Town of Scituate 195 DARTELSON PIKE NORTH SCITUATE, RHODE ISLAND 02857 Philip deVries Sent via email only to Re: Access to Public Records Act Request dated 7/ Dear Mr. deVries: In my capacity as the Town Clerk of the Town of Scituate and the person responsible to ensure that public records requests directed to the Town of Scituate are processed properly, I am in receipt of your request for documents pursuant to the relevant provisions of the R.I. General Laws Access to Public Records Act (“APRA”). The responses to each of your numbered paragraphs are below in bold typeface: 1, “LDP & ZBR Application 183 Hop Mill Multi Unit Residential Development” Please see attached documents in Exhibit A. 2. “Pimentel Consulting Inc. Qualifications” Please see attached documents in Exhibit B. 3. “Zoning Board Application Case #1200" Please see attached documents in Exhibit C. 4, “Diprete Engineering Letter dated Jan 27, 2017 Re: Hope Mill AE Floodplan, Explanation” Please see attached documents in Exhibit D. 5. “Diprete Engineering Letter dated Jan 17,2017 Hope Mill Zoning Submission” Please see attached documents in Exhibit E. This response is the Town’s full compliance with your Access to Publie Records request. Since the Town does not have a Chief Administrative Officer under APRA, no appeal to the local chief administrative officer under § 38-2-8(a) is available. As such, if you are aggrieved by this decision, you may file a complaint with the Rhode Island Attorney General pursuant to § 38-2- 8(b). Sincerely, Mogae ™, dos Margaret M. Long Enclosures ‘TELEPHONE: (401)-647-2802 + TTY: 1-800-745-5555 » FAX: 687-7220 RECYCLED PAPER“exhibit A” TOWN OF SCITUATE ZONING BOARD OF REVIEW LDP and ZBR Application 193-Unit ‘Hope Mill’ Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development Main and Mill Streets PREPARED FOR: PARAMOUNT DEVELOPMENT GROUP BY: EDWARD PIMENTEL 40 July 2017ICTORY. iT Paramount Development Group [hereinafter ‘Applicant'] has retained my professional land use Planning and zoning consulting services, in order to evaluate the proposed redevelopment of the Hope Mills property [hereinafter 'Property']. The referenced redevelopment project consists of the conversion of the Hope Mill facility proper into a residential complex containing both market and affordable housing units, and construction of two (2) new multi-unit residential structures. Although, the degree of anticipated affordable housing unit count far exceeds minimum regulatory requirements (approximately 40% proposed versus regulatory minimum of 25%), in a community that lags almost last in said provision, the redevelopment is being pursued as a conventional Major Land Development Project [hereinafter ‘LDP’, rather than as a Comprehensive Permit. The reason being that redevelopment in the manner so proposed, as this report will substantiate, furthers so many regulatory goals and objectives, not the least of which is the most-needed infusion of affordable housing. The redevelopment has already achieved LDP - Master Plan and Hope Village Overlay District approvals. What is still required is satisfactory response to the requisite LDP ‘General Requitements’ and affirmation of the ‘special use permit standards and dimensional variance burdens, for realizing the proposed residential unit density. Also, out of an abundance of caution, the requisite Multi-Family Site Plan Review - Standards of Review [hereinafter ‘SPR’} will be appropriately addressed, considering there appears to be some overlap between the LDP and SPR review procedures. In light of the stated proposal, | have thoroughly reviewed all submission materials pertaining to the subject LDP multi-unit redevelopment project proposal, as well as the following regulatory documents: Town of Scituate Comprehensive Plan, Five-Year Update - Approved July 2004 [hereinafter ‘Comprehensive Plan}; Town of Scituate Zoning Ordinance - Amended through April 2008 [hereinafter ‘Ordinance’], Town of Scituate Subdivision and Land Development Regulations - As Amended Through 15 May 2012 {hereinafter ‘Development Regulations’; Town of Scituate Low and Moderate Income Housing Plan - Adopted as an Amendment to the Scituate Comprehensive Plan [hereinafter ‘Affordable Housing Pian’); United States Census; Rhode Island Housing (hereinafter ‘RIH’) reports, specifically Low and Moderate Income Housing information. In addition, @ thorough analysis of the Property and general Hope Mill neighborhood, for the purpose of determining neighborhood character, was conducted as well My analysis entails rendering a determination as to the appropriateness of the proposed Hope Mill redevelopment project, in light of the respective Comprehensive and Affordable Housing Plans, Development Regulations and Ordinance goals and objectives,LDP and ZBR Application Page 20f 26 193-Unit ‘Hope Mill’ Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development Main and Mill Streets, DIT The Property is addressed 5 Main Street and comprised of several parcels, inclusive of Assessor's Plat 3, Lot 8, Assessor's Plat 5, Lots 1 and 114, and Assessor's Plat 101, Lot 5 (situated in the adjacent Town of Coventry). The Property contains in excess of 32-acres, and historically improved with the ‘Hope Industrial Mil,’ said mill site having been underutiized for ‘some period of time now, as evidenced by the following photograph. ‘The Property is both uniquely situated as well as having an unusual configuration. It is defined as a comer-lot, being situated at the intersection of Main and Mill Streets: approximately 1,000 linear feet along Main Street; and, approximately 360 linear feet along the side Mill Street. There are presently multiple points of ingress and egress, from both public right-of-ways Pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan - Circulation Element, the subject portion of Main Street is classified a Principal / Major Arterial Roadway. K-3.1.1 Highway Plan - Highway Functional Classification - “The traffic circulation proposals on Map K- 1 are consistent with those of the Rhode Island Funetional Classification ‘System (See Section K-5. 