests petitions that
have been advertised and so we can uh
[11:29] make sure that we have time to hear
those prior to the uh closing of the
[11:35] meeting. So if if the the uh discussion
uh with the farm accessory uses carries
[11:44] on uh past 9:00 we can terminate then
and bring uh the subject to the zoning
[11:52] petitions is that
so um can I amend your motion? Sure you
[11:59] can
>> to uh so the motion is now to hold
[12:03] theformational meeting first
then move to item four which is to
[12:09] remand the request from the young family
for the matter of farm accessory
[12:13] ordinance to the planning board for
further discussion and then we will uh
[12:19] terminate that at 9 and we will uh deal
with the recommendations for the zoning
[12:25] board and those two petitions
Is there a second to that?
[12:30] » Second.
>> Second. All those in favor?
[12:35] » I
>> I.
[12:36] » Any opposed?
>> No.
[12:39] » Okay. Thank you,
>> Mr. Chairman. I just like the record to
[12:42] show that I need to recuse myself from
theformational meeting item number one
[12:46] on the agenda and I'll return for for
the open meeting.
[12:50] » Thank you.
So item number one is notice of
[12:55] anformational meeting is hereby given
upon the petition of David Harrison,
[13:00] trustee of the David Harrison
2024 trust, owner of the subject
[13:06] property located at 147B West Main Road,
Little Compton, Rhode Island, Tax
[13:13] Assessor's Plat 2, lot 9-9.
The applicant and/or their
[13:19] representative is presenting a master
plan for a five lot major subdivision of
[13:25] the subject property, including the
request for a dimensional waiver in the
[13:30] form of a road measuring approximately
2,380
[13:35] linear feet, including the 1,00 linear
foot along the existing 50ft wide right
[13:44] of way where greater than 900 linear F
feet is not allowed pursuant to appendix
[13:50] C 2D2.2.2E
[13:55] of the Lil Compton subdivision
regulations.
[13:59] The petitioner intends to create a five
lot residential family subdivision
[14:04] including one
LMI low to moderate income unit to be
[14:10] incorporated into an ADU accessory
dwelling unit on lot number one.
[14:17] Is this mic on?
>> Uh, I don't know.
[14:22] » Can Can everybody hear me? Oh, there it
is. Good evening, Court Chappelle. On
[14:26] behalf of the Harrisons, I'm going to
begin tonight by asking uh Mrs. Harrison
[14:31] to give you a brief overview, but just
for the audience and and for the uh the
[14:36] board, let me remind you that we were
here a couple of months ago on a
[14:39] conceptual. This is a 31 acre parcel.
The 31 acre parcel is owned now by the
[14:46] Harrison Trust and the goal is that the
Harrisons are building their own home on
[14:51] lot one and then each of their children
some of whom are represented here
[14:56] tonight are also uh hopefully building a
home within the next three or four years
[15:01] and it will be what I commonly refer to
as a family compound. It is extremely
[15:07] benign use and that it is five house
lots on 31 acres. There is just a single
[15:13] modification that is needed and that is
that the road that goes into it is in
[15:18] excess of 900 ft. But I remind you that
the planning board saw this before at
[15:24] the alme subdivision. When the Alme
subdivided and the a trust purchased
[15:28] some of the land, there was specifically
an easement that was uh incorporated
[15:35] into all the planning so that this lot
nine could be subdivided. And in fact,
[15:40] the planning board was involved in that.
In many cases, we see the easement go
[15:45] across the a trust land. And in other
cases, we see what we call hockey stick
[15:50] lot, which is the large 31 acre lot in
the back with an appendage that goes out
[15:55] to the main road. For some reason, I was
not present. Some of you may have been.
[16:00] This particular 50-foot road was a
separate parcel known as lot 7 and its
[16:06] sole existence was for ingress and
egress to lot 9. It is restricted from
[16:12] going to any other lot. They cannot
according to the a trust easement use
[16:17] this to develop and go into lot 10 or
any of the other surrounding properties.
[16:23] So it was apparent whether it be
mandatory for us or good neighbors, we
[16:30] wanted to go to the a trust and we were
on the agenda on two weeks ago and we
[16:35] were before them. So there's no issues
with the a trust land. There were
[16:41] discussions certainly that we had about
how we can uh decorate that piece, if
[16:46] you will, and landscape that piece. And
we agreed that we would stake it out uh
[16:51] to show where we were going to lay out
the road on that property and where the
[16:56] drainage and utilities would go, which
are part of the underlying easement. And
[17:02] we'll go back there regarding any
permission to put in trees and grass and
[17:07] those things. So, with that said, I'm
going to have uh Marilyn read a
[17:11] statement or give you a statement of
what her intentions are, and then I'll
[17:14] go over the modification and the plan
that's slightly different from the
[17:19] conceptual plan. The conceptual plan, if
you recall, you had some issues with. We
[17:24] were asking for phasing. We were asking
to cross some roads. We redid this as a
[17:29] simple, straight uh five lot
subdivision. Each lot meets your minimum
[17:34] criteria in your town ordinance for 2
acres. Each lot meets your minimum
[17:38] frontage and width requirements. And
it's all designed to be a large family
[17:42] farm with the large area including the
stable, barn, and riding area
[17:47] incorporated into and onto other
parcels. So,
[17:52] the property will flow as one big uh
farm type uh family compound. All the
[18:00] amenities won't just be on the lot one.
So, with that said, this is Harrison.
[18:08] Thank you uh for giving us the
opportunity to be here tonight.
[18:12] Oh, sorry, uh Maryanne Harrison.
Um you know, we purchased this property
[18:18] because we really see it as an
opportunity to create something for our
[18:21] family that's going to go well beyond
our lives. We, as Court had mentioned,
[18:26] we are building five home sites on
there. Our each of our four children are
[18:31] planning to build a home and my husband
and I will be building one as well. and
[18:34] we will have a barn with horses and a
paddock area also. And it's really to
[18:39] create a life that we really think would
be a beautiful one here in Little
[18:43] Compton. Um I [clears throat] grew up in
the country myself and I know how
[18:47] special it is to have that experience
child and the key thing for us and what
[18:52] we are trying to accomplish is to have a
place where our children can raise their
[18:56] families and they can have our
grandchildren would be there as well and
[18:59] they have a connection to the land to
the ocean and most importantly to their
[19:03] cousins. When my kids grew up, they had
an environment like that and we would
[19:07] like to replicate that for our
grandkids. U my daughter's here this
[19:10] evening as you can see. She's expecting
our first grandchild in the next couple
[19:14] of weeks. So, we're very excited about
that and my son is expecting twins in
[19:18] November. So, it is already starting to
to build and we really are looking
[19:22] forward to being able to have that
experience with our children. We also
[19:26] recognize that Little Compton is a very
special place and with that comes a
[19:31] responsibility for all of us. you know,
we want to be very thoughtful about how
[19:35] we develop the property. We want to
preserve as much as we can of its
[19:39] character and the open space and we want
to be good neighbors. So, that's really
[19:43] at the heart of what we're trying to
accomplish uh with purchase of this
[19:47] property. So, I'll leave it to court to
go through the details.
[19:51] » Thank you. So, I'll begin with the
access road. The access road again is on
[19:55] lot 7, which is a lot owned by the a
trust. It's 50 feet wide and your plan
[20:01] approved by the planning board when it
was done specifically says that we could
[20:06] have asked for modifications for 12 foot
wide road if we were building one house
[20:10] but if we were going to do more than two
I think it was that you set the width at
[20:14] 20 ft. So we are so we believe that's
kind of a done deal that you said that
[20:19] the width of that would be 20 ft and
consistent with the egg trust. They
[20:23] obviously don't want that pavement.
They're very uh big on impervious
[20:26] service that must be gravel. So like
most of your roads in town we are
[20:32] proposing to uh honor obviously the
easement that that's gravel to that
[20:36] point.
>> Tell us what the what the proposition of
[20:42] would be please.
>> Yes.
[20:45] Yes, the Phil Bill Smith civil
engineering concepts. So that road will
[20:49] be a gravel road and consistent with the
subdivision standards. Uh 8 in bank run
[20:55] gravel, 8 inches of processed gravel on
top of that. Um compacted and uh
[21:02] essentially we're we're not asking for
any waiverss in the construction. We're
[21:05] going to meet your specifications for
that.
[21:09] » Okay. And even though that road is
approved, I should have said it's not
[21:12] installed. And part of the reason we
were here for master plan is that
[21:16] somewhat we're going to try to put the
cart before the horse and one you could
[21:20] certainly go down tomorrow and build get
a permit for one lot. So with that
[21:26] starting we want to improve the road to
make sure that we don't do damage to it
[21:30] to put it right up with the gravel now
so that we could get construction trucks
[21:34] and those things. And that's why we went
to the a trust and said hey do you want
[21:38] it left or do you want it right or you
want to keep us just in the middle? We
[21:42] don't want to put it in and then come
back to the planning board for
[21:45] preliminary and have them say, "Hey,
thanks for spending the money to make it
[21:48] a nice gravel road that's not in the
center, but the egg trust uh wants it
[21:54] differently." So, it's going to be
staked out before it's done. We also
[21:57] with the egg trust, there's corn growing
there now. Uh obviously, we're not
[22:01] plowing the corn to start it. We've
agreed to wait until harvest and to
[22:05] start it then. So again, I think it's a
a good communal effort to try to to try
[22:10] to work that out with them. Once you
come in, you can see where our road is
[22:14] really quite simple. It just sweeps down
along the property and then turns uh to
[22:20] the north and then each of the lots draw
themselves off the back. If you look at
[22:24] the topography of the land, you'll see
why that road is where it is and why the
[22:29] uh topography allows houses off to the
left of it. And then the large lot which
[22:34] we call lot one that would be occupied
by the parents uh building their house
[22:40] in the north west corner and building
the barn and amenities in the middle. Uh
[22:46] I certainly don't uh you know most of
you know I have a horse farm. I don't
[22:50] find uh horse farms offensive. Uh but
certainly the amenities of the horse
[22:56] farm which means where the horses are
and manure piles and things are kept in
[23:01] the middle of this uh property. It's
over I think five or 6 h00 ft uh from
[23:06] the from the nearest uh boundary to the
south. So again they're developing in a
[23:11] way with their neighbors in mind. Uh we
were here last time, remember we could
[23:16] have come, I guess for a four lot
subdivision and we could have avoided
[23:20] the uh low to moderate income
requirement. Uh but the truth is in the
[23:24] end we want five lots. So we might as
well address it now. So we are proposing
[23:30] five lots. By my definition under your
new ordinance, I guess we get to pick
[23:35] which lot has the LMI dwelling unit and
we want that dwelling unit to be on lot
[23:41] one. that lot uh lot one dwelling unit
will be in the form of an ADU which
[23:47] according to your ordinance is a
dwelling unit and can count and
[23:50] according to the state law an ADU can
also uh count as an LMI it has to be
[23:56] your solicitor would have to uh with our
office make sure that the proper
[24:02] documentation is filed so there are it's
a deed with the restrictions that would
[24:08] in this case not be a lot that an ADU
that was offered for separate sale, but
[24:13] a lot that we had to uh lease, show
annually the lease if uh if we lease it
[24:19] to someone that fits the criteria of the
LMI ordinance. So, it does
[24:26] effectually pass not only your old
ordinance, but the new ordinance that
[24:31] you just looked at that we have 20% of
the lots, 20% of five is one has a uh
[24:38] dwelling unit. that dwelling unit has to
be done with the same construction uh
[24:42] construction materials and architectural
integrity as the other houses. And
[24:47] again, because it's a family compound
and all of the houses are done uh to
[24:53] look like a a rural family farm and
match the barn and match the stable. uh
[24:58] we will meet the criteria that the
construction materials and that the
[25:03] quality of the 1,200 square ft unit in
the ad in the barn itself uh will be as
[25:11] uh with the same quality and
construction materials as our homes.
[25:17] So for those of you that might say the
house in the in the barn facility is
[25:23] strange, not so. Uh, I have a number of
clients that have them. And in my
[25:27] opinion, if we go back over to my side
of the bay over in Portsouth, the finest
[25:32] equestrian center is with J Sergeants
called Sandy Point Farms, there's seven
[25:37] apartments attached to that. So, there
are in fact uh plenty of people that uh
[25:43] like nice apartments attached to the
equestrian world.
[25:48] Uh as to the modification
um I am asking there's there's two
[25:54] things I think we're asking for tonight
even though you're not voting even
[25:57] though it's just master plan. One is
we're going to try to put that road in
[26:03] once the a trust tells us where they
want it and once we know that it is to
[26:09] town specs. Normally the planning board
approves something and then your
[26:15] department of public works oversees the
road with Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith is going
[26:20] to try to get Department of Public Works
to oversee it now and to give good
[26:25] pictorial evidence so that he can show
that what we're doing now, a little bit
[26:30] cart before the horse, meets the
specifications of the Little Compton
[26:35] Road ordinance.
The other thing comes back to some
[26:39] recent controversies that we don't
necessarily like to talk about, but the
[26:44] this road is in excess of thousand feet
and that's the modification. There are
[26:48] many roads in town that do that. And the
problem is is that according to your
[26:53] ordinance, if it's a major subdivision,
once that road is approved over a,000
[26:57] ft, there's an argument that no further
subdivision uh can be done off of it.
[27:02] and we have
a five lot subdivision, but we have
[27:08] disclosed to everyone that there's a
strong possibility that we need a six
[27:12] lot subdivision. The reason we may want
a six lot subdivision is lot one could
[27:18] be cut off separate. Remember, lot one
is 13 acres. So, it could certainly be
[27:23] cut off from the Harrison's main home
and the apartment could be done separate
[27:28] as a primary dwelling or a house. The
most common things with family compounds
[27:34] and the trouble with them is sooner or
later a house needs to be sold and in
[27:38] the natural order of things that may be
the one occupied by the oldest people
[27:43] and at my house that's the parents and
when my house gets sold I don't want the
[27:48] farm to go to my house cuz my farm is
the amenity for my four children and
[27:53] that's exactly what is happening here
with the Harrisons. So we would like the
[27:58] ability to cut that off in the future so
that it could be a separate lot so that
[28:03] we could still maintain ownership of
that even if the main house sold. It
[28:07] would still be a six lot subdivision. It
would still be a minor subdivision. It
[28:12] would not kick in any more LMI
requirements. It just and we understand
[28:17] that in the future if the zoning changes
we may not be able to do it. But as of
[28:24] today, we could easily make lot one into
two lots because it has adequate
[28:30] frontage and adequate size. We don't
have an intention of doing it now, but
[28:36] when we come back in the future, if we
ever did, we'd like the planning board
[28:40] to say that road that you designed that
has a
[28:46] uh criteria that there may not be any
further subdivision.
[28:52] you have disclosed to us and we designed
it in a way that it was adequate for
[28:57] six.
I I don't think the board will ever say
[29:02] that making this 22 ft is necessary for
six. Although if you do that, that's
[29:06] fine with us. I just want to be genuous
and say we see that there's a
[29:13] possibility sometime in the future that
it may go to six slots. And if it goes
[29:17] to six lots, we would like the board to
note that that requirement that it no
[29:24] further subdivision was addressed and
that we did that. That can be done at
[29:28] preliminary. Uh it may something that
you want to talk about. It might be
[29:31] something that Mark wants to to research
about the availability of it. We did
[29:36] turn that over to Anthony Disto that
specific question, but he reserved his
[29:41] right to keep looking I think is fair
enough to say. Um, but those are really
[29:45] the only criteria that make this any
different from a very innocuous simple
[29:50] subdivision.