1). No changes are proposed.” “The Principal/Major Arterials are as follows." © Route 116 - South of Route 12 ‘The Development Regulations defines an ‘Arterial Roadway’, in the following manner: Street Classification. “A method of roadway organization which identifies a street hierarchy according to function within a roadway system, that is, types of vehicles served and anticipated volumes, for the purposes of promoting safety, efficient land use and the design character of neighborhoods and districts. Major categories are:” (1) Arterial. “A major street that serves as an avenue for the circulation of traffic info, out of, or around the town and carries high volumes of traffic.” (Page 787)LDP and ZBR Application Page 3 of 26, 193-Unit ‘Hope Mill Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development Main and Mill Streets ‘The Property is physically surrounded by the Pawuxet River on both the southerly and westerly sides. It is physically abutted by an industrial operation to the immediate north, along Mill Street. Otherwise, residential land uses are well represented throughout Mill Street, and to the north-west, along main Street. The property is improved with the historical Hope Mill, approaching approximately upwards 150- years in age. Although, a valuable industrial resource to the Town of Scituate in years past, quite similar to the multitude of mill buildings littering the State of Rhode Island, it has now become industrially obsolete and a blight in the neighborhood. Immediate reuse is imperative, if salvation of the referenced historically recognized asset is to be realized. Given the state of disrepair, time is of the essence, otherwise it may soon become infeasible, However, said reuse has to be both physically (plausibly code compliant) and economically feasible, It must also afford the community some value - realizing documented municipal objectives. The present Tedevelopment proposal achieves all of these worthy goals, as will be evidenced below. The following visual overview and photographs illustrate existing site and neighborhood conditions [Credit: Combination of personal photographs and google maps}.LDP and ZBR Application Page 4 0f 26 193-Unit ‘Hope Mill’ Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development Main and Mill Streets‘LDP and ZBR Application Page § of 26 193-Unit ‘Hope Mill’ Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development Main and Mill Streets The Property is zoned General Manufacturing District [hereinafter 'M District, otherwise defined pursuant to Section 4 ‘Zoning districts and zoning map,’ in the following manner: (M) General Manufacturing - “This district is composed of certain land and structures for light, clean industrial uses. The land included in this district are those suited for use by most industries, subject only to those regulations needed to control congestion and to protect nearby residential and business districts, and protect the waters and watershed of the water supply of the City of Providence. The furnishing of a public water supply does not constitute the sole criteria for reduction in minimum lot area nor shail said reduction be deemed inherently approved or established. Any proposal to modily the minimum lot size must be accompanied by comprehensive data such as any negative impacts on the watershed / water supply of the City of Providence / Providence Water Supply and effects on the town's rural character and any such data or information as may be required by the governing boards, commissions and officials of the town.” ‘The Property, as well as immediately surrounding \borhoad, Is also located within the Hope Village Overlay District [hereinafter ‘Hope. rict']. The reason why this is so important, is due to the fact that not only does the underlying M-District designation (a designation that is generally imposed upon a smattering of properties throughout the Town) recognize the reasonable reuse of such properties for residential purposes, likewise does the neighborhood specific Hope District. The Hope District, being an overlay district and thus more vastly narrow in its scope, expresses the precise development objectives of specific properties. Therefore, the specific reuse of the Hope Mill for dense, multifamily purposes, is well recognized and supported. However, what clearly corroborates this conclusion, is when reuse for dense muttifamily purposes, includes the provision of much-needed affordable housing, which is woefully lacking. The Comprehensive Plan [Pages E-4 - E-6] expresses the following: “The policies which relate to increasing the supply of habitable affordable units include.” This would occur by amending the zoning to permit such conversions. This would benefit both moderate income and potentially lower income categories depending on the mix of ‘market rate and subsidized units and the extent of subsidy involved, if any. Mill and + "Allow conversion of certain types of existing structures by special use permit and require as a condition of the special use permit that a percentage of units (10 percent, for example) be offered at below market rate rents to locally-connecied households. These should The primary reason behind regulatory support for mill conversion to dense multi-unit affordable housing, is due to the fact that unlike other communities, the Town of Scituate has extremely limited