>> No, I'm I'm just the the conscious of we
[29:56] right now you want to establish the
elements that you want in the master
[30:00] plan approved in preparing for the
preliminary plan. Is that right?
[30:05] » Yes. And so the the um if if you want to
have in my opinion if you want to have
[30:12] six slots eventually we need to provide
some conditional approval for that in
[30:17] the preliminary stage. I also think that
the the
[30:23] we're going to need some better
understanding of having uh the loader of
[30:27] moderate income
[30:31] building affordable
factor that's in in in another
[30:36] structure.
We're going to need
[30:39] » I I can address I can address that. and
and in in addition to I'm assuming
[30:44] you're going to rent it.
And so then then there there's all the
[30:49] the management of an affordable uh
property and and how that is
[30:55] » monitoring
>> monitored with the state
[30:59] there. There's a lot to that question.
>> I'm I understand I just want
[31:04] » and I'll answer it at the preliminary
but on a very preliminary because of
[31:08] where we are tonight. First of all, your
ordinance specifically defines a
[31:11] dwelling unit. And when you look under
dwelling unit under your ordinance, it
[31:15] says a building or a portion of a
building. So your ordinance contemplates
[31:21] that a dwelling unit may be in a barn or
maybe a duplex or maybe a market. So it
[31:27] doesn't have to be its own freestanding
building. That was the first hurdle I
[31:30] thought I had to get over.
Secondly, your
[31:36] ordinance says, "Thou shalt have one of
your five lots." In this case, 20%, one
[31:42] of your five lots. It doesn't say shall
contain a single family home. It doesn't
[31:47] say it shall contain a dedicated single
family house to low to moderate income.
[31:54] It says it must contain a single low to
moderate income dwelling unit. And when
[32:02] you go to dwelling unit, it says a
building in a structure. That's I
[32:07] believe hurdle number two. Hurdle number
three, when you redid your ordinance and
[32:12] when the state did the ordinance, it did
not say that the unit needs to be the
[32:16] same size. Some communities actually
have that. They have a size requirement
[32:20] for an LMI. Yours does not say that.
Yours does just says it has to be the
[32:26] same quality. You don't want an LMI
that's
[32:30] anyone insulting me with a trailer, but
a trailer next to another home and say
[32:35] that's not the integration of a low to
moderate income home into a nice
[32:40] community. I assure you this, I don't
think it's possible that this isn't the
[32:45] nicest LMI in Little Compton when it's
done. The problem with LMIs is
[32:53] there's some density bonuses and things,
but as you know, you can't sell them for
[32:57] more than 400,000 and you can't rent
them for more than X dollars. And you
[33:02] have to have a certain uh economic uh
person to lease them that doesn't make
[33:08] over 85, I think, if they're single or
120,000 if there's a a couple of kids
[33:13] and a and a spouse. But you can't It
doesn't It works in Providence. It
[33:18] really does. And we're trying to make it
work in Little Compton, but you can't
[33:22] spend millions of dollars on a piece of
of land and millions of dollars or
[33:28] substantial dollars to build a unit and
then say, "Let's sell it." Even if
[33:33] someone could afford the maximum
$480,000 to buy it, they couldn't afford
[33:37] the taxes and the insurance and the
homeowners association often times in
[33:42] this unit. So, this is a subsidized unit
basically for life by the Harrison's
[33:47] that they will rent it at uh according
to the code at an amount that does not
[33:55] exceed the rental that can be charged in
an LMI by state law that they will not
[34:01] have a tenant in that unit that exceeds
the economic or monetary salary. And if
[34:09] the property loses, that's on them.
that's a little easier to incorporate um
[34:15] inside a structure that you're already
paying for and that you have the help of
[34:19] a homeowners association, in this case
your own four kids um all utilizing and
[34:24] maintaining. So I think it works in that
it fits your ordinance and I think it
[34:28] works in that it integrates quite
frankly an LMI in a in a neighborhood
[34:32] that would never have it without your
ordinance.
[34:40] S could you lean into the mic so that
everybody can hear you
[34:43] » please
>> lean into the microphone
[34:53] » can you hear me?
>> There you go
[34:54] » everyone.
>> Thank you.
[34:57] » So you want us to go beyond 900 ft.
You want us to go to six lots
[35:06] eventually. You want us to give you
the the the expectations of possibly
[35:15] using lot one for further subdivision.
>> Well, that would make five into six.
[35:20] » Yes.
>> Not ever more than that.
[35:22] » But you're you're talking about lot
number one possibly in the future to do
[35:26] something else. meaning it could be a
six lot subdivision whether we do it now
[35:32] or later. But okay, we would rather not
create a lot for the sole purpose of
[35:38] beating an ordinance in the future that
isn't necessarily
[35:43] always uh where modifications aren't
>> always granted
[35:49] because we have no intention of cutting
off a lot and selling it to anyone. We
[35:53] have intention of keeping this as a
family. I'm going to make sure you don't
[35:58] uh that's not my problem. My problem is
that you've given us a lot of
[36:03] definitions when you came here just now
of what you could do without us. If that
[36:10] was possible, we wouldn't be here.
>> I I don't that way.
[36:14] » I want to I want to be clear. I want to
be clear on what you want before we go
[36:19] to the next stage. All right? I don't
want to leave anything in the dock. I
[36:25] don't want to leave anything to your
determination later. I want to know what
[36:30] you want
now and and if it's something that we
[36:35] can agree on, fine. If not, I want to
know that now.
[36:39] » All right. Let me go through a four
process situation and have something I
[36:44] don't like later.
>> Let me start with what we don't want. We
[36:48] don't want a 12 lot or 13 lot
subdivision that this land supports. the
[36:53] engineering supports it here and they
>> we know that
[36:57] » okay and and we don't want that. We
would like one lot for parents and four
[37:05] lots for kids.
>> Okay.
[37:07] » But we see the pro strong possibility
that the
[37:14] 13 acre lot number one may need to be
cut off in the future. And when it's cut
[37:19] off in the future, either we can say, "I
just want to let you know we're cutting
[37:24] it off in the future. Are you okay with
it?" Or if you would like here at Master
[37:28] and we just show you the six slots now.
That's okay, too. We don't If this was
[37:35] the old days, we'd ask for two right
now. And when a child said, "I'm ready
[37:41] to build," would come in and say, "The
roads in as what used to be an admin or
[37:46] planning board approval not required.
Can I have a lot for my next child? Can
[37:50] I have a lot for my next child? And we'd
move right down the road. But because of
[37:54] all the new ordinances that say
successive and we may not be able once
[38:00] you give us a modification for over 900
ft, if you granted us that, you may not
[38:05] do it again. We want to just say if we
have to do it that way and do six now.
[38:11] Now, we're still not saying 12, but if
we have to do it that way and do six
[38:14] now, then we'll do that. I just don't
think that's a practical approach.
[38:20] But that's me.
[38:24] » Yeah, I'm good.
>> The only scenario, just to be clear, the
[38:28] only scenario for lot six is should my
husband and I die, we want to make sure
[38:33] if the kids can't afford our place,
which I'm sure they probably won't be
[38:36] able to, and they have to sell our
house, that the farm doesn't go with it.
[38:40] we just want to append it probably to
somebody else's lot or have a lot six
[38:44] that they can all own. The plan is not
to expand and build another house. So, I
[38:48] just want to make sure that's really
clear.
[39:01] » Do you have any questions of Mr. Smith?
Uh, by the way, do we have the drawing
[39:06] of the uh barn?
Well, the one question I had was you you
[39:11] shown the uh six houses
with
[39:16] six accessory dwelling units. Is that
correct?
[39:21] » That is
>> five
[39:24] » five houses with five houses dwelling
units. Correct. And so when you uh come
[39:30] back for uh the preliminary, you'll know
the number of bedrooms and because it
[39:37] you've switched from
uh I think so now everybody has an
[39:43] individual uh septic system of their
own. Is that correct?
[39:47] » That's correct.
>> So those will all obviously be worked
[39:51] out for prelim
>> including the ADUs. And then besides
[39:54] appropriately to handle an ADU, if there
is going to be an ADU for for those
[39:59] lots, it is allowed. We as a matter of
we wanted to show it so that if somebody
[40:06] down the road
>> wanted to do that, then nobody's going
[40:10] to say, "Well, you never told us,"
>> right?
[40:15] You say, "I want to know."
[40:28] look like.
>> Very nice.
[40:33] » It's like the school. It looks like the
school.
[40:37] You take a picture of the school built.
[40:58] Yep.
[41:04] Just Bill, other than the unique nature
of this lot and that it's already starts
[41:09] 980 ft deep on on the road that was
other than the unique nature of the lot
[41:15] that it by definition doesn't start till
1,000 ft in the road that you've
[41:21] designed. Were were there any uh
scenarios that you could shorten that
[41:25] and still try to get the frontage of uh
the five lot division?
[41:34] » Um
yeah. So, so that was laid out so that
[41:38] we could take advantage of the there's a
substantial amount of water frontage
[41:43] along this lot and the four lots um lots
2, three, four, and five will all be uh
[41:50] have water frontage. So, the road really
couldn't be shortened uh substantially.
[41:56] Could I move the coal sack back a few
feet? Maybe, but this seemed like this
[42:00] was a a good fit. Um, we've incorporated
storm water uh BMPPS along the roadway
[42:08] uh so that we capture storm water so
we're not causing any issues with uh
[42:13] runoff or sedimentation
um you know for the for either the water
[42:18] or for any of the neighbors. Um this
this seemed like this was the best best
[42:24] fit for the roadway.
>> Uh stay at the mic Bill for a minute. I
[42:28] have a question. When you I was up there
today. When you when you go in and you
[42:33] as you go in, it takes quite a rise
[clears throat] to the peak. Are you are
[42:39] you confident that you can pick up that
water that's coming off that ride and
[42:44] going towards West Main Road?
>> Yes.
[42:48] » Okay. Yeah.
>> If if do you have
[42:52] do you have a a way of uh of taking care
of that if the calculations are
[43:00] » So So we do that that section that's on
the actress prop a trust property um
[43:06] that drains back toward West Bane Road.
We'll have a swale system incorporated
[43:11] into it with a series of check dams so
that it can have whiz going down in the
[43:17] swailes.
>> Exactly. Yeah.
[43:18] » All right. So, you can feed the swale at
at West Main
[43:22] » and and the water will stay in each of
the cells, if you want to call it that,
[43:27] uh infiltrate into the ground so that it
reduces the runoff going out to West
[43:31] Main.
>> That's designed to the south side of the
[43:33] road so that it doesn't interfere with
the farmer.
[43:37] » Yeah.
>> And that was part of the act trust
[43:39] discussion.
>> Thank you. Thank you.
[43:42] » Can I just say
>> you you had asked a question if for
[43:44] Perlin we would have the number of
bedrooms for each of them. I just want
[43:48] to make sure that you're aware that
three of the lots will be built on
[43:52] relatively soon. The other two will be
quite a while. So, we originally, as you
[43:56] recall, we were going in phasing because
we knew two of them weren't building for
[44:00] quite some time, but we're still going
forward with the five, but we don't have
[44:03] we won't have the details on two of
those lots.
[44:05] » Okay.
[44:09] Thank you, C.
[44:13] » I'm good.
[44:18] I don't think we have any other
questions.
[44:21] » And all five of these are individuals,
right?
[44:23] » All the septic systems.
>> So all five of these lots are individual
[44:27] ISDs systems. So they would um based on
Rhode Island DEM be approved for a
[44:34] fourbedroom or a five-bedroom. If the
person that was getting the lot, the
[44:38] child that was getting the lot
anticipated the ADU and the ADU was
[44:43] going to be onebedroom, then if they
were at a four-bedroom house, they
[44:46] either would build a five- bedroomedroom
system or they would have to do a new
[44:50] system at a later date. But that is 100%
uh done by by DEM, right? But this is
[44:56] not the common system like we that's a
much bigger issue in the common system
[45:01] in the other properties that we've been
before you recently.
[45:05] You're you're not going to utilize the
first culde-sac at the at the beginning
[45:12] of this property and at the end of the
egg trust property.
[45:16] » That culde-sac was put on to provide
frontage. Yes. This lot. So it
[45:20] legitimized this 31 acres as a separate
lot. We are not going to use that
[45:25] culdeac. We don't need the front.
>> So that won't be improved.
[45:28] » No. Okay.
>> No, there's no need for that.
[45:31] » Okay.
>> We're good.
[45:34] » Yeah. But the culde-sac at the end is of
adequate size and we'll have letters
[45:39] from the fire department.
>> Okay,
[45:41] » I'm good.
>> Thanks,
[45:44] » Mr. Chair. So, all you would need on
this is a a vote to move to public
[45:48] hearing. Master plan public hearing.
[45:54] » Master plan public.
>> Never mind. So moved. I need to hear
[45:56] what it is. What's the motion? Mark, can
>> you make the motion again? Mark.
[46:02] » I'll make a motion that we move this the
master for
[46:05] » to to master plan.
>> Master plan.
[46:07] » Master plan. Public hearing.
>> Public hearing.
[46:11] You
>> want to second?
[46:12] » All those in favor?
>> Second.
[46:13] » I we scheduling that for next month.
>> Thank you.
[46:18] » Second.
>> Are we automatically scheduling that for
[46:20] next month?
>> No.
[46:25] [laughter]
>> Yeah. Okay.
[46:27] » The application.
>> Can I Can I ask a question? I just want
[46:30] to make sure I got it straight. It was
master plan not
[46:33] » this is a master plan applic
[46:38] » right but this is a master plan
application so weed the entire package
[46:42] to do master plan so we're not coming
back for preliminary we just agreed that
[46:46] this could be informal and then we'd
come back for
[46:50] but we don't have to refile anything no
>> which would except for advertising make
[46:56] this continue to next month on your
agenda subject to our uh working with
[47:01] Julie to make sure it's advertised for
the public master plan hearing.
[47:06] » Yes, correct.
>> Skip a month. I have time to to
[47:08] advertise.
>> We want to make sure the advertising
[47:11] gets done correctly. So, absolutely.
>> But if the advertising is done, we'll
[47:14] see you next month.
>> Yes.
[47:17] » Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you, Bill.
[47:44] So now we're we're going to um move to
item number four in accordance with the
[47:49] agenda. Uh and
u I think that we should we should uh
[47:56] ask the youngs to lead off the comments
and uh then we'll
[48:03] alternate with other people that wish to
speak and we'll um
[48:09] try to limit it to uh 3 minutes but
we'll we'll see how that goes.
[48:15] » Good evening. Good evening, Tyler.
>> You have me before we started.
[48:25] » So, good evening. My name is Tyler
Young. Uh, my wife Carl and I operate
[48:30] Young Family Farm. Many of you know our
farm well. We started 108 acres back in
[48:35] 1997.
And over the years, we've grown into
[48:39] operation over 300 acres. We're one of
the larger growers in the state. Uh,
[48:43] raised some pretty good corn, too.
Farming this land always will be
[48:50] our primary purpose. But as anyone in
agriculture knows, open land isn't just
[48:55] scenic backdrop.
It is a living, breathing operation that
[49:00] requires constant physical work, massive
daily investment, and deep
[49:04] responsibility to our environment. My
family has worked these lands for
[49:07] generations, and our greatest hope is to
pass the legacy on to the next. But it
[49:13] brings up a critical question. What will
our town look like if working farms
[49:17] disappear?
When farmland is no longer financially
[49:20] sustainable and active cultivation
stops, those fields don't simply stay
[49:24] pristine. They quickly turn into dense
brush, overgrown briars, and unmanaged
[49:29] tall grass,
breeding several tick infestations, and
[49:33] driving deer activity right into our
neighboring yards, which we already
[49:36] have.
Even more than that, keeping a working
[49:40] farm viable is what protects our
community from ultimate disruption,
[49:44] being forced to sell farmland. The
reality is very few farmers today can
[49:48] afford to purchase land in this town,
even land that is protected.
[49:53] To keep 300 acres active and
well-managed, modern farmers must be
[49:57] allowed to diversify.
That is why we started a petition for
[50:01] our community members and customers who
support our vision. We're not asking for
[50:06] zoning change. We are requesting a
special you special use permit
[50:11] specifically for our farm.
This ensures the town council retains
[50:16] full control of keeping our plan
squarely aligned with the town's
[50:20] comprehensive plan.
In a short time, we received
[50:24] overwhelming support, nearly 900
signatures, 400 which have come directly
[50:29] from Old Compton residents and
taxpayers.
[50:33] We're also honored to be joined tonight
by representatives from Rhode Island
[50:36] BEM, the Department of Agriculture, the
Farm Bureau, and State Legal Council.
[50:41] The state of Rhode Island has made its
position explicitly clear for preserving
[50:45] working farmland for main and
production, family farms need
[50:48] sustainable economic models such as
hosting limited farm-to-table events and
[50:53] community gatherings.
State officials are here tonight support
[50:57] modernizing rules so that family farms
like ours can survive
[51:03] tonight. Let's simply set the record
straight and work together to preserve
[51:06] agriculture part of our town. Thank you.
But I'd like to also say that there's a
[51:11] flyer that was passed around town and
that flyer was very inaccurate.
[51:17] Some of the claims were multiple
commercial venues false unrestricted
[51:22] parties false. harmful tranquility
false. Now, we did a measurement. Some
[51:27] of the neighbors saying we're 70 ft from
the venue. The closest one was 241 ft.
[51:32] The next one was 401 ft.
Our proposed guardrails and facts
[51:38] limited special use permit pilot
program. Maximum 10 evening events per
[51:44] year with flexible to work with town 150
guest cap. Music stops at 9:00.
[51:51] Farm first focus events tied to
agriculture, farm, flowers, vegetables,
[51:56] and local. Designated parking area
avoids on street parking and traffic.
[52:03] Why support this proposal? Preserves
working farmland. Creates critical
[52:08] revenue for multigenerational farm
sustainability. Fair treatment. Follows
[52:14] rules similar to other non-farm venues
in Little Compton.
[52:19] Specific special use permit.
A property specific permit for young
[52:24] family only. This is not a townwide
zoning change. It allows for strict
[52:28] custom conditions tailored to farm and
neighborhood. Give towns council
[52:33] complete control and full review after
two-year trial. Next, I'd like to
[52:37] introduce my daughter Sarah.
[52:42] Just give me a minute. I got to pull
this up.
[52:49] We're ready to add another grandchild.
>> Yeah, any day now.
[52:56] » Actually,
>> um, good evening everyone. My name is
[53:01] Sarah Young. My sister Haddie and I are
here tonight to ensure Young Family Farm
[53:06] survives for our kids' generation. She
has twin boys and I have a boy due
[53:11] probably the end of this week. To be
honest, working farms are a huge part of
[53:15] what makes Little Compton special.
However, keeping a farm viable today uh
[53:20] requires diversifying revenue to be
sustainable against the unpredictable
[53:24] weather.
Yeah. And today's market cost of
[53:28] agriculture.
This isn't just business, it's personal.
[53:32] Hadtie and I held our own weddings and
baby showers on the farm just last year
[53:38] and in 2024 successfully without any
complaints.
[53:42] Many people in this room were actually
at these celebrations where our caterers
[53:46] featured the farm's crops, which guests
still talk about how good the sweet corn
[53:50] and potatoes were. Not to mention the
immense amount of flowers showcased. My
[53:55] sister and I own a floral design
business, Young Designs. We sourced at
[54:00] our both of our weddings roughly 75% of
the flowers used directly from the
[54:05] fields. Since 2016, Young Designs has
been rooted in agriculture.
[54:11] We focus sourcing farm flowers, which
significantly drives the farm's flower
[54:15] growing operations. The farm's flower
growing operations wouldn't be what they
[54:20] are today if it weren't for our floral
design business.
[54:23] Private events like these are what help
provide the predictable revenue, demand,
[54:28] and profitability that our farm needs to
thrive.
[54:32] To clear up confusion and address those
who oppose our request, we encourage
[54:36] everyone to read our full pilot program
proposal that we have on our website and
[54:42] the town's public records.
We don't want a permanent zoning change.
[54:47] were requesting, as my dad said, the
temporary 2-year special use permit for
[54:52] a tide events, including private daytime
gatherings intertwined with workshops,
[54:58] farm-to-table weddings, in addition to
the public events we already host, like
[55:03] the annual apple festival. Our farm has
hosted that responsibly for over 10
[55:08] years now.
Allowing private gatherings in
[55:11] residential zones is not unprecedented
in Little Compton. The golf club
[55:16] operates right here under residential
zoning. Regardless of grandfathered
[55:20] rights, working farms deserve that same
conditional land use opportunity to
[55:25] divers diversify and adapt to today's
economic realities.
[55:32] Banning events outright isn't the
answer. Enforcable [clears throat]
[55:35] rules are. Our pilot program addresses
impacts that would affect neighbors with
[55:40] binding conditions.
50 guest cap, on-site parking, and the
[55:45] uh 9:00 p.m. music cutoff. States across
the country like New Jersey and Virginia
[55:50] have already passed legislation,
recognizing that private farm events are
[55:56] essential to saving family farms. They
do this again through clear enforcable
[56:00] caps, the exact same accountability
model we're proposing tonight.
[56:05] We want to thank the nearly 900
supporters, including over 350 Little
[56:09] Compton taxpayers, who stand with us and
have signed our petition supporting the
[56:14] proposal.
We ask the board to evaluate this
[56:18] proposal based on its concrete physical
impacts and sound land use policy. Thank
[56:23] you.
[56:26] » Thank you.
[56:40] Anyone
[56:45] else want to speak?
[56:50] » Someone from your
[56:54] » Yes.
>> Yes.
[57:03] » So, my name is Jane Wear. I am taking
over White Lark Farm, which is right
[57:10] across from Peekom's greenhouse, if
everybody knows where I'm talking about.
[57:17] My father is Rusty Kabat. Um, and
I have a vested interest in Young's Farm
[57:27] being able to host weddings because that
will affect White Rock Farm in the
[57:35] future because um, as we set ourselves
up for the next generation to take over
[57:44] the farm, if they want to, I don't know.
Um,
[57:50] we need to have
other revenue outside of agricultural
[57:59] agricultural
um, things for them to be able to do and
[58:04] weddings is one of those things because
it's agricultural tourism.
[58:11] Um, and the Right to Farm Act
for Rhode Island states specifically in
[58:22] 2-23-4
agricultural operations defined is
[58:30] in that is the mixed use of farm and
farmlands for other forms of enterprise
[58:37] including but not limited to the display
of antique
[58:42] vehicles, equipment, retail sales,
tours, classes, petting, feeding and
[58:48] viewing of animals, hay rides, crop
mazes, festivals, and other special
[58:54] events are hereby recognized as valuable
and viable means of contributing to
[59:02] preservation of agricultural.
So, one of the things that came
[59:10] out was that weddings were not
agricultural.
[59:16] And
according to the definition
[59:21] of the farm, the right to farm act is
festivals and other things
[59:31] i.e. weddings are allowed on
agricultural land.
[59:37] Um,
so
[59:41] with the
2018 Little Compton comprehensive plan,
[59:50] one of the things on page 71 and 72 is
that that the town is concerned not only
[59:57] with preserving agricultural land, but
also improving the vitality of the
[1:00:03] existing agricultural operation and
maintaining rural
[1:00:08] rural economy. In many farming
communities, accessories used to support
[1:00:14] agricultural growing portions of
revenues for farmers often
[1:00:21] ne are often necessary to maintain
active farms. While the towns
[1:00:28] is generally supportive of this concept,
the strong desire of the town to ensure
[1:00:35] that commercial activities on farmland
are an appropriate scale and are
[1:00:40] directly related related to our
agricultural
[1:00:45] production of or principal use of the
land. The town should consider
[1:00:51] regulations that will support desired
and appropriate commercial activities on
[1:00:56] farms and discourage and set limits to
the types of activities will that will
[1:01:03] increase uh create a nuisance for
surrounding residential properties and
[1:01:09] compro and compromise rural and peaceful
nature of the community. with Young's
[1:01:16] Farm's proposal of a 2-year
um
[1:01:27] special license
that they will h and they've
[1:01:34] um
[1:01:37] [sighs and gasps]
limited themselves i.e.
[1:01:41] Everything will be com done by 900 pm.
The the the
[1:01:47] size of the the wedding will be either
150 people or 175. I've seen both of
[1:01:56] those numbers. Um I think is valid
[1:02:03] because it's not a
overreaching.
[1:02:08] It's it's a limited let's see how we do
with this
[1:02:17] limited number of
um weddings
[1:02:23] and if there's a problem then we can
readress it.
[1:02:32] » Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[1:02:41] My name is Lindsay June. Um, friend of
the farmer, friend of the cabbs,
[1:02:47] obviously. And not to quote anything
agricultural, and you might call this
[1:02:51] apples and oranges, but a little bit of
me feels like we were burned before.
[1:02:57] And we give a better chance to a
millionaire in a mansion in Newport who
[1:03:01] sold jewelry than we're giving to our
own local farmers
[1:03:09] to maintain and to prosper on their
land. For our future, for Little
[1:03:16] Compton's future, the Kitts had Jane
Kat. She kept Little Compton little,
[1:03:22] didn't she? She looked out for the
farmers. She looked out for the
[1:03:24] civilians. She looked out for all the
workers. while her son was off fighting
[1:03:29] in the folder for the nation. These are
good people, guys.
[1:03:35] Really good people. We don't have 100
farms
[1:03:41] in Little Compton that could handle a
150 person wedding. It's nonsense.
[1:03:48] We have a few farms and they're good
farms and they're good people and
[1:03:52] without giving them a shot. It's two
years. It's two years. They're reigning
[1:03:58] themselves in. They're begging you guys
for assistance. These are your people.
[1:04:04] These are your constituents.
Just think it through long and hard.
[1:04:09] That's all I have to say.
Thank you.
[1:04:21] Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of
the board. Uh my name is attorney Dne
[1:04:25] Ardente. For the record, I represent a
group of concerned abutters and agreed
[1:04:29] parties and residents uh within the town
of Little Compton. I wanted to mention
[1:04:33] to this planning board before I get
started, I'm very well aware of what
[1:04:37] we're doing here tonight and I'm very
well aware that the planning board also
[1:04:40] understands what we're doing here
tonight. Um, as the planning board
[1:04:44] knows, this is a process and it's the
same process for every town for passage
[1:04:48] of an ordinance. I understand that the
planning board has already issued a
[1:04:51] negative recommendation to the town
council and ultimately it's going to be
[1:04:54] the town council's duty to actually
review the ordinance, hold public
[1:04:58] comment, and take a vote on it. However,
if the planning board were to uh want to
[1:05:04] hear further input on this, I would ask
that the planning board not change its
[1:05:08] current negative recommendation for the
following reasons.
[1:05:12] I heard uh earlier some testimony
provided that this special use permit is
[1:05:17] not going to apply to every farm. Um but
the problem is is when we actually look
[1:05:21] at the text of the ordinance. There is
no limiting factors, right? It's a
[1:05:26] farming accessory use. There is no
qualifying factors for which farms are
[1:05:29] able to take advantage of it and which
farms aren't. Now that would be probably
[1:05:34] the qualifying language that you would
look for would probably be dimensionally
[1:05:37] related potentially on acreage or amount
of space or something of that nature.
[1:05:42] The only thing in this ordinance that it
actually proposes is someone engaged in
[1:05:46] farming use. So it is applicable to any
farm any farm throughout town if this
[1:05:51] ordinance was passed as written and take
advantage of the special use permit. The
[1:05:55] second part of this is I'm not aware of
any provision in the Rhode Island
[1:06:01] general laws that would allow a special
use permit to have a sunset period or be
[1:06:05] temporary. But what I am aware of after
reviewing the code and the proposed
[1:06:09] amendments is that the text as written
in this ordinance has no 2-year
[1:06:13] provision for this to be temporary. Once
this is in, as it's written, it's in.
[1:06:17] And I didn't see anything proposed that
would say it was 2 years. And I worry
[1:06:21] that the town council is going to
potentially just assume that that's
[1:06:24] drafted into there. Now, the planning
board's only concern with their
[1:06:30] recommendation and the negative
recommendation which they properly
[1:06:33] issued and the the reasons for why they
properly issued is based on the fact
[1:06:37] that this is inconsistent with the
town's comprehensive plan. And I just
[1:06:40] wanted to point out a few portions of
the comprehensive plan that uh that I
[1:06:44] think the planning board should be aware
of. Uh in the accessory uses on farms
[1:06:48] and the comprehensive plan, it provides
it is a strong desire of the town to
[1:06:52] ensure that commercial activities on
farmland are of an appropriate scale and
[1:06:56] directly related to aggricultural
production or principal use of land.
[1:07:03] Additionally,
uh limiting factors for economic
[1:07:07] development provides most importantly
economic development is limited by the
[1:07:12] desire of the residents to live in a
quiet rural community. I understand that
[1:07:16] this ordinance is limited to size and
the amount of people that can be at the
[1:07:21] venue. Uh but there are several portions
of the comprehensive plan that this also
[1:07:26] raises concerns about with the amount of
lighting. I understand that the
[1:07:30] ordinance proposes an enclosed uh event
area, but that doesn't take into
[1:07:35] consideration the amount of vehicles
that are going to be coming in and out
[1:07:38] on uh West Main Road, which I understand
currently is an unlated road. Uh and
[1:07:42] again, these are going to be patrons of
a wedding. We all know that patrons of
[1:07:45] wedding weddings drink. Uh that's a
concern that I think the town should be
[1:07:49] considering at this point in time. Um,
additionally, uh, I understand that
[1:07:54] although it's not this this board's
jurisdiction or interest to determine at
[1:07:59] this point in time, uh, the restrictions
applicable to to the Young family farm,
[1:08:03] there's a conservation restriction on
this property that directly and
[1:08:08] expressly prohibits them from engaging
in this in this use. And the last thing
[1:08:13] that I'll touch on for the board tonight
uh, is I heard reference that this is an
[1:08:19] agricultural use. Well, the problem is,
and as I'm sure the board's council,
[1:08:24] who's a phenomenal council, has advised
them many times, there's a case called
[1:08:28] Zerella versus the town of Exiter, and
our Supreme Court has specifically
[1:08:32] declared and expressly declared that
weddings and events are not an
[1:08:37] agricultural use protected under the
Right to Farm Act. Thank you.
[1:08:41] » Thank you.
[1:08:51] Good evening.