land resources. The vast majority of land area is either dedicated to the ScituateLDP and ZBR Application Page 6 of 26 193-Unit ‘Hope Mill” Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development ‘Main and Mill Streets Reservoir proper or the associated watershed and other contributing resources. Development is extremely controlled, primarily in regard to residential development, which is regulatory limited to a density not to exceed one-unit for each three-acres. These regulated land resources (comprising the overwhelming majority of the town), are going to contribute few, if any, affordable housing units. This land use consultant concurs with this regulatory limitation, given the very unique and sensitive nature of these areas. Alternatively, affordable housing is much- needed, as will be evidenced below, and therefore those assets that can accommodate dense residential development, while affording reservoir protection, must be thoroughly supported. The following section fully encapsulates the unique and sensitive nature of the town-wide land resources, thereby corroborating the conclusions of this land use consultant as to the appropriateness of densifying the Hope Mil fort residential purposes, ‘TOWN-WIDE LAND RESOURCE ASSESSMENT Prior to describing the specifics of the subject redevelopment proposal, it is imperative that this land use consultant briefly discuss the limited ‘viable’ land resources available to accommodate much-needed affordable housing. Although, the following is quite obvious to both the Planning Commission and Zoning Board of Review [hereinafter ‘ZBR’, t nevertheless requires reference in this report for those who are not familiar with the Town of Scituate. The presence of the Scituate Reservoir, and the measures instituted to assure its protection, has direct implications on residential development. Therefore, realizing development of dense multi-unit development, which is necessary to realize provision of sufficient affordable housi meet local documented need, is almost virtually impossible. The vast majority of land resources are either outright incapable of accommodating, or zoned in such a manner as to severely limit, residential development. This is well substantiated by the Affordable Housing Plan [Pages 1 - 2], which acknowledge that as much as 85% of overall acreage is encumbered by the watershed. “The goals contained in Section E - 2 of the Housing Element, ilustrate Scituate's commitment to providing affordable housing in context with the policies set forth in the comprehensive plan. The Town of Scituate is committed to incorporating more affordable housing into the current land development patterns. Development patterns in Scituate have historically been directed by the physical constraints of the Scituate Reservoir, which supplies water to the majority of Rhode Island's municipalities. The Town of Scituate covers approximately 34,800 acres. OF this total, 14,436 acres are owned and maintained by the Providence Water Supply Board (PWSB).LDP and ZBR Application Page 7 of 26 193-Unit ‘Hope Mill Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development Main and Mill Streets {In addition to the land owned by PWSB that is utilized for water production within Scituate, an additional 15,196 el oe ee |. Excluding the land donned by PWSB, developed land, land a development constraints, and public and semni- public properties, the vacant land available for residential development totals close to 10,500 acres. init fe” i The Scituate Reservoir Watershed Map (illustrated below) excerpted from the Affordable Housing Plan, further exemplifies this point - illustrating that only the southerly most portion of the Town is appropriate for more intensive development. Hope Village, and specifically Hope Mill, is situated within this area, as evidenced by the subsequent map [Comprehensive Plan - Page H-5]Page 8 of 26 ial (Affordable Housing) Development 193-Unit ‘Hope Mill’ Multi-Unit Reside Main and Mill Streets Scituate Historic Districts & Villages Sachem | eres ' MAP It for this very reason why multifamily development is strictly regulated in Town. Pursuant to Article Il ‘District Use Regulations’ - Section 2 ‘Residential Uses’, of the Ordinance,"Muttifamily ‘Dwelling Structures’ are outright prohibited in all districts, less the very limited BL District and the few Village Overlay Districts, and then only by special use permit. Pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan - Town of Scituate Land Use Acreage Table [Page D-14], of the 34,789 acres comprising the Town of Scituate, a mere 118 acres is attributable to ‘High Density Residential, or three-tenths of one-percent (0.3%). The almost non-existent presenceLDP and ZBR Application Page 9 of 26 193-Unit ‘Hope Mill’ Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development ‘Main and Mill Streets of multi-unit housing, is further substantiated by Table 5 - ‘Sctuate Housing Stock Distribution,’ of the Affordable Housing Plan (Page 7], as evidenced by the following: 2.6 Housing Unit Distribution - "The most common type of housing in Scituate is @ single family detached home, with 86.6% of housing types falling into this category. This number reflects an increase of 7.08% from 1990. As seen on Table 5, the second most common hhousing type in Scituate is a structure that contains 2-4 units” Table 5 - Scituate Housing Stock Distribution [eseceeecseed 1990 | % of 1990 | 2000 “| % of 2000} Total # Units 3,520 400% Sing! imily Home Unit Attached (e.g. 57 1.6% 81 2.1% Gondo) faa ndings wi 2-4 Units 272 7.7% M7 8.9% 5-9 Units 17 | 0.5% 16 0.4% 10 or more units | 65 1.9% i a 2.0% Mobile home 0.0% | Boat, RV, van, : To etc. E 00% Given the vast constraints to development and almost non-existent high-density land usage, fone may question why additional land resources, however minimal, are not rezoned to assist in spurting multi-unit residential development. The reason being that constraints exist throughout, and basically whatever remains should be maintained at present densities. In fact, the opposite is being explored, introducing even more stringent regulations that will further inhibit densifying residential development. D-1.1.2 Population Projections [Page D-3] 3. “The Land Use Plan does not propose significant changes in overall density under the Zoning Ordinance. For environmental protection reasons, there will be more stringent controls, such as the proposed Hydric Soils Overlay District’ (See Section G-3. 