I'm uh Jack Salvagio. I'm a a butter of
[1:08:57] the young farm and um I consider myself
friends with the Youngs. I partnered
[1:09:05] with Tyler for at least 15 years to farm
my backfield. Uh got to know the family
[1:09:12] through that process and I still regard
them my friends. I I don't enjoy coming
[1:09:16] up here and having to face off my
neighbor, but that's where we are. But
[1:09:21] [clears throat]
there were a number of letters written
[1:09:24] to the planning board, town council
about this, and there were about 15
[1:09:30] letters of opposition.
At least eight to nine of those letters
[1:09:35] were direct to Butters to the Young
Farm. There were no letters of support
[1:09:41] on the young side that were direct to
Butters. And I'm
[1:09:45] I'm here to speak about being in the
butter here and what what's ahead of us.
[1:09:50] First thing I'd like to point out is
they're they're proposing 150 people for
[1:09:57] these weddings. And if you count up the
amount of people in these rows and you
[1:10:03] count the number of rows, we don't even
have 150 people
[1:10:08] sitting here. We have less than that. So
you have to add more of these people
[1:10:11] here, more of these people here,
probably to at least the front half of
[1:10:17] this room. So we're talking about this
many people
[1:10:21] um attending these weddings and the
parking that you would also assume for
[1:10:27] about this many people would come onto
the farm. Um what we're really here to
[1:10:32] talk about is a zoning change. um and
the difference between residential
[1:10:40] zoning and commercial zoning. And
the uh the the number one goal of our
[1:10:49] town's zoning ordinance is to promote
the public health, the safety, and the
[1:10:56] general welfare of the town. Okay. of
the number seven goal is to provide for
[1:11:03] the control, protection and abatement of
air, water, groundwater and noise
[1:11:10] pollution.
Okay. And I and that comes to partly
[1:11:15] what we're talking about as was just
mentioned by Dane Ardente.
[1:11:21] Uh there w this this entire case there
was a farmer in exit Rhode Island in
[1:11:26] 2018
that
[1:11:29] uh interpreted accessory use under the
right to farm act as his ability to host
[1:11:35] weddings for a fee on his farm. And
unlike our town, uh the town of Exiter
[1:11:43] uh
looked at the residents were abudding
[1:11:46] his farm and they they objected and the
solicitor took that farmer to court and
[1:11:53] this case went to the Supreme Court. And
the wording in that the wording from the
[1:11:59] the ruling, I'll read it to you right
here. It says, "After careful
[1:12:03] consideration of this issue, we agree
with the town. It is our view that the
[1:12:08] second sentence of 2-23-4
provides only a clear and unambiguous
[1:12:14] list of mixed uses that the general
assembly has recognized as a valuable
[1:12:19] and viable means of contributing to the
preservation of agriculture. That list
[1:12:24] does not include weddings. But it is our
opinion that even if the activity of
[1:12:28] hosting weddings for a fee fell within
the ambit of 2-23-4
[1:12:35] second sentence that's second sentence
that sentence would not and could not
[1:12:40] expand the definition of agricultural
operations.
[1:12:44] So what we're if you look at the
definition of residential zoning versus
[1:12:52] commercial zoning
the purpose for residential zoning it's
[1:12:56] designed for housing including single
family homes, town houses, apartments,
[1:13:01] condominiums
maintained to have a lower traffic
[1:13:05] levels and strict noise limits to ensure
quiet safe living environments.
[1:13:11] Uh the regulations for residential
zoning focus heavily on maintaining
[1:13:16] neighborhood character, lot sizes,
keeping commercial disruption out.
[1:13:22] Commercial zoning dedicated to business
operations such as retail stores,
[1:13:27] office, rents, restaurants, hotels, and
warehouses built to hire higher volumes
[1:13:33] of people and noise, delivery trucks,
heavier parking, utility demands. So,
[1:13:40] this is kind of what we're talking about
right in as in a butter right right in
[1:13:45] our neighborhood. Now, um bear with me a
second. So,
[1:13:52] I understand there's going to be a
representative here from the DEM who
[1:13:56] owns the or who
uh the conservation easement was
[1:14:02] conveyed by the Rhode Island Department
of Environmental Management. I have I
[1:14:07] have a certain I have a I have the same
easement on my own property. Um
[1:14:13] so [clears throat]
if you go to the Department of
[1:14:16] Environmental Management's actual
website today and you wanted to find out
[1:14:22] about farmland preservation which I did
which I have on my own property you read
[1:14:29] the very first uh sentence. It says the
farmland preservation program helps to
[1:14:33] ensure that farming remains viable in
that state in the state. It does this by
[1:14:39] purchasing development rights from
farmers which enable them to retain
[1:14:44] ownership of their property while
protecting the land for agricultural
[1:14:48] use. Um not commercial use, agricultural
use. And if you go down and they're
[1:14:55] frequent frequently asked question,
[gasps]
[1:14:58] what is a development right? The
acquisition of development rights is a
[1:15:04] purchase right or easement to the
property which restricts all future use
[1:15:09] except those relating to farming with a
goal of permanently protecting the best
[1:15:13] farmland farmland and preserving a base
of agricultural land for food protection
[1:15:19] and open space. Selling development
rights enables a land owner to keep land
[1:15:25] in agricultural use. And finally on
their website
[1:15:32] and their frequently asked question once
I sell my development rights how will my
[1:15:37] property be restricted
and it gives three or four restrictions.
[1:15:41] Final one is no use other than
agriculture.
[1:15:45] So, even if we have the DEM supporting
weddings, and I support expanded uses
[1:15:53] for farms, this is really about weddings
and corporate events on farms. It's not
[1:15:58] about farm-to-table dinners, uh, you
know, some of the festivals Tyler's had,
[1:16:04] we nobody's had any issue like that. But
the abutters and one thing that was
[1:16:09] mentioned here earlier that was on some
things on that card were not accurate.
[1:16:13] If you take the GIS map of the young
farm,
[1:16:18] one thing that the Agricultural Land
Preservation Commission has said is we
[1:16:23] will allow you to have farms on that
farm of 180 acres, but it can only be on
[1:16:30] the equivalent of about a five to 6 acre
parcel pushed right up against the homes
[1:16:36] on West Main Road. And if you take the
GIS map, which you can do, and you use
[1:16:41] their measurement tool, there are three
homes, including the Youngs, which could
[1:16:44] be sold in the future, that are 70 ft
away from that border. That border only
[1:16:50] extends another 200 ft total from that
back wall approximately. So, so you
[1:16:57] really are not talking about 180 acre
farm. You're talking about a 6 acre
[1:17:01] parcel, 5 to 6 acre parcel pushed right
up against the West Main Road homes. And
[1:17:07] that's how it should be looked at.
Finally, uh, with regard to the
[1:17:10] comprehensive plan,
>> Mr. Salvage, I'm just going to ask you
[1:17:15] to try to wrap this up.
>> Yeah. Okay. I'll finish up.
[1:17:17] » You're going about five minutes. I
>> All right. Thank you.
[1:17:19] » Just earlier that we try to keep these
comments to about three minutes.
[1:17:22] » Okay. I'll just I'll just read two
goals. One of them was was already said.
[1:17:28] I said it says a strong desire of our
town to ensure that commercial
[1:17:31] activities on farmland are of an
appropriate scale and are directly
[1:17:34] related to agricult production or
principal use of land and to discourage
[1:17:39] or set limits on the types of activities
which may create a nuisance for
[1:17:43] surrounding residential neighbors or
compromise the rural and peaceful nature
[1:17:47] of the community. And there have been
some people suggest you know we we close
[1:17:51] our windows. Uh you know little kids
little b you little three-year-old kids
[1:17:56] which the young baby sap for my kid when
they're 3 years old they they go to bed
[1:18:01] at 7:00 at night and we like to sleep
with our windows open little Compton and
[1:18:07] we like to sleep where we're not hearing
150 people in our backyard 10 times a
[1:18:12] year. Thank you.
[1:18:23] Good evening. Um, Chairman Steers, a
member of the planning boards. My name
[1:18:26] is Eileen Stores Celino and my husband
and I live at Two Butts Rock Road. My
[1:18:31] husband and I are a Butters at a family
farm on Shaw Road, Wishing Stone Farm
[1:18:36] that would be affected by this revised
zoning ordinance to inject commercial
[1:18:40] businesses like weddings into a
residential neighborhood. We're here
[1:18:45] tonight because of a dangerous myth
circulating by neighbors who do not abut
[1:18:49] the farm who have com commented that
there's a middle path or an easy
[1:18:53] compromise that can regulate commercial
weddings on farmland. I'm not sure they
[1:18:58] understand the implication of a townwide
zoning regulation change. Or if they do,
[1:19:03] they aren't living right next door to
the location of a farm that may become a
[1:19:08] wedding venue. As my compatriots already
said, this room is probably a good size
[1:19:14] or estimate of what a wedding like that
might be. And in speaking directly to
[1:19:18] one of those neighbors, when I asked
them how they would feel living across
[1:19:22] the street from a farm with weddings,
they admitted they would not like it at
[1:19:26] all. It's easy to advocate for a
compromise when you are an armchair
[1:19:31] observer living safely down the street,
far out of earshot. Another neighbor
[1:19:36] also mentioned by someone else here, not
in a butter actually advised that we
[1:19:40] close our windows.
But for my family, living under a 100 ft
[1:19:45] from a farm in the residential
agricultural zone, a middle path does
[1:19:50] not exist. We love the tractors, the
working soil. We knew what we moved
[1:19:54] into. We knew there was a farm across
the street. We rejoiced. We had a lovely
[1:19:59] organic farm. But that's a vast
structural difference between the sounds
[1:20:04] of agriculture and small to farm table
dinners and other appropriately scaled
[1:20:10] agricultural accessory uses versus 150
person weddings with amplified music at
[1:20:16] night going on until late in the
evening. And as aside, I have my
[1:20:19] grandchildren coming here shortly and I
don't want to have to close the windows.
[1:20:23] We moved here because Little Compton is
beautiful and we've been coming down
[1:20:27] here for 45 years and we was our dream
to buy this home and be close to the
[1:20:33] ocean and around all the farms. So, this
is absolutely just crushing and so
[1:20:38] stressful. But the e acoustic and
ecological reality is that we are in a
[1:20:44] rural environment and this zoning
rewrite is directly threatening that
[1:20:49] piece. Not just for human residents but
for the local environment. Our dark
[1:20:54] skies, our wildlife, we heard uh great
horned owls the other night. I don't
[1:20:59] think we're going to hear those over the
music and lights. The directives of the
[1:21:03] comprehensive plan were extremely clear.
There's proposed v the proposed zoning
[1:21:08] rewrite explicitly contradicts many of
those uh directives which have already
[1:21:12] been mentioned but things like
residential character protect the
[1:21:16] residential character from nuisance that
generate excessive noise light pollution
[1:21:20] or traffic. Also, the comprehensive plan
speaks expansively about sustaining
[1:21:26] rural landscapes, directing growth away
from farms and forest areas into
[1:21:32] villages and existing commercial areas,
being compatible with the aesthetic
[1:21:37] quality of the community and minimizing
the negative environmental impacts. In
[1:21:41] other words, keeping Little Compton a
quiet and beautiful place.
[1:21:46] This commercial, this proposal also
raises fundamental questions about the
[1:21:51] economic priorities and the unverified
narrative that our farmers are in
[1:21:55] trouble. We don't have proof of that.
I'm sorry, I have financial backgrounds,
[1:21:59] but we don't have proof of that. And the
reality is that local farmers today in
[1:22:04] Little Compton receive massive amounts
of land for free to support their
[1:22:08] operations through the Little Compton
Agricultural Trust, which we contributed
[1:22:13] to, the DEM, Sakconet Preservation
Association, and the Nature Conservancy.
[1:22:19] Our community already heavily subsidizes
agriculture to keep it viable. Pushing
[1:22:25] commercial operations into quiet
residential agricultural zones is a
[1:22:29] failure of planning that compromises
compromises neighborhoods rather than
[1:22:33] doing the hard work of supporting an
active commercial center. And I will
[1:22:38] just comment we have seen a real decline
in our commercial activity here and that
[1:22:42] is a problem that I think that the town
council and the town needs to pay
[1:22:46] attention to.
>> Miss Selena, we're going on about four
[1:22:48] and a half minutes. Could you please
comments? Um, I just want to talk
[1:22:52] personally about what we we dealt with
um in 2015 and 2016. We had
[1:22:58] unmititigated noise next door to us. We
did not get any reaction from town
[1:23:04] council or the police. We were told to
stop calling. There was also multi-year
[1:23:09] litigation at Carolyn Sconet Vineyard.
There were no noise limits uh that were
[1:23:14] enforced. And today, Little Compton does
not have the infrastructure to manage
[1:23:19] it. And in fact, the budgeted police
force today is the same with 10
[1:23:24] policemen that there were in 2016. So
increased costs. We are going to see
[1:23:29] Little Compton residents are going to be
facing larger tax bills. It will require
[1:23:34] a larger police force, more zoning
inspectors, and an increased number of
[1:23:38] fire department personnel. And abutterss
are going to see a decline in the value
[1:23:42] of their real estate. So, we'll be
asking for some mitigation in our
[1:23:47] assessed values and as um attorney
already stood up and talked about there
[1:23:52] will be likely lit litigation that the
town will need to pay for. So, the town
[1:23:57] and the town uh planning board has
already been given some very good
[1:24:00] direction from the town solicitor. The
Zerella versus extor.
[1:24:06] » Yes. And I'm wrapping it up. I will
>> but I am
[1:24:11] I'm wrapping it up. I urge the planning
board to stand by its previous logic and
[1:24:17] town council when presented with this
zoning change and say no to protect our
[1:24:22] residential neighborhoods, protect our
local environment, and soundly reject
[1:24:26] this short-sighted proposal for our
family for generations to come. Thank
[1:24:31] you very much.
>> Thank you.
[1:24:37] I'd just like to reiterate, we asked for
people to keep their comments to about
[1:24:42] three minutes if they could. We have
people standing in line. I'm sure that
[1:24:47] there more people are going to comment.
The meeting has to be closed by 9:15.
[1:24:51] We're not going to get to everybody if
we're all doing five minutes.
[1:24:55] » Thank you.
>> And you're welcome. Can you hear me?
[1:24:59] My name is Barbara Passmore on West Main
Road and I'm a butter to the far to the
[1:25:05] fam farm young family farm and they've
been good neighbors. But as a farmer's
[1:25:13] daughter, I ask that you not change the
rules that would take away our town's
[1:25:19] tranquility,
uniqueness, and simplicity. Help us to
[1:25:24] keep our farms for farming and keep our
town like no other that we have known in
[1:25:32] all these centuries. I ask you not to
agree to this. Thank you.
[1:25:50] I'm Amanda Nickerson Toasty. I am 253
West Main Road. Any of you any of you
[1:25:57] that have purchased produce at Young
Family Farm have seen my house. I live
[1:26:02] directly across from the entrance. Uh 9
years ago, my husband and I bought our
[1:26:07] home. We would like the Youngs to know
that we support them and their right to
[1:26:13] have weddings on their property. They
are our friends.
[1:26:18] They have been any time I have gone to
Carla about the corn honking sign,
[1:26:25] the great corn honking event. Anytime we
across the road have had a problem that
[1:26:30] has been very small in our opinion,
very, very small. We've gone to Carla or
[1:26:36] Tyler. I have their cell phone numbers.
If Tyler is about to start irrigating
[1:26:40] and using the wells, he texts me and
it's usually along the lines of, "Hey
[1:26:45] kid, if you have any trouble, let us
know." We support their right to have
[1:26:50] weddings on their farm. We would ask
daytime if it could if if we do
[1:26:57] introduce weddings in some capacity into
our farms, which if you support agro
[1:27:02] tourism, weddings are a part of that.
farm-to-table weddings. You want to see
[1:27:07] the produce, you want to see the fields,
you want to get married in the vines, in
[1:27:13] the pumpkins, whatever it is. Um, but
what we would say is when the family
[1:27:19] weddings have happened, which we have no
complaints. Many of them are our
[1:27:22] friends. Um, my bedroom faces the farm
stand. So, every single vehicle that
[1:27:29] doesn't follow their very detailed
parking, and they've done a great job at
[1:27:34] parking people on the farm. I used to be
the crazy lady putting caution tape so
[1:27:39] people wouldn't hit my stone wall
because stuff happens. They within the
[1:27:43] next season modified and moved all the
parking from West Main Road into the
[1:27:49] farm. They've seen dangers. They've
mitigated in the past. Um, my main thing
[1:27:55] would be if it could be a daytime event
where if the farm stand were allowed to
[1:28:00] extend their hours to maybe 6:00 p.m. or
700 p.m. I can tell you I can tell time
[1:28:07] by 5:34 a.m. Tyler is in that tractor
and he's in the front field. We hear him
[1:28:14] all night, all year in his tractor
trailer, air braing right in front of my
[1:28:20] bedroom. But we understand that's food.
That's the food bank donations that they
[1:28:25] make. That's all of the other good
things that they do. I believe we need
[1:28:29] to support Wishing Stone. And also, I am
a unique butter. I share 488 ft of stone
[1:28:36] wall with Ian Walker. So, not only do I
live across the street from the Youngs,
[1:28:41] I purposefully bought a home 9 years ago
next to Cole Walker. We love looking out
[1:28:47] our windows watching Cole in the
tractor. We love looking out our
[1:28:51] windows. What I don't like is the idea
of 75 to 100 cars coming out at my
[1:28:57] bedroom. The breakdown of a wedding if
it ends at 900 p.m. Those of us that
[1:29:03] have worked for local caterers know
that's not staff breaking down. That's
[1:29:08] not chairs, tables. That's not any of
the cleanup that needs to be done. We do
[1:29:12] live in the woods. All of the food needs
to be cleaned up and secured and
[1:29:16] removed. So, there's a lot more work
that goes into a 900 p.m. event ending
[1:29:21] with 10 p.m. guests out the catering
staff and it's not their fault and it's
[1:29:26] nothing that Tyler or Carla could
control or any farm voices in the night.
[1:29:32] It sounds like they're in our bedroom.
So, again, I would say we support
[1:29:37] weddings daytime use maybe until 7. We
would just love to see a little bit more
[1:29:44] rained in on what exactly. And then also
the daytime events. They're daytime
[1:29:49] events we've had no problem with. So if
this was something we could fold in and
[1:29:53] talk more about, um, we are the voice of
disscent in the neighborhood. We support
[1:29:58] you.
[1:30:10] » Hello. Good evening everyone. Uh my name
is Ananda Fraser. I am the acting chief
[1:30:15] of the division of agriculture and
forest and environment at the DEM.
[1:30:21] I am here representing the department of
environmental management to express our
[1:30:26] strong support for the young family farm
and its proposal.
[1:30:30] The young family farm is exactly the
kind of agricultural operation Rhode
[1:30:34] Island has worked decades to protect.
For nearly 30 years, the young family
[1:30:39] has farmed more than 300 acres,
producing food for Little Compton, Rhode
[1:30:43] Island, and markets throughout the
Northeast. Importantly, there is now a
[1:30:48] second generation that wants to continue
their agricultural legacy.
[1:30:53] This is not something that should be
ignored. It should be encouraged.
[1:30:58] When we talk about protecting farmland,
we cannot simply focus on the land and
[1:31:02] allow it to beow. We have to keep the
land in active agricultural production.
[1:31:08] And for that to happen, farms have to be
viable. Not just financially viable, but
[1:31:14] viable across generations.
Agriculture has changed. Costs have
[1:31:20] increased. Markets have changed. And
island farms generally do not have the
[1:31:25] economies of scale available
that larger operations would. Farms
[1:31:32] therefore need the ability to diversify
and develop additional sources of
[1:31:36] revenue that complement and support
their agricultural production.
[1:31:42] That is particularly important for Rhode
Island agriculture. The average age of
[1:31:47] Rhode Island agricultural producer is
over 57 years old. At the same time, 41%
[1:31:54] of producers are considered new and
beginning farmers. We have the highest
[1:31:58] percentage in the nation. This is the
exact scenario at Young Family Farm. We
[1:32:03] have people who want to continue farming
and at the division of agriculture, it's
[1:32:08] our responsibility to make sure that
they have the ability to continue
[1:32:11] farming that property for decades to
come.
[1:32:15] Farms face unique pressures. We continue
to lose farms over time. Rhode Island
[1:32:21] had,243
farms in 2012
[1:32:26] compared to just over a thousand farms
today. That's almost a 16 16% decline or
[1:32:33] 200 farms in the last decade.
Every time a working farm leaves
[1:32:38] production, we lose more than just the
farmland. We lose the food production,
[1:32:42] the economic activity, open space,
agricultural knowledge and an
[1:32:47] opportunity for the next generation.
This is why the young farmley family
[1:32:52] farms proposal is so important. Agurism
and the diversification of agricultural
[1:32:57] activities can provide farms the
flexibility to remain in business while
[1:33:01] continuing their primary agricultural
operations. A farm market, education
[1:33:07] program, seasonal activities,
agricultural experience, and even
[1:33:10] hosting a wedding that highlights food
and flowers produced on the farm can
[1:33:15] create an opportunity to sustain
agriculture while connecting people with
[1:33:19] the land. The Young's plan is that the
fundamental purpose of the property
[1:33:25] remains in agriculture. Diversification
is a tool to support that purpose and
[1:33:30] help ensure the farm can continue
operating.
[1:33:34] Rhode Island recognized th this reality
through its right to farm act and its
[1:33:38] recognition of the diversification of
agriculture activities means as a means
[1:33:43] of supporting the preservation of
agriculture.
[1:33:46] So from the division's perspective, I
come back to a simple question. What can
[1:33:51] we do to make sure that farms remain in
agriculture as working farms for the
[1:33:58] next generation?
In this case, we have a family that
[1:34:02] wants to continue farming hundreds of
acres in Little Compton and a new
[1:34:06] generation prepared to take up that
responsibility.
[1:34:09] We strongly support giving them the
opportunity to do that. At the end of
[1:34:13] the day, preserving farmland is
extraordinarily important, but
[1:34:17] preserving working farms is the goal. We
want to see the Young Family Farm
[1:34:22] continue to produce food, support the
local economy, steward the land, and
[1:34:26] provide an opportunity for another
generation of Rhode Island farmers to
[1:34:30] make a living from agriculture. Thank
you.
[1:34:41] I also just want to put on the record, I
have sent in a letter to the planning
[1:34:46] board, but on the record that the young
family farm does have an easement um
[1:34:51] through the the DEM, the division of
agriculture. However, they did go
[1:34:55] through the necessary channels for
approval for the event for the weddings
[1:35:00] event planned on the farm and it was
approved in late 2024. So I just want to
[1:35:05] make sure that they have gone through
the necessary channels to make sure that
[1:35:07] they are in compliance with their
easement and nothing that is proposed
[1:35:11] would um would be in uh juxaposition of
their their current easement. Thank you.
[1:35:28] » Good evening. My name is Heidi Quinn.
I'm the executive director of Rhode
[1:35:31] Island Farm Bureau. Um, much of what
Ananda says expresses our views as well.
[1:35:37] So, I'm going to be a little bit more
brief. Uh, the most recent USDA census
[1:35:41] of agriculture shows Rhode Island to
have the highest percentage of new and
[1:35:44] beginning Sorry, new I'm from Rhode
Island. I apologize. Um, new and
[1:35:48] beginning farmers in the nation. If we
do not allow our farms to be profitable,
[1:35:53] the next generation of farmers cannot
succeed.
[1:35:57] Farm succession, either family to family
or outside the family, is one way to
[1:36:01] maintain current a acreage, but only if
farms can be profitable. It is far
[1:36:06] easier to sell off the land. Currently,
Rhode Island has the highest
[1:36:10] agricultural land value in the country
at $23,000 per acre. To compare, the
[1:36:16] national average is $4,300 per acre. All
of New All of the Northeast has an
[1:36:22] average value of $7,500 per acre.
The Youngs have preserved land, but
[1:36:29] there is a lot of agricultural land that
is not preserved in Little Compton and
[1:36:33] other areas of the state. It is much
easier to sell that land than to try to
[1:36:37] fail at farming. As farm input costs
increase, fuel, seed, fertilizer,
[1:36:43] equipment, insurance, product prices
cannot keep pace. Without profit, what
[1:36:48] is there to keep farmers farming?
Agurism and diversification of a
[1:36:53] activities is an increasingly common way
for farms to support their businesses
[1:36:58] economic stability while at the same
time giving guests the opportunity to
[1:37:02] experience the farm.
The Young family farm has offered a
[1:37:06] well-thoughtout proposal to allow them
to host agurism events while maintaining
[1:37:11] an authentic agricultural connection to
their farm. These events will help them
[1:37:15] to continue to strengthen their own
economic viability and that of the
[1:37:19] farm's next generation while continuing
to respect the community that they are a
[1:37:23] part of. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[1:37:38] » All right. My name is Skip Paul. I'm
probably one of the oldest farmers in
[1:37:43] Little Compton at this point. I'm 74
years old and luckily I have a 35 year
[1:37:48] old son that's going to take up the
mantle and keep going with it. I've been
[1:37:53] a 46 year town resident and uh running
stone farm for a good 40 years of that.
[1:38:01] I want to support the uh young family
farms uh farm ordinance uh accessory
[1:38:08] because I want to think it's a and
everybody seems to be getting all
[1:38:12] bunched up about changing the town plan
and reszoning everything. We're just
[1:38:16] looking for an example for him to try
something out for two years. And uh I
[1:38:22] think that's really important to begin
with. People get all freaked out that
[1:38:26] we're going to change the town u
ordinances and everything. Um, I also
[1:38:32] like to give our small perspective on
farming in Little Compton. And uh,
[1:38:36] another thing I want to comment is the
extraordinary means that wellunded
[1:38:41] opposition has gone to inflate fear,
misrepresent facts, and gaslight the
[1:38:47] farming community and the town into
believing that allowing farm weddings
[1:38:52] will bring decades of out of control
events which will ruin life as we know
[1:38:57] it.
And I've seen misrepresentation coming
[1:39:01] through cards, video, the amount of
money spent on uh websites and stuff and
[1:39:07] a lot of it's gone way over the top.
It's almost become vitriolic and we're
[1:39:12] just trying to experiment to see how how
a system would work for two years. Um
[1:39:18] the town can build whatever parameters
it wants to and protocols to be met. The
[1:39:23] weddings don't have to go from 5 to
10:00. They can go from 1 to 7. public
[1:39:28] can be done. Nobody's headlights are
bothering anybody. The town traffic is
[1:39:32] uh can be moderated. Um the town parking
will be contained in their farm. Their
[1:39:37] farm is plenty of size to to take the uh
farm uh parking. Noise town ordinances
[1:39:44] will be met. Um
I don't think we have to change the town
[1:39:49] plan, but it it's good to have an
experiment for two years.
[1:39:54] Um
[1:39:58] trying to save you a lot of my extra
ideas here. Um but this the whole
[1:40:04] subject of that there's a hundred farms
in town and that we're we're in danger
[1:40:08] of having all these people with card
tabletop people selling eggs and
[1:40:14] zucchini as if they were there going to
be a new type of farm that's going to
[1:40:18] register to try to be do weddings and
everything else. I also like to mention
[1:40:24] hearken back to like Nelson Farm was
doing weddings four or five years ago
[1:40:29] and it wasn't until some wealthy
neighbor
[1:40:33] got enough lawyers and forced them to
shut it down. And so um I say that
[1:40:39] little Compton, this famous rural
character was created by agriculture and
[1:40:43] the fishing industry. Families like Gary
Maderas
[1:40:48] and Cole Walker silently were the
backdrop to the alluring character that
[1:40:53] Little Compton still is today.
Yet some of the new wellto-do residents
[1:40:59] have any of their impact to the extent
that Walker stand was closed because his
[1:41:06] son couldn't protect a sweet corn with a
gas cannon. I was in an agricultural
[1:41:12] land tr the agricultural land trust
committee meeting and some wealthy guy
[1:41:16] got up and said I didn't work all my
life to buy a piece of land to have this
[1:41:20] cannon going off for 10 days and ruined
my summer and I got up right after you
[1:41:25] stood up and said sir don't tell me you
don't invest in the stock market you
[1:41:29] wouldn't buy a stock and have no idea
you have somebody look at what the what
[1:41:33] the parameters are for what that's going
to be I'm sorry you didn't look at your
[1:41:37] land next to a piece of land that the
guys been using a cannon for 25 years to
[1:41:42] protect his his crops. And
the farming community doesn't want a
[1:41:50] hand up, but needs some community
awareness of the financial needs that a
[1:41:54] limited agricultural income requires.
Many East Coast farmers, 85% of them now
[1:42:00] they say, need a husband or wife that
has off
[1:42:04] seasonal job of teaching or some other
work to make ends meet.
[1:42:09] If the wedding concept doesn't pass,
please don't take aim at farm-to-table
[1:42:14] school bus tools and apple festivals.
And my last comment I love to call
[1:42:19] walkie was a friend of mine. Walkers
didn't close by lack of money, more from
[1:42:24] the lack of the community's interest and
supporting the value of the commodity
[1:42:29] they offered.
Thank you.
[1:42:50] I don't there's no way that I can
uh follow, you know, the words of a real
[1:42:57] farmer and a real hard worker like Skip
Paul. Um but I'll try.
[1:43:04] I'm speaking. My name is Jim Piatt. I
live on Amesberry Lane. I'm an
[1:43:08] architect. I'm speaking tonight in
support of the Young family farm
[1:43:12] proposal for a pilot program.
I and probably everyone in this room in
[1:43:17] support or oppos opposition to the
Young's proposal values the farm and its
[1:43:22] products as they relate both to their
delightful consumption but also as part
[1:43:26] of the more intangible
and aesthetic enjoyment of the
[1:43:30] ruralesque
environment of the town itself.
[1:43:36] I though apparently not everyone take it
at the young family's word
[1:43:41] and also the word of other farmers like
Skip and other families. People can read
[1:43:45] about it across the country. We heard
the state representative talk about it
[1:43:50] that farming crops in themselves does
not provide a sustainable living for a
[1:43:55] farm family.
I'm 77 years old. I've been working
[1:43:59] since the age of 14. generally hunched
over a drawing board, but sometimes in
[1:44:04] construction labor. And so I figure, as
many might, that I have worked hard.
[1:44:11] But I have for a long time been aware
that there are others, farmers for sure,
[1:44:16] who work much harder physically, start
their mornings earlier at 4:30, and
[1:44:20] don't quit at my closing time. They take
extraordinary risks financially for
[1:44:26] tools and seed with their fortune such
as it is determined as much by weather
[1:44:32] as by skill. And then we all who sit on
the sidelines in safe and secure
[1:44:37] occupations hope that the farmer's
children will want to continue the
[1:44:42] family tradition.