1.5), which will inhibit development in critical resource areas,”LDP and ZBR Application Page 10 of 26 193-Unit ‘Hope Mill’ Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development ‘Main and Mill Streets 4. ‘Much of the more easily developed land has been taken; that which remains hes more development constraints and will be, on a per housing unit basis, more expensive to develop.” It is therefore abundantly clear that the ability to achieve the regulatory minimum 10% affordability may be quite difficult, if not impossible. The community must therefore recognize that every reasonable opportunity afforded to realize affordable housing, and done so in a manner that averts any impact on the reservoir and it's contributing resources, must be vehemently supported. REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL Present Property conditions are quite deplorable, evidencing the presence of a blight that will in all likelihood have ttle restorative ‘capacity should events fail to soon change. It is also rather apparent that it is starting to have some spillover effect - the business across Main Street being in a similar state of disrepair and lack of usage. The photograph to the right, as well as those below, exemplify these assertions.LDP and ZBR Application Page 11 of 26 193-Unit ‘Hope Mill’ Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development Main and Mill Streets The following photograph illustrates the now defunct business, situated diagonally across from the Hope Mill site, opposite Main Street. The redevelopment proposal entails three (3) components: rehabbing the present Hope Mil facility; constructing two (2) new multi-unit housing complexes; and improving overall site conditions (landscaping, off-street parking, appropriate buffering, etc.). The mill facility proper, ‘as well as new construction, will all be used for residential purposes, realizing provision of much-needed affordable housing (upwards of 40%). The proposed redevelopment action is well supported by the Comprehensive [Page E-2] and Affordable Housing Plans. E-2.0 Policy Planning Chart - Housing Goal - Increase the Supply of Habitable, Affordable Units In total, 193-units are proposed, of which 76-units will be deemed affordable, or approximately 40% of the overall development. It is anticipated that upwards of 117-units - both market rate and affordable rental units - will be dispersed throughout the mil. Furthermore, the units will be comprised of one (1) and two-bedroom units, for purposes of accommodating both the elderly and smaller families. As will be evidenced below, households have been steadily decreasing over the last several decades. The remaining 76-units will be cistributed throughout the two (2) new proposed residential facities, all of which will be market-ate, The entire site will be fully landscaped and buffered, as well as introducing appropriate off-streat parking. Finally, the primary means of ingress and egress will be off of Main Street, directing traffic away from the residential neighborhood along Nill StreetLDP and ZBR Application Page 12 of 26 193-Unit ‘Hope Mill’ Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development Main and Mill Streets OPRIAT iS. Given the described redevelopment parameters and degree of affordable housing to be realized, which is well in excess of minimum regulatory requirements, itis rather unusual that i is not being sought pursuant to the Comprehensive Permit procedural process. Regardless, the proposed redevelopment will result in the provision of much-needed affordable rental housing - both family and elderly oriented. The Property's distinctive placement within the Hope District ‘and presence of the long underutilized Hope Mil, both contribute to the appropriateness of reuse for dense mult-unit residential, of which approximately 40% of the units to be introduced are deemed affordable, This must be compared to the minimum regulatory requirement of 25%, mandated by the Affordable Housing statute. The density associated with the subject proposal is six-units per acre, or one-unit per 7,272 ‘square feet of total land area. Although, somewhat dense in comparison to typical town-wide residential development, this land use consultant can attest to the fact that it is on par with a typical mill conversion project that will realize affordable housing, A more precise barometer, is the percentage of affordable housing to be attained, given the many town-wide development constraints and thus vastly limited land resources capable of accommodating such densities. Practically speaking, 10% affordability may never be achieved, even realizing intensive development of all appropriately zoned land resources. Therefore, those few sites that are extremely capable of accommodating even greater densities, must be thoroughly supported. Once again, redevelopment of the Hope Mill site, wil result in the introduction of 193-units, of which 76-units are deemed affordable. The redevelopment will