It's a romantic notion that I wouldn't
[1:44:47] bet on. In Switzerland, by comparison,
the government pays subsidies that
[1:44:53] account for approximately 50% of a
farmer's income. So, the farms will not
[1:44:58] only survive for their produce, but also
enhance the landscape quality based on
[1:45:04] legally determined aesthetic
concepts of beauty, ecology, and
[1:45:09] tradition. And yet here in Little
Compton, we hope the farmers will just
[1:45:14] keep doing it so the rest of us can have
a bucolic landscape to drive by and eat
[1:45:20] a peach.
[1:45:28] The Youngs are asking for a permit for
an event to occur on 10 days a year,
[1:45:32] creating increased activity for those 10
days. Well, the rest of us, for every
[1:45:37] day from mid-spring to midfall, we all
accept outdoors, the unbidden and
[1:45:42] unlimited noise of lawnmowers, leaf
blowers, airplanes overhead, motorcycles
[1:45:47] in convoys of a hundred, neighbors,
outdoor parties and weddings, boom
[1:45:52] boxes, dogs parking at all hours, and
did I mention fireworks?
[1:45:56] Well, some of these can be managed by
calling them police. Most we cannot
[1:46:00] change. or we choose not to in the
spirit of live and let live which is how
[1:46:05] I go about my life.
I support the Young's proposal. All the
[1:46:10] concerns about how Little Compton will
deal that as a practical matter that can
[1:46:13] be worked out. Perhaps volunteers such
as myself to what to help with
[1:46:18] monitoring drawing plans of the site to
show what they're trying to do etc.
[1:46:24] The alternative may at some not too
distant point in the future be the
[1:46:28] collapse of the farms when there is no
one in the family who can make sense out
[1:46:33] of being a farmer. Those holes in the
landscape will be filled by more big
[1:46:39] houses with plenty of peace and quiet.
Thank you.
[1:46:55] Good evening. Uh, my name is Rob
Galford. I live at 35 Butts Rock Road,
[1:47:00] just a stones throw or a shout down from
Swishing Stone Farm. As you may have
[1:47:05] seen included in the record, I wrote the
letter that was published in the Zakon
[1:47:09] at times suggesting and saying that you
don't really need to make that stark a
[1:47:13] choice between banning all such events
on one hand and devol defaulting to
[1:47:18] parties run a mock on the other. Tonight
in three minutes or less, I promise uh
[1:47:24] I'm here to offer a different focused
perspective on how and why such items as
[1:47:28] the farm accessory ordinance and special
use permits can and should indeed
[1:47:33] accommodate both these all these kinds
of activities. In one of my earliest
[1:47:38] jobs in the hospitality industry, I
worked for a specialty caterer at more
[1:47:44] than a 100 weddings, remote weddings and
celebrations in parks, private gardens,
[1:47:49] estates, and farms. Exactly the kinds of
setting that the youngs are proposing.
[1:47:55] It's a complicated business to run
off-site events where everything, and I
[1:47:59] do mean everything, is brought in. An
entire catering kitchen and everything
[1:48:03] that goes with it. and they can't forget
a thing because here's the important
[1:48:07] part. Having those things ready on the
site are not the business of a farm or a
[1:48:12] park or a garden. Their business is
simply growing things for people to
[1:48:17] enjoy and to share it with with them in
a place of their own. And the successful
[1:48:22] caterers and suppliers are masters at
making it work with hosting locations in
[1:48:28] the single most important category,
which is respecting the rules. These
[1:48:33] specialty caterers, such as the ones
I've worked for, work closely with the
[1:48:38] host locations on adhering to rules
about safety, parking, timing, lighting,
[1:48:43] and everything else. If a town says no
music after 9:00 p.m., you can be sure
[1:48:49] that the band starts to play Last Dance
or Don't Stop Believing at 8:47.
[1:48:55] They make they turn down cash bribes of
$1,000 or more from fathers of the bride
[1:49:01] to keep the music going. And they never
get those bribes accepted. They hire
[1:49:07] local people whenever possible. They
pride themselves on preparing meals
[1:49:11] using ingredients grown right on that
site. They work closely with the towns,
[1:49:16] police, and hosting locations and
staying within the rules. And that's how
[1:49:20] they stay in business. That's why
specialty event kinds of catering
[1:49:26] understands exactly what has to be done
and to make this work. And hosting
[1:49:30] farms, however, hosting farms are in the
business of growing things for the
[1:49:34] people to enjoy. And that's what they
want to do. Their intention is not to be
[1:49:38] in the catering business, but to put
their farming places in the best light.
[1:49:42] And they don't get rich from being a
fake farm with a catering business.
[1:49:46] That's not what they want to do. They
are real farms and there are very few of
[1:49:50] them left and we are very lucky in
Little Compton to have places like
[1:49:54] Youngs and Wishing Stone and Small World
in our midst where farming is what they
[1:49:59] do and they do what they can to support
and continue that and limited event
[1:50:04] hosting 10 days perhaps out of 365 would
be one of those things. So please let's
[1:50:11] not make it any harder for them than it
already is. Thank you.
[1:50:28] Jane wear again. Um so I have a couple
of things. Um
[1:50:36] this is my child. We are looking at
generational farming. Um, and one of the
[1:50:43] things we want to do is looking at
diversifying our farm in order to make
[1:50:50] the next generation be able to make it
profitable.
[1:50:56] Um, [sighs and gasps] the other thing I
would like to ask is what is a
[1:51:01] commercial wedding? Because one of the
things that was put out on the postcard
[1:51:08] that was sent to everybody is that
commercial weddings was going to be a
[1:51:14] thing. I don't understand what a
commercial wedding is. In my opinion,
[1:51:19] weddings are personal. So, how do you
make a wedding commercial? Um, and then
[1:51:27] I talked to somebody else and they were
like, "Oh, well, if you're a wedding
[1:51:30] planner, it's a commercial wedding. You
you do that for a living."
[1:51:37] Well, if you're only doing it for five
or eight times out of the year,
[1:51:44] that's
not a commercial wedding.
[1:51:48] Um,
the other thing is
[1:51:53] if our farm, White Rock Farm, across
from Peekom's greenhouse were to ask for
[1:52:02] a
uh variance or a a permit to have one
[1:52:09] wedding, would that be a problem?
If that's not a problem, then why is
[1:52:15] this why is Young's farm asking for a
permit or or a problem? If you would let
[1:52:23] one farm
have a wedding one time,
[1:52:29] why is it a problem to let this one
Young's farm
[1:52:34] have five weddings in one year
if they follow the rules that they've
[1:52:40] set out which they have set out that
they would have off?
[1:52:45] » Miss Weir, I'm just going to ask you to
wrap up your comments. We have three
[1:52:47] more people. We're almost there. So,
>> okay. Thank you.
[1:53:02] » Um, good evening. I'm Cherry Bar and I
live at 231 West Main Road. So, first
[1:53:09] I'd just like to thank everybody for
coming here. Um it's a very sensitive
[1:53:16] subject and we do have differing
viewpoints
[1:53:21] but this issue is
creating hostility
[1:53:27] and I hope we can get beyond that. I
mean I have to say when I go to Young's
[1:53:33] farm which I do almost daily I don't
even go to the cash register. I just use
[1:53:38] the honesty box because this issue is
getting way too personal. So, I did
[1:53:45] actually have a lot of comments. So, I
know that we're very pressed for time.
[1:53:50] So, I just would like to say them very
quickly. Um, the ALPC easement contains
[1:53:56] a pond and repairarian area which is
near to the wedding venue and which is
[1:54:01] home to including not but not limited to
deer, coyote, fox, barred owls, wild
[1:54:08] turkey, small animals, and multiple
species of birds. The easement
[1:54:14] specifically states, "The premises has
over 180 acres of land with splendid
[1:54:22] views. major habitat types common to the
area, woodlands, agricultural fields, as
[1:54:30] well as repairing corridors and other
natural areas.
[1:54:35] Has anybody requested that any kind of
environmental study be performed to see
[1:54:40] what the impact of noise and lights are
on the area and the the wildlife in this
[1:54:46] area?
It seems to me that should be
[1:54:50] considered. Secondly, I'd like to speak
to um
[1:54:55] some of the diagrams that I've seen in
the licensing application
[1:55:03] uh entertainment licensing application.
The Young submitted a diagram
[1:55:10] um which showed the activities
fully within the easement area
[1:55:17] um in which they're allowed to have
agricultural structures.
[1:55:21] In the current proposal, they show a
completely different diagram. And I can
[1:55:27] assure you if that diagram were scaled,
had layout areas, had property lines and
[1:55:34] easements, you would notice that the
entire tent is is is beyond the
[1:55:41] agricultural area for structures. So I
think that really somebody needs to look
[1:55:46] at this a little bit more carefully.
Um
[1:55:51] I mean this kind of goes to another
thing which I just really want to touch
[1:55:55] on.
um because I know we're we're very short
[1:55:59] of time.
[1:56:03] All right. Well, I don't have my notes,
so I'll just uh summarize it here. In
[1:56:09] the application um for the entertainment
license
[1:56:15] um which was granted
um
[1:56:21] farm to folk to farm farm to fork
dinners was approved.
[1:56:26] This was completely inconsistent
with what the zoning board said. They
[1:56:33] said farmtofork dinners are not allowed.
In addition,
[1:56:40] the the application asks that a diagram
be submitted that is scaled and includes
[1:56:49] measurements.
And the answer from the Youngs on that
[1:56:53] was yes.
The diagram had no scales. It had
[1:56:58] absolutely no dimensions.
So
[1:57:02] where is the coordination
between what one department says and
[1:57:08] what is being permitted?
Why aren't you why are you approving
[1:57:16] applications which are actually
incorrect and incompliant?
[1:57:22] That really raises a lot of red flags
for me when we are talking about these
[1:57:28] much larger issues.
And then I will just say one other
[1:57:33] thing.
The cabbas are on the north side of my
[1:57:38] property. The dressers who also have a
farm are on the west and the south side
[1:57:43] of my property. The peckhams are a tenth
of a mile away. And the youngs are a
[1:57:48] tenth of a mile away. If each of these
farms can have 10 weddings a year, that
[1:57:55] is 40 weddings a year.
All of which are going to happen in the
[1:58:01] summer months.
Is that right that I can't open my
[1:58:06] windows because there's amplified music
for 40 nights of my summer?
[1:58:13] What does this do to my property value?
I'm already thinking that when I sell my
[1:58:19] house, I'll have to say, "Hey, extra
bonus, free music on Thursday, Fridays,
[1:58:25] Saturdays, and Sundays." So, I again I
want to conclude this by saying I am
[1:58:32] totally in support of appropriately
scaled farming and you know, revenue
[1:58:39] generating activities. I do not believe
wedding venues fit within this or fit
[1:58:45] within the comprehensive plan.
So be nice everybody.
[1:58:51] » Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[1:58:55] » Well, I could have gotten a bigger class
if you don't agree with what I said.
[1:59:06] » I met the ones that grant the permit to
me.
[1:59:13] Hello. I'm gonna speak now. Uh my name
is Alexandra Greenwood and I keep
[1:59:18] hearing tonight that we want to keep
Little Compton little and quiet. And I
[1:59:23] think that if we don't support this
proposal, it's going to be a ghost town.
[1:59:27] Um we need to shift with the times. We
need to pivot. And I think everyone has
[1:59:31] been affected by the increasing cost of
literally everything. You know, that
[1:59:38] might be getting a second job, having to
be a stay-at-home mom because daycare is
[1:59:44] too freaking expensive. Um, we're all
just trying to financially survive right
[1:59:49] now. And these financial pressures have
touched farmers, especially the people
[1:59:53] who feed you. And no offense, Tyler and
Carla, but this is like the least
[1:59:59] creative thing that you could do is
being a wedding venue. But if it's going
[2:00:03] to keep you going and it's going to keep
you, you know, the next generation
[2:00:07] farming, I'm all for it. I think that's
incredible. They're not asking for
[2:00:12] [sighs]
more than what, 10 events a year. Um, I
[2:00:17] don't think that the great horned owls
are going to go away after 10 events a
[2:00:21] year. Um, I think we can all find it in
our hearts to be flexible for our
[2:00:26] community and for our farmers. Thank
you.
[2:00:30] » Thank you.
[2:00:37] Good evening. My name is Sarah Rich and
our family home sits at 238 West Main
[2:00:42] Road, directly in front of the young
family's barn and working areas. We've
[2:00:46] owned the property since 1989.
I'm not speaking about this from a
[2:00:51] distance. I have personally heard music
from farm weddings already held on the
[2:00:55] property, clearly from inside our home.
At that time, I remember being excited
[2:01:00] knowing that it was Hadtie and Sarah's
wedding and that they were celebrating a
[2:01:04] big milestone. I even remember a Venmo
link being shared on Instagram so
[2:01:09] friends could chip in for a drink at
their bachelorette parties. And of
[2:01:13] course, I did. My brother and I
anticipate being future owners of this
[2:01:18] property. I live in the area year round
today with a good chance that I'll live
[2:01:22] at this residence year round in the
years ahead. The Rhode Island Supreme
[2:01:26] Court has already ruled on this.
Commercial farm weddings held for a fee
[2:01:30] are not considered an agricultural use
the way a dinner or a festival would be.
[2:01:35] That means this is a zoning question,
not a farming one. And the comprehensive
[2:01:40] plan already speaks to it directly.
Policy ED2.D
[2:01:44] Directs the town to regulate uses on
farms that are not directly related to
[2:01:50] the agricultural operation or the
principal use of the land. I'd ask this
[2:01:56] board to weigh this when you are making
a recommendation to town council. I also
[2:02:01] don't believe weddings are easy to
contain, especially at a scale of 175
[2:02:06] people. Based on what I've seen so far,
I don't have full confidence that a 9:00
[2:02:11] cutoff will actually mean 9:00.
What makes this farm able to operate
[2:02:16] under different rules than other farms,
the Stonehouse or the Vineyard? They've
[2:02:20] been abiding by these rules for some
time now. What starts as a 10 weddings a
[2:02:24] year could easily become 20, once
something like this is approved, there's
[2:02:28] little standing in the way of the number
growing. I'd ask that the board to
[2:02:33] consider that although tonight's hearing
is only about the young family farm, a
[2:02:38] zoning change would apply to this far
wouldn't apply to this farm alone. it
[2:02:42] would open the door to other farms
across town to make the same request.
[2:02:48] It's also worth noting that the original
1996 conservation easement on this land
[2:02:53] explicitly restricted the property to
agricultural use and prohibited
[2:02:58] commercial development. I grew up next
door to the Young family. I remember
[2:03:02] when they moved in and I watched Emma,
Hattie, and Sarah grow up. I've always
[2:03:07] made a point of buying my hanging
basket, gardening needs, fruits, and
[2:03:10] vegetables from their farm to support
them. This is exactly why it's so
[2:03:15] surprising that this proposal in
progress since last fall was never once
[2:03:20] mentioned to us or to the other
neighbors. And yet, the Youngs were able
[2:03:23] to launch a petition and have it shared
across the entire community. Many people
[2:03:28] who signed it have told us they didn't
fully understand what they were saying.
[2:03:32] It's telling that outreach outreach was
possible when it served the proposable,
[2:03:37] but not when it came to informing the
neighbors who'd actually be affected by
[2:03:41] it, who had supported them for so long.
This board already did this work. On
[2:03:46] July 7th, by a vote of 5 to zero, you
found that weddings do not conform with
[2:03:51] the comprehensive plan. You specifically
warned that a special use permit becomes
[2:03:56] permanent and travels with the property.
Meaning this decision binds every future
[2:04:00] owner of this land forever. Honestly,
what's hardest for me isn't just the
[2:04:05] noise or the scale. It's the
disappointment. This has stopped feeling
[2:04:09] like a decision made with farms,
neighbors, and community in mind and
[2:04:14] started to feel like a decision made for
the revenue at our expense. I support
[2:04:18] the youngs earning a living on this
land. My first job was at Skit Paul's
[2:04:24] country stand. I was very close to Cole
Walker and grew up with other farmers in
[2:04:29] this town. I want to see farms in this
town find creative ways to stay viable
[2:04:34] through farm stands, farm-totable
dinners, and other events that stay
[2:04:38] close to the land's agricultural roots,
but not at the direct expense of
[2:04:42] neighbors closest to it.
[2:04:48] » Mr. Sher, I I would note that uh we had
a 9:00 deadline, but it looks like
[2:04:53] there's only one more gentleman up here,
and I would suggest that we just uh be a
[2:04:57] little loose with that 9:00 deadline.
Excellent.
[2:05:02] » Yes. Thank you. It's a pleasure to be
here in front of the board. My name is
[2:05:07] Henry Wright. I am president of the
Rhode Island Farm Bureau. I had the
[2:05:12] pleasure of uh serving on the board of
directors bureau with Tyler for years.
[2:05:18] Uh very dedicated farmer. Uh you people
are extremely lucky to have a farm such
[2:05:26] as the Young's farm here in Little
Compton. Uh Ty, a few years back, Tyler
[2:05:31] got an award for giving the most food to
the food bank, donating the food to the
[2:05:37] food bank. He has always been
community-minded.
[2:05:41] uh just excellent as my position as
president of the Farm Bureau Rhode
[2:05:46] Island,
part of the American Farm Bureau, which
[2:05:50] is largest Farm Bureau organization in
the United States. I get to travel
[2:05:55] around a lot. Uh see what's wrong,
what's right. uh very very difficult to
[2:06:03] continue to farm hold on to the land
especially to pass it on to you people
[2:06:09] within the family.
Uh this year as in other years I had an
[2:06:14] opportunity to visit farms that have
wedding venues and every one of them
[2:06:21] said if it wasn't for the wedding venue
we would no longer be able to farm. Uh
[2:06:27] it has been the bright spot in
agriculture. Agurism is the only thing
[2:06:32] that's really keeping us going.
Remember, we're only producing 3% of the
[2:06:38] food that we need here in Rhode Island.
3% is all we produce. If we lose that,
[2:06:45] you know, you see on the TV all the
time, buy local. Where is local? Local
[2:06:50] is 500 miles from here. It's it's going
to be difficult. Have we ever run into
[2:06:56] trouble with transportation?
Three years. Uh I'm sorry. We only have
[2:07:02] three days of food in Rhode Island.
After three days, we're out. Hurricane,
[2:07:09] snowstorm, bad roads, whatever. So, this
is an opportunity perhaps for Little
[2:07:16] Compton to step forward and maybe do the
right thing and show that they can do
[2:07:21] something for two years. Thank you.
Thank you.
[2:07:26] » Thank you, Mr. Wright.
[2:07:34] Matters again. I'd like to thank you for
allowing all these people to speak
[2:07:37] tonight.
It was very enlightening to me because
[2:07:41] it's going to come in front of me with
everything everybody said. So, thank
[2:07:45] very much.
>> Well, thank you.
[2:07:53] » So, Uh Mr. Chair, as that concludes the
the comments, uh no motions necessary on
[2:07:58] this because this was just a remand
again to the planning board to hear uh
[2:08:03] the Youngs in accordance with the town
council's order.
[2:08:07] » Thank you everyone. Uh we'll continue
with our our planning board of business
[2:08:12] as I had mentioned earlier and and the
next item for us our first item is the
[2:08:18] petition by Lesie Fox for some solar
panels.
[2:08:28] » Sorry, but they don't.
[2:08:35] So, so you lastly
that means we're back to the zoning.
[2:08:49] » Let's get Julie.
>> Um, how many council here?
[2:08:56] » Excuse me.
>> Excuse me. We're holding a planning
[2:09:00] board meeting. If you could exit
quietly, please, you can have your
[2:09:04] conversations outside. We'd appreciate
that.
[2:09:10] » Oh, really? Hi.
[2:09:14] » Yes, that's what I'm trying to do right
now is trying to
[2:09:20] » trying to get everything back up here.
[2:09:31] fire away.
[2:09:38] » Yes.
>> And he's going to make it or just run
[2:09:42] through the
you slides.
[2:09:46] » Right.
I think the most important thing.
[2:09:59] » Where's S when you need it?
>> Do we have the packet for this one?
[2:10:03] » Yeah, I do.
I label it number two.
[2:10:06] » Oh, you're smart. Let's do this.
>> Give Tyler Dang.
[2:10:10] » I have spread out
got important solar things. It's, you
[2:10:15] know, I don't like what they've done
here.
[2:10:18] » It took me a while.
>> Can anyone hear me? Uh, we we have to
[2:10:22] conduct the rest of the business for the
planning board. So, if you want to
[2:10:25] continue talking to one another, could
you go out in the foyer, please? Thank
[2:10:28] you.
[2:10:34] Not you, Marsha.
[2:10:46] Yeah, where the start of the races
right across the street.
[2:10:55] » Um,
[2:11:00] » which ones?
>> Well, that shows your house, right?
[2:11:05] » I've got the two photos. I've got the
survey plan.
[2:11:09] take a photo of the court. I mean they
like the little flag in the drive
[2:11:15] » myself
different
[2:11:18] » different
[2:11:22] I don't like this yet.
[2:11:26] So the the
ordinance asks you to come for a special
[2:11:32] use permit when you want to put solar in
Pikes Peak area
[2:11:37] » and so that is
>> Mike we can't hear you
[2:11:42] » the the ordinance uh on on solar
>> just turn me off. Oh, go ahead.
[2:11:50] » The the ordinance is is so that the from
the visibility standpoint of solar
[2:11:55] panels within the Pikes Peak area and
does it affect the the view of the
[2:12:02] quality of the town. So that's why the
pictures of your house
[2:12:07] » Yes.
>> and where the panels will be and are
[2:12:10] they visible to the the general public.
>> Correct. is is probably the first and
[2:12:17] most important question uh with regard
to your solar application.
[2:12:24] » Okay. I don't know. Do you have the
plans?
[2:12:29] » Yes, we do. We do have we do have your
plan.
[2:12:31] » Oh, yeah. They got they got copies of
everything that you gave me. So,
[2:12:35] » thank you. So, I'm Lesie Fox. I live at
14 Commons and I have a application for
[2:12:41] a permit for solar panels which would go
on the south roof which you cannot see
[2:12:48] from the street. Uh 10 panels
10 or 12 I can't remember 10 or 12 would
[2:12:55] go on the south roof. The north roof
faces the street. No panels on the north
[2:13:02] side obviously.
and two panels would go on the west
[2:13:08] roof, which is where that arrow is
pointing to. So, if if you stood exactly
[2:13:15] where this photo was taken, you would be
able to see
[2:13:21] uh a pan, at least one uh of the solar
panels, but otherwise not visible from
[2:13:27] the street at all.
>> The panel with air was
[2:13:34] You couldn't see anything else.
[2:13:38] » To the south.
>> Yeah. Can't see anything. Yeah. Okay.
[2:13:45] All right.
>> Should I go on or
[2:13:49] » the
the solar application is for the use of
[2:13:54] your property?
>> Yes.
[2:13:57] » I don't know. They call that net zero or
or whatever. So, it's not not a solar
[2:14:02] installation where you're selling it to
uh Rhode Island Energy.
[2:14:08] » I would It's a reciprocal, what do you
call it?
[2:14:13] » So, it's it's called net metering.
I I'm Thomas Campbell. I work for Beacon
[2:14:19] Solar. Um so, what it's referred to as
net metering. Um, so basically
[2:14:25] she's not selling any of the
electricity.
[2:14:28] » Whatever she produces,
her electrical panel will draw
[2:14:33] » and then if there's any excess,
the meter that Rhode Island Energy
[2:14:39] installs or whoever the local company is
over here,
[2:14:42] » um,
>> tracks that and just keeps the data for
[2:14:47] her use.
>> So it it banks that energy sort of. Yes.
[2:14:51] for her for her future use.
>> Yes. But it's not be sold or
[2:14:56] » the solar installation is for the use of
the residents and their consumption.
[2:15:01] » Yes. The sole use of her res.
>> And the main reason why I wanted to get
[2:15:06] solar is to um have a power backup. I
was without electricity for 24 hours
[2:15:15] last February and it was pretty brutal
in the cold. I don't want to buy a noisy
[2:15:21] generator. So, I'd much prefer to
>> So, this has a clean.
[2:15:25] » This has a bank of batteries as well.
>> Yes.
[2:15:29] It'll have a
>> Yes. Yes. If you look on the plan set,
[2:15:33] it kind of shows it. It's the Franklin
Agate and the battery disconnect and the
[2:15:38] uh Franklin A power 15 kilowatt hour.
That's what the battery is. Yeah.
[2:15:43] » Right there. So, all right.
>> That's pretty good. Yep.
[2:15:51] No.
Carter, you Mary, you okay with Yep.
[2:15:56] » Yep.
>> Yep. Yep.
[2:16:00] » Anybody want to make a motion to uh
[2:16:06] communicate to the zoning board that
this uh
[2:16:09] » with the comp plan? Yeah, I uh I'll make
a motion that this uh application
[2:16:15] uh adheres to the comprehensive plan and
uh and uh will provide for
[2:16:23] » um the clean energy the the type of
energy that we're looking for in the
[2:16:27] town and also uh takes uh the our
ordinance in the uh in that area into
[2:16:34] consideration.
>> Second.
[2:16:38] » All those in favor? Hi.
>> Hi.
[2:16:41] » Terrific.
>> Thank you everyone.
[2:16:43] » You're very welcome. It
>> was a long
[2:16:45] Well, it was a little a little flag.
Don't do anything flag.
[2:16:50] » No, the flags are staying.
>> We Okay.
[2:16:56] » Well, no. I think we have one more.
>> Yes.
[2:17:00] We're going to come up to the 15 minute
point on that. Do we just move to
[2:17:04] elections?
>> Yeah.
[2:17:09] Um and please
[2:17:13] can we extend the we
[2:17:18] » why don't we do elections and then
extend. See
[2:17:20] » I think you you've got to extend now.
>> Yeah. Do both.
[2:17:24] » We can do both.
>> Yeah.
[2:17:26] » Um Marian Carter, what were uh
conversation think about extending the
[2:17:33] meeting so we can do this? We're we were
at 14 after
[2:17:39] » Yeah, we're running close.
>> We I'm fine with continuing.
[2:17:43] » Yes,
>> everybody. Okay. So, make that motion.
[2:17:47] » Yeah, I'll make a motion that we accept
the meeting
[2:17:49] » till 10.
>> Okay. Well, we don't have to go that
[2:17:52] till we're done
>> until we're done.
[2:17:54] » Continue the meeting. That's first.
Anyway, how about 12? And who second?
[2:17:58] » All right.
Um second, second. Thank you, Carter.
[2:18:04] » All those are in favor. We weed within
favor.
[2:18:08] » Okay. Uh the the um
the next uh petition is is um
[2:18:17] on behalf of the closest
>> I miss our small room. I can't hear you.
[2:18:21] I'm not sure whether it's a variance or
whatever. Yes,
[2:18:24] » we cannot hear you down here.
>> Speak to the microphone so we can hear
[2:18:29] you.
>> Okay. I'm not used to this giant venue.
[2:18:33] » We're we're
>> Thank you.
[2:18:36] » Okay. Yeah, we're we're we're moving on
to the next petition
[2:18:39] » for the the closest.
>> I I can help explain this if nothing
[2:18:45] else.
[2:18:49] » I know you said,
>> right?
[2:18:53] » Just for this one thing and then you
then you're free to go. Thank you.
[2:18:57] » Thank you.
Very briefly, hopefully. Yes, briefly.
[2:19:01] Uh, Court Chappelle on behalf of George
and Mallerie Close. This is 71 Warren
[2:19:06] Point Road. It is just a single mic.
>> Yeah, it's just a single family home. It
[2:19:12] has no basement and no garage and it has
a structure on it now that according to
[2:19:17] the town is a 10x12 cottage. It more
like a 10x12 shed. And off of that shed
[2:19:24] there was a permitted outdoor shower.
Now, whether that's a fence or whether
[2:19:30] it's a structure is an interesting
point, but long story short, uh your
[2:19:35] zoning ordinance has a provision that if
you have a pre-existing building that's
[2:19:41] too close to a property line and you
file for a demolition permit, you can
[2:19:46] ask to rebuild it and they can move it.
Uh but you can without getting a
[2:19:52] variance.
The issue with the and I don't want to
[2:19:57] get caught up in it here, but the issue
with the zoning board is one of the
[2:20:00] criterias that you can do that is that
the increase is not more than 50%. And
[2:20:05] if you have the 10 by 12 building alone
and this building goes 16 to 20, well
[2:20:11] that's more than 50%. But back when the
shower got permitted, that was an
[2:20:15] enclosure that's 5t by 14t and then the
generator was it was enclosed.
[2:20:23] It's not just a fence. It's a fence.
This area meets the building on all
[2:20:28] three sides. It in some cases by the
shower has a floor under the generator
[2:20:34] doesn't have a floor. So it would be
less than a 50% increase if you looked
[2:20:40] at the current footprint of the
building. And I think Julie has some of
[2:20:44] the pictures and you can see it. But
that isn't really for here. What I'm
[2:20:47] saying to you is a home that is a single
family residence that fits in your
[2:20:53] comprehensive plan as a single family
residence has an existing structure that
[2:20:58] straddles and goes onto the neighbor's
property. It's a foot and a half onto
[2:21:03] the egg trust easement. We're raising
that and moving it as far as we can and
[2:21:10] as close to the house as we can to put
in this small 16 by 20 studio that and
[2:21:18] part of the w part of the width is a
stairway so that there's storage in the
[2:21:22] basement. Uh you can't even get to the
basement from the inside a separate door
[2:21:26] that goes down. So, it'll have some
storage underneath that the house is
[2:21:30] desperate to to add some storage to and
a small uh building for a studio and
[2:21:36] fitness room for uh Mr. Close and his
wife.
[2:21:42] I would argue it's more fitting with the
comprehensive plan because you're taking
[2:21:46] a building that has not only a zero lot
line but a negative 1 1/2 ft trespassing
[2:21:52] lot line onto the neighbor's property
pre-existing from these owners and
[2:21:58] you're moving it 7 ft away.
If they say it is 50% or less, it's just
[2:22:06] a special use permit and we'll argue
that at the zoning board. If they say
[2:22:10] it's a variance, then we still think it
uh fits with the comp plan because it's
[2:22:15] not getting any closer to where it is
now. The current building is 41 ft from
[2:22:20] the road where 50 ft is required under
your ordinance, but that's just the
[2:22:26] distance of the current structure. If
you say the generator, which is 5T
[2:22:32] closer, then it's 37 ft, I believe. And
we're not moving anything closer. It's
[2:22:38] just straight sideways moving it closer
to the house, moving it away from the
[2:22:42] property line.
>> So if if if I can um
[2:22:46] » back to the chase, maybe the the on the
north side of the property, there's a
[2:22:52] small shed
that you've on your plan. Is that going
[2:22:57] away?