realize much-needed affordable family and elderly rental housing units, or approximately 40% of the overall unit count, The typical Comprehensive Permit would only realize approximately 48-units (in accordance with minimal 25% requirement). Although, the redevelopment proposal does not comply with the minimum lot area requirement pursuant to Section 3 ‘Multifamily Dwelling Structures’, of the Ordinance, the proposed land use, ‘namely multi-unit residential, is conditionally permitted within both the M-District as well as Hope District. A conditionally permitted land use, is in fact permissible pursuant to case law, allowing for the imposition of reasonable conditions of approval, if necessary. Therefore, the only obstacle from a land use perspective, that is dimensional in nature, is the resulting deficient lot area density. However, this land use consultant cannot even fathom a situation in which the requisite lot area density could be achieved, while realizing provision of affordable housing. The subject development itself necessitates in excess of 177-acres to realize dimensional compliance, At this rate, the vast majority of town-wide land resources would have to beLDP and ZBR Application Page 13 of 26 193-Unit ‘Hope Mill? Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development Main and Mill Streets ‘consumed, and even then fail to meet the minimum 10% statutory requirement. Common sense dictates that the entire town cannot be developed in such a manner. The preceding points are corroborated by the following language excerpted from the Comprehensive Plan [Page E-8] “Only 443 of Scituate's 1999 inventory of 3,904 housing units are were located in structures with more than one housing unit. Most of these are found in former single family homes in North Sotuate and Hope Vilage which have Bean convaried 10 two or three-family homes. z The only ue multtfamly housing is the 24-unit Rockland rOaks Reservoirs water quality. elderly housing, described in Section E-5.1.2." hard to Implement, owing to low density and restricted land. For example, commercial zones permit multi-family unit construction but there is very little land area available to meet the one-unit-per-acre requirement.” No community permits high-density, multi-unit residential development throughout - even without consideration for the unique presence of the Scituate Reservoir, that rightfully imposes very restrictive development policies. Therefore, the community must support those rare appropriate circumstances, in which some headway towards affordable housing compliance can be achieved. It can be properly concluded, that associated dimensional density non-compliance is purely technical, and therefore appropriate. As a final point, the extremely restrictive lot area density standard is primarily to assure reservoir protection - a consideration that has no application to the redevelopment proposal in question. This condusion is substantiated by the fact that both the Comprehensive Plan [Page E-12] and Affordable Housing Plan [Page 2] direct affordable housing to areas outside the watershed, and more specifically, to those already disturbed such as existing commercial and/or industrial properties. Comprehensive Plan commercial/industrial structures and mill buildings, no sites are ‘specifically recommended since they lack the critical environmental compatibility required. The proposed Zoning would require such an environmental evaluation as a prerequisite fo any exceptions. I ‘and/or in areas with sewer and water, oF i from reservoir watershed protection zones areas with the potential for sewer and water expansion.” Affordable Housing Plan eee ee teerae rehabilitation of the Town's da devas ed elt ‘stock, ‘cause of existing sommercialindustrial and municipal buildings and allowing controlled density increases toLDP and ZBR Application Page 14 of 26 193-Unit “Hope Mill” Multi-Unit Residentiat (Affordable Housing) Development ‘Main and Mill Streets accomplish its housing goels, without placing total reliance on new construction to provide affordable housing.” Regardless, dimensional relief from the minimum lot area density requirement, pursuant to Section 3 ‘Multifamily Dwelling Structures’, along with other dmensional criteria (as elaborated In the submission package), will be pursued. It is the professional opinion of this land use consultant that the granting of the requisite relief is appropriate, considering the subject property is not only a valid site for the provision of affordable housing, but also at the prescribed density. EVIDENCING NEED ‘The Comprehensive / Housing Plans and US Census were the principle documents researched in conducting the following analysis. ‘Therefore, all information provided here-forth expresses clear and conclusive suppor, in regard to the provision of affordable housing, which is perhaps the most important component of the subject redevelopment proposal. The analysis begins with documenting ‘Need,’ Town of Scituate demographics, as excerpted from the US Census, Comprehensive and Affordable Housing Plans, illustrate that the population has been ever growing (2010 being an anomaly) and getting older, while simultaneously decreasing in overall household size. Population and housing counts, as well as age related data, are as follows: Population Counts, * — 1950-3,905 1990- 9,796 (16.5%) + 1980-5,210 (33.4%) 2000 - 10,324 (05.4%) © 1970 -7,489 (43.7%) 2010 10,329 (0.05%) + 1980-8,405 (12.2%) Housing Unit Counts 1980 - 2,911 + 2000~ 3,904 (10.9%) 1990 ~ 3,520 (20.9%) + 2010- 4,102 (05.1%) Age Data 1990 2000 2010 019 2,682 (27.3%) 2,859 (27.7%) 2,501 (24.2%) 20-64 5,983 (61.1%) 6,224 (60.3%) 6,304 (61.0%) 65+ 4,134 (11.5%) 1,241 (11.9%) 1,524 (14.8%)LDP and ZBR Application Page 15 of 26, 193-Unit “Hope Mil? Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development Main and Mill Streets Alternatively, average household size is decreasing at a steady rate, thereby resulting in smaller households and the need for more housing units, as evidenced below. 1970 - 3.30 persons per unit 2000 - 2.70 persons per unit 1980 - 2.90 persons per unit 2010 ~ 2.62 persons per unit 1990 ~ 2,80 persons per unit The resulting decrease of greater than two-thirds of one (1) person per unit in 40-years, evidences the need for more housing units. This results in increased pressure for additional housing, in particular affordable housing, as well supported by the Comprehensive Plan [Page D2) “The apparent inconsistency between the addition of 609 housing units and a net in migration of only 1,071 people recorded between 1980 and 1990 can be explained by the changing ature of average household size. For the period between 1970 and 1990, the average household size dropped from 3.3 in 1970 to 2.9 in 1980 and 2.8 in 1990. This trend continued in 2000 with a household size decrease to 2.7. This deciine is consistent with State and National trends due to an aging population and smaller households. Consequently, a greater ‘umber of housing units are required to meet the needs of a given population.” ‘The decreased household size is even more drastic when discussing rental units. Smaller households occupy such premises, evidencing an even greater need as evidenced by the Comprehensive Plan “Between 1990 and 2000, the average household size in Scituate stayed relatively the same, from 2,96 persons per owner-occupied housing unit in 1990, to 2.84 persons per owner- ‘occupied housing unit in 2000. ? A significant combination of reduction in household density and increase in population growth, results in a drastic need for more housing units. When contrasting overall need for more housing units with the statutory requirement of 10% total housing stock affordability, the anticipated need Is rather evident. It has been the position of this land use consultant that present and future requirements could result in Affordable Housing needs that far surpass the Community's ability to react. Affordable rental housing is required for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is accommodating the needs of local residents, especially those with established generational roots as well as those providing a commurity service (e.g. emergency Personnel), and yet unable to secure affordable living arrangements, Comprehensive Plan “Even allowing for the extraordinary real estate boom during that period, we ean predict that Supply of rental units in Scituate, which is unlikely to change significantly. This prediction assumes thet the regional economic decline will be of limited duration.” [Page E40)LDP and ZBR Application Page 16 of 26 193-Unit ‘Hope Mill’ Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development Main and Mill Streets E-5.2.1 Moderate Income Households [Page E-10] — "Responses to alleviate moderate income housing need in Scituate should include consideration of.” "Encouraging private sector production of new affordable units.” “I jorea! a As previously noted, the Comprehensive Plan documents that single-family housing is the Predominant fownewide land use, in fact i speciically acknowledges the folowing: “Tax which fs developed’ What has been difficult to introduce, given documented town-wide constraints, is the introduction of multi-unit housing. This is very important because density Permits affordability, and is typically introduced via the private sector. Therefore, unless a community has vast viable land resources for subdivision, or conventional development in general, affordable housing is typically solely realized by means of more dense multi-unit housing developments. It is therefore imperative that locel permitting authorities carefully ‘consider all such proposals when they avail themselves. This land use consultant has yet to be engaged in a residential development that entails affordable housing, and yet gamers no opposition, It would be difficult to comprehend if the same fate awaits the subject redevelopment, given the well-documented Comprehensive Plan and Affordable Housing Plan goals and objectives for procuring affordable housing by means of commercial and/or industrial property conversion. Nevertheless, there are a variety of obstacles to achieving the provision of affordable housing, apart from neighborhood consternation, that evidences why such qualified Proposals cannot be disavowed. The Affordable Housing Plan [Page 26] well acknowledges the difficulties associated with introducing much-needed affordable housing. “Although this plan identifies potential sites for redevelopment, and introduces strategies for increased housing production in residential districts on land outside the watershed (Appendix A), the Proposed development must be proven feasbie givan the availabilty of funding resources, availability of land and the commitment of development agencies.” [Page 26] In regard to provision of affordable housing, the Town of Scituate is literally only one of two (2) communities, the other being the Town of Little Compton, that has less than one-percent (0.85%) of its year-round housing stock dedicated to such necessary usage, Not only is the provision of affordable housing woefully lacking, but more disconcerting is the fact that since the adoption of the revised affordable housing statute in 2004, the community has actually lost affordable housing. In 2004, there was a total of 39-units, of which 24 was dedicated to the elderly and 15-units to those with special needs - four (4) of the referenced units having sinceLDP and ZBR Application Page 17 of 26 199-Unit ‘Hope Mill’ Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development Main and Mili Streets been extinguished and only ‘1-units remaining. The numbers are even more staggering, when ‘one considers that percentages are based on the then year-round housing unit count. Clearly, there has been development during the stated 13+ years. In 2004, the estimated housing unit count, based upon the 2000 Census, was 3,904-units, or an estimated 1% deemed affordable. The 2010-Census housing unit count acknowledges that there has been an approximate increase of 198-units to a total of 4,102, or increase of 198-units. And yet, provision of affordable has actually decreased, now standing at approximately 0.85%. This must be placed in the context of a housing unit count that is now several years dated. There clearly has been housing development during said census, thereby resulting in an even lower percentage attributed to the affordable housing needs of local citizens. Its the professional opinion of this land use consultant that the Town of Scituate is only one (1) of a handful of communities that will in all likelihood never achieve minimum 10% affordability. There are simply too many town-wide constraints, constraints that are extremely valid even in the face of such importance as provision of affordable housing, that their exclusion is inadvisable. Therefore, those few development scenarios that avail themselves, which will not only realize the provision of considerable affordable housing, but also absolutely capable of doing so in an environmentally sound and neighborhood friendly manner, must be supported and eventually approved. The Comprehensive Plan's - Build-Out Analysis [Page D-9], albeit somewhat dated, nevertheless provides a solid basis from which to deduce final housing unit count This information is then used to conclude 10% affordability housing unit count at full build out. D - 3.1.4 Build-Out Analysis - “A build-out analysis completed in 1990 of the areas vacant and proposed for residential use revealed a potential to construct approximately 3,700 additional homes in Scituate. Of these, about 3,300 are within the Reservoir's watershed and the balance of 400 are outside the watershed. This is an optimum estimate; in actual practice the total would probably drop by 25 percent due to natural and man-made constraints which occur when a more detailed analysis is made of individual parcels of land.” ‘The Affordable Housing Plan reemphasizes the preceding Build-Out Analysis, however, it offers ‘a more conservative 33% reduction in regard to resources incapable of accommodating further development. For purposes of this report, the more conservaiive 33% reduction approach will be taken, so that there is no argument regarding the padding of numbers to renders matters worse than they already are. In 1990, the total housing unit count was 3,520. Considering the "Build-Out Analysis’ anticipated approximately 3,700 additional units prior to applying the 33% reduction, a more precise conservative housing unit count at full build-out will be 5,986. To achieve minimum 10% affordability, the Town of Scituate necessitates 699-units, or an additional 564-units at full build-out. It is therefore rather self-evident that a singular development thatLDP and ZBR Application Page 18 of 26 193-Unit ‘Hope Mil? Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development Main and Mil Streets affords 76-units of affordability, or approximately 13.5% of overall need at estimated full build- out, is most assuredly appropriate. To reiterate, the present number of affordable housing units is approximately 0.85%, consisting Of 24-elderly and 11-special needs units. The 2000 CHAS Data for Scituate, as evidenced in the Affordable Housing Plan, illustrates continued need among all three categories, Therefore, the subject development will greatly assist in diminishing these dire shortfalls. The following chart, excerpted from the Affordable Housing Plan, illustrates need according to CHAS necessary to achieve affordable housing compliance. ‘Souoe: HUD SOCDS chip faceds hudvsct.org CHTAS/CHAS, jan bie). [Note:The number inthis chart represent the ital of those in need according wo CHAS at -<>E0%6 median income. POTENTIAL LOCATION SUMMARY CHART One final note is in regard to the appropriateness of the respective property for affordable housing development purposes, such that it is without question that densifying the referenced mill site is absolutely regulatory compliant. Pursuant to the ‘Development and Adaptive Re-use Sites Identified for Potential Use as Low and Moderate Housing Locations’ chart, as excerpted from the Affordable Housing Plan, not only is the referenced property specifically included for Purposes of realizing affordable housing, but at anticipated numbers that are lower than the present proposal. Upwards of 59-units affordable housing were anticipated, as contrasted with the present proposal of 76-units (or increase of 22.4%). Furthermore, the type of affordableLDP and ZBR Application Page 19 of 26 193-Unit ‘Hope Mil” Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development Main and Mill Streets housing to be hopefully procured from said development, expressly included both elderly and family rentals. It is therefore this planning consultant's professional opinion that the subject property is well suited for densification, thereby realizing provision of much-needed affordable housing. The subject redevelopment proposal, if successful, will increase present affordable housing counts from the approximately 0.85% to 2.60% (or staggering 206% increase). This would be the largest increase this land use consultant has ever professionally experienced. Of equal importance is the presence of the historic Hope Mil, and its loss if no action is taken to preserve in a timely fashion. The area is already disturbed, and therefore proposed actions will only serve as a win-win situation, Finally, the proposed reuse is not only in character with surrounding neighborhood characteristics, but well supported by the goals and objectives of both the Comprehensive and Affordable Housing Plans. REGULATORY ANALYSIS — REQUIRED STANDARDS and BURDENS 1. Special Use Permit Standards Section 6(C) - Zoning board of review: Powers of the zoning board of review - “The board shail have the powers set forth in section 45-24-27 of the General Laws as follows.” (10) “To hear and decide special use permits to the terms of this ordinance, according to the provisions set forth as follows.” "A use designated as special use in article II or elsewhere in this ordinance shall be permitted by the board following a public hearing if such use meets the following requirements” A. “It will be compatible with the neighboring land uses.” Refer to report, which documents surrounding neighborhood land uses. Redevelopment will greatly assist the surrounding neighborhood, and town in general, by eliminating a blight and introducing dense residential usage, which is what is in character with the surrounding neighborhood. B. "it will not create @ nuisance in the neighborhood.” The property, albeit zoned M-District, is primarily surrounded by residential land uses. Furthermore, it is presently in a ‘blighted, deplorable condition, The proposed redevelopment will in fact cure a present neighborhood nuisance.LDP and ZBR Application Page 200f 26 193-Unit ‘Hope Mill’ Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development Main and Mill Streets ©. “it will not hinder the future development of the town’ No such action will result, as evidenced by the indepth analysis of both the ‘Comprehensive and Affordable Housing Plans, D. “It will be in conformance with the purposes and intent of the comprehensive plan and ‘the zoning ordinance." Absolute conformance. Once again, refer to the results of the in-depth analysis of both the Comprehensive and Affordable Housing Plans, Il. Dimensional Variance Burdens Section 6(C) - Zoning board of review: Powers of the zoning board of review - “The board shall have the powers set forth in section 45-24-27 of the General Laws as follows:” (13) “In granting a variance, the zoning board of review shall require that evidence to the satisfaction of the following standards be entered info the record of the proceedings.” (a) “That the hardship from which the applicant seeks relief is due to the unique characteristics of the subject land or structure and not to the general characteristics of the ‘surrounding area; and is not due to a physical or economic disability of the applicant.” Hardship results from the unique characteristics of both the subject land and structure. Failure to approve, will continue the non-use of the Historic Hope Mil, and its eventual demolition. It will also continue the Town's inability to realize provision of affordable housing from appropriate developments. (b) “That the hardship is not the result of any prior action of the applicant and does not result primarily from the desire of the applicant to realize greater financial gain.” Present land use and period of deterioration is in no way associated with the present applicant / developer. Primary desire is to reuse in a reasonably, feasible manner, that is well supported by the Town's regulatory documents, because it will realize much-needed affordable housing, {c) “That the granting of the requested variance will not alter the general character of the surrounding area or impair the intent or purpose of the zoning ordinance or the comprehensive plan upon which the ordinance is based.” Refer to report, which documents surrounding neighborhood land uses, Redevelopment will greatly assist the surrounding neighborhood, and town in general, by eliminating a blight and introducing residential usage, which is what is in character with the surrounding neighborhood. It will be in absolute conformance, as evidenced by the results of the in- depth analysis of both the Comprehensive and Affordable Housing Plans.LDP and ZBR Application Page 21 of 26 193-Unit ‘Hope Mil? Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development Main and Mill Streets (d) "That the relief to be granted is the least relief necessary." The present proposal will realize an even greater number of affordable housing units than anticipated by the Affordable Housing Plan. The density pursued, and all resulting dimensional deviations, were thus anticipated and already deemed reasonable. It is therefore the least relief necessary to realize reasonable reuse of the property. (14) “The zoning board of review shall, in addition to the above standards, require that evidence be entered into the record of the proceedings showing that.” (b) “in granting a dimensional variance, that the hardship that will be suffered by the ovmer of the subject property if the dimensional variance is not granted shall amount to more than a mere inconvenience, which shall mean that there is not other reasonable alternative 10 ‘enjoy a legally permitted beneficial use of one’s property. The fact that a use may be more profitable or that a structure may be more valuable efter the relief is granted shall not be grounds for relief.” Were the redevelopment proposal to be denied, the historic Hope Mil will continue to deteriorate to the point of obsolescence. Furthermore, provision of much-needed affordable housing will be subverted. This will clearly result in hardship amounting to more than a