>> On the north side? No.
[2:23:00] » No. So the the little shed just past
your driveway where you park, that
[2:23:06] stays. next to us
>> and and
[2:23:09] » sorry George post
>> and so the the the the structure that's
[2:23:15] going to get demoed is the existing one
that in fact encroaches on the property
[2:23:21] line on the south side of the property.
>> Correct.
[2:23:25] » And you're you're going to you want to
consolidate that
[2:23:28] » want to consolidate that with the
existing shower generator
[2:23:32] » with one new building.
>> Correct.
[2:23:34] » And push it over. Yes. So you're you're
um
[2:23:39] you're asking to be able to take down
that building, put up a new building and
[2:23:44] that
>> right
[2:23:45] » is better conform more is in more in
conformance with zoning than the current
[2:23:50] situation. That is correct.
>> Property too. The other one is off the
[2:23:53] property
>> and well that could be and again it's a
[2:23:57] special use permit. If you look at the
size of it as a whole, it is less than a
[2:24:03] 50% increase.
>> But that our concern is does it con
[2:24:07] comport with the comp plan.
>> It's still more conforming still
[2:24:11] residential
>> is makes the property more in
[2:24:14] conformance.
>> That is correct.
[2:24:16] » And a new better structure built to
code.
[2:24:19] » That's absolutely true. whether the
zoning want board wants you to do it one
[2:24:23] way or the other doesn't affect the the
the
[2:24:29] effect or it doesn't
>> I agree I just background but
[2:24:32] » um how does everybody
>> I don't have
[2:24:35] » they think it's a good idea or okay with
it
[2:24:38] » Mike I have
>> pardon
[2:24:41] » uh what um
>> in the mic
[2:24:44] » oh in mic sorry um is there something
you have to do to comply with CRMC See,
[2:24:50] seeing it's within the uh 200 foot
jurisdictional area,
[2:24:57] » I think when they anything that we do,
we'd have to go through them. We believe
[2:25:03] it's either not going to need them or
what we call a minimum of impact, but
[2:25:08] » what we call a minimal impact petition,
which is kind of an administrative
[2:25:12] petition where they say, "Hey, that was
there before. It's okay now." But the
[2:25:16] zoning board or the town never waves
that if it's uh if the building
[2:25:21] inspector requires that we go and get
the coastal permit. We they require town
[2:25:27] first. I can't go to coastal and say the
town might do it. So can will you they
[2:25:32] only opine on things after I get a
letter from the building inspector says
[2:25:37] that according to the planning board and
the zoning board and the building
[2:25:39] inspector you could do this. So yes we
will we may have to that that line I
[2:25:45] understand has shifted. Yeah, there was
a it was just redrawn that say that 200
[2:25:51] foot jurisdiction is set back is
as of last when it was drawn I think uh
[2:25:58] a year ago right so
>> so and if you can see it's right on it
[2:26:03] » well
I don't think it's going to be worse
[2:26:09] even
even considering that she don't you
[2:26:13] agree that it's it's it's improvement
[2:26:17] because it's it is where it is and it's
going to be where it is.
[2:26:24] Yeah. Okay.
[2:26:29] And the irony is moving in 5t to get out
of that is closer to the street which is
[2:26:34] a zoning.
Okay.
[2:26:40] » Yeah. I'll make a motion that we accept
this plan as provided and uh make a
[2:26:45] recommendation that it is uh in
conformance more in conformance to the
[2:26:50] comprehensive plan uh in the plan than
as as it exists now.
[2:26:57] » Is there a second to that?
>> Second.
[2:27:05] » Second.
>> Second. All those in favor?
[2:27:08] » I
>> I Excellent.
[2:27:10] » I wish to be recorded as having recused
myself from the vote due to my service
[2:27:14] on the Little Compton Agricultural
Conservancy Trust which has a easement
[2:27:19] abuing the property.
>> Thank you everyone. Enjoy your evening.
[2:27:23] » Thanks.
>> Thank you
[2:27:24] » again.
>> All right. Um
[2:27:30] offices.
>> No, I think the next thing is
[2:27:32] » Tracy, you're all good to go. Thank you.
Thank you.
[2:27:38] » Thank you.
>> So our next uh item of business is the
[2:27:43] um minutes from July 7th
resitions, corrections.
[2:27:50] » Mr. No amendments for the move that
becept
[2:27:55] prepared.
>> Seconded.
[2:27:57] » All those in favor? I.
>> Any opposed? No. Okay. And the um
[2:28:11] I think that request for extension
>> where is that handled with?
[2:28:16] » Well, we're going to the the extension
can be handled administratively.
[2:28:21] » So, we don't need to do
the the request for the SBA extension. I
[2:28:27] can I can do administratively.
We don't have to with our new laws.
[2:28:36] So, sorry to make you uh hang out for
>> Pardon.
[2:28:44] » Okay. Um
and the the uh
[2:28:51] Donnie, I I don't think we can give you
justice tonight on
[2:28:55] uh
>> want
[2:28:57] we're passed. We need to do our officers
and
[2:29:01] » we might still make it if we don't.
>> All right.
[2:29:05] » It's only I mean we'll go to 10.
>> I
[2:29:10] got a date in the morning though.
>> Pardon?
[2:29:13] » Thanks again Tracy.
>> Yeah. Let's get it done.
[2:29:18] » What are we doing?
>> Let's do the election of officers.
[2:29:21] » Okay.
>> Okay.
[2:29:22] » Okay. Uh if we do that, we should switch
uh
[2:29:26] we should have a vote to move that up in
the agenda.
[2:29:29] » Let I I uh I make a motion that we move
the offic's uh uh item uh
[2:29:37] » the agenda to the next item.
>> All right.
[2:29:42] » Second.
[2:29:45] » All right. Second.
>> Okay.
[2:29:47] » Okay.
>> Okay. Wait a minute. Just moving.
[2:29:49] » Who s you made the motion? Mayor, you
second. Thank you.
[2:29:56] » All in favor?
>> All those are in favor?
[2:29:58] » I
>> I
[2:30:03] » All right.
>> All right.
[2:30:04] » We ready?
>> All right.
[2:30:07] » I'll make a I'll I I'll nominate for
president,
[2:30:11] » Vice Chairman. Chairman
and vice chairman. uh chairman first
[2:30:19] Carter Wilkkey,
vice chairman Mike Steers and
[2:30:25] administrative officer
for them to share both to share that
[2:30:31] position. So if one has to recluse
himself, the other would be present
[2:30:38] » and Carter will do a trust.
[2:30:42] » Mary,
>> what second?
[2:30:45] I think uh Mike Chucker amendment was
that I take Mike's position as the
[2:30:50] planning board's design
agricultural.
[2:30:55] » You want to add that to it?
>> Yep. Just add that to it.
[2:30:58] » So that that motion's been amended. Is
the second uh in conformance with that
[2:31:02] amendment?
>> Yes.
[2:31:05] » Yeah.
All those in favor? I
[2:31:09] » Great.
>> All right. Okay. All right. Now, now
[2:31:13] Donnie, now we got to move.
>> Come on. We got to get done.
[2:31:16] » Got to talk fast. It's not your not your
your trait, you know.
[2:31:22] » Super quiet.
>> I had to talk him into it. Hurry up.
[2:31:25] » Really, it just hinges on a on a
question as to how the board wants this
[2:31:30] to be filed. U, it's a it's a concept
plan. Um, you know, basically it's an
[2:31:36] administrative subdivision that follows
the
[2:31:40] » uh format or the end result of a
one-time only subdivision. As we know,
[2:31:44] the one time only requires a variance
for the for the back lot having
[2:31:49] frontage. And so we, as I said in the
cover letter, we believe that we um need
[2:31:55] unified development review um to get a
frontage variance for the rear lot to do
[2:32:01] this. I just before we file a formal
application, we just wanted to make sure
[2:32:06] that uh we understood
>> direction from the board on how to the
[2:32:10] proper way to proceed with this.
>> So,
[2:32:14] we did an administrative subdivision on
this a while ago, right? To take the
[2:32:18] property line out of the building.
>> That That's correct. Did the property
[2:32:22] was owned by the Teachman estate. The
north lot had the existing house number
[2:32:27] 44. Um and the south lot was vacant. um
at two long narrow lots each one acre in
[2:32:34] size, basically the same shape, same
amount of road frontage, same width
[2:32:39] going down to the back. Um but the lot
line of the vacant lot went through just
[2:32:44] clipped the corner of the existing
house.
[2:32:46] » So So now you're you're
right now there are two dwellings on
[2:32:52] this property. Is that right?
>> No, it's two separate properties.
[2:32:55] » Two separate properties.
>> Yep.
[2:32:57] » And how many how many dwellings are
there? There's one dwelling on each
[2:33:01] front on each property. That's correct.
>> So you're you're you're you want to move
[2:33:06] the property line.
>> That's correct.
[2:33:08] » Right.
>> That uh instead of it being horizontal,
[2:33:13] you want to slice it vertically in the
middle.
[2:33:17] » That's correct.
>> Which then causes you to make the access
[2:33:21] by easement.
>> That's correct.
[2:33:24] » Why? It would seem to me you you could
make this administrative change, but
[2:33:31] keep let the house
>> in the back, if you will, have access to
[2:33:36] the road on and own that access.
>> Well, we we could, but what we're trying
[2:33:42] to do is keep the lot areas equal. Um
what happens is if you take that area
[2:33:48] for the driveway and incorporate it into
the rear lot that you you have to make
[2:33:54] the front lot bigger to accomplish that.
>> Right? So if you move the line the
[2:33:58] septic system line to the right then
then the the house to the south or the
[2:34:06] » compensate by moving the line near the
septic system
[2:34:09] » then they can own their their their
right of way to their house
[2:34:14] » instead of and instead of having it by
easement.
[2:34:17] » Well
>> that's correct but but just kind of
[2:34:22] concept discussion.
>> Yeah. So the with the concept
[2:34:24] discussions, our our advice always is we
don't want to we just want to say
[2:34:28] whether these ideas are good or bad. We
don't want to give the applicant the
[2:34:33] plan that we want because then what
happens and I know Don wouldn't do this
[2:34:39] to us but
>> yes he would.
[2:34:40] » We don't want them to come back later
and say oh no you said
[2:34:43] » you told me to do it this way. Yeah.
Okay.
[2:34:45] » Right. No, I'm just suggesting that in
we've done two lot one time only and you
[2:34:52] could do the access by easement as
opposed to owning the right of way. The
[2:34:57] the it's been favored or thought that if
the land owner can own his access,
[2:35:04] that's a preferable position. If that
doesn't work the way you want to slice
[2:35:08] it.
>> Yeah. that I mean my my thought is
[2:35:12] there's two options there and they're
options right one way or the other you
[2:35:17] know that there's I think there's
benefits to to both options depending on
[2:35:22] where you're looking where you're coming
from
[2:35:24] » and it's just
>> I do know now
[2:35:26] » the both houses the set back to both
houses to the property line is about 12
[2:35:31] feet so this basically makes the two
lots much better shaped and more
[2:35:36] functional in terms of yard area and
privacy and whatnot
[2:35:41] So I think we're back to the to the crux
of the question
[2:35:45] » and how is he? Yeah. Any
>> All right. So what were you were you
[2:35:51] wanted to know what kind [clears throat]
of
[2:35:54] » So I the the the I just wanted to make
sure um
[2:36:00] » to the degree that you can. I just
wanted to introduce this before I file
[2:36:04] formally to do it. Um, but I believe
this would be um this is an
[2:36:09] administrative sub as presented. It's an
administrative subdivision. Um, that
[2:36:14] follows the format of a one-time only
and we know the one time only requires a
[2:36:19] frontage variance for the rear lot to
not have frontage, which
[2:36:23] » we're not creating a new lot, right?
>> But we're adjusting lot lines,
[2:36:27] » which is just an administrative
subdivision.
[2:36:30] » Well, so we're taking a lot that has
frontage and we're rendering it with no
[2:36:33] frontage. So, so, so Don's right here.
The issue is you could do an
[2:36:38] administrative subdivision if there are
no uh incursions onto the setbacks. So,
[2:36:45] imagine let's say um the problem here is
there's an incursion into the setback,
[2:36:52] the frontage setback. So, it's Yeah. So
let's say if it was a, you know, a line
[2:36:57] right down the middle of the lot and you
know we have to have 175 feet on each
[2:37:05] for each lot. Right. So what if we say
it's down the line then we move it even
[2:37:11] more so that there's only 100 foot of of
frontage. Right. Right. We would require
[2:37:16] a variance in that case. Yeah. Now, this
is a little bit different because we're
[2:37:21] flipping the W line, but we're still uh
basically making it so that there is a
[2:37:27] um an incursion into that frontage. Don,
is that am I explaining that?
[2:37:32] » Well, less conforming,
>> right? So, you're you're making it less
[2:37:35] conforming.
>> So, so I think what Don's asking is
[2:37:39] whether he needs a variance here. And I
guess the question is whether you go to
[2:37:43] the zoning board to get the variance or
do you apply to um univ development
[2:37:48] review because we have an administrative
subdivision right here too.
[2:37:51] » So I guess it's a question of whether
you guys want to see this or you want to
[2:37:54] hand it off to the zoning board.
>> Well the the um he wants to change the
[2:38:01] current lot configuration.
>> Yes.
[2:38:04] » Zoning board can't do that. Right.
>> Correct. So a unified development is
[2:38:08] whenever it's the variance is attached
to a subdivision.
[2:38:12] » Yeah.
>> So
[2:38:13] » it has to be.
>> So that
[2:38:18] that's the the the
decision here.
[2:38:21] » So then therefore because the variance
requires unified review it then rises to
[2:38:26] a minor subdivision. Correct. I just
want
[2:38:30] » in order to do the the
>> an admin will well an administrative
[2:38:33] subdivision that requires relief
automatically rises to a minor.
[2:38:38] » Okay, that's correct.
>> So I I just that's why I'm here. I just
[2:38:42] wanted to make sure I understood how how
this
[2:38:44] » I'm glad you're here because now we
understand it too.
[2:38:47] » Awkward to treat it as an admin that you
know is going to have public hearing.
[2:38:52] » Say again.
>> It's gonna it' be awkward to treat it as
[2:38:54] an admin that admin subdivision that's
going to have a public hearing. So,
[2:38:58] » it's better to call it a minor anyways,
I guess. Right. Is that what you're
[2:39:01] saying?
>> Yeah.
[2:39:02] » You got to come
>> both. Yeah.
[2:39:04] » Yeah. You got to
>> Okay. Thank you. I appreciate you saying
[2:39:09] to save your time.
>> Yes.
[2:39:13] » We agreed.
>> I think we did. Is there something else
[2:39:16] you want to have a motion for?
>> No.
[2:39:18] » What?
>> I say something.
[2:39:20] » Oh, good.
>> Thank Julie.
[2:39:23] » Yes.
>> What? She's coming back next month. She
[2:39:29] can't leave.
She can't leave. He may listen very
[2:39:34] loud.
>> You're welcome.
[2:39:37] » Ah, Julie, Julie, Julie,
Jolie, Julie. I'll make a motion we
[2:39:45] adjourn.
[2:39:54] » No.
Bye.
[2:40:03] » So, what's your report?
>> Thank you. Thank you.
[2:40:07] » So, when you say we can do this
administratively, you know, what does
[2:40:11] that mean? We need an extension. That's
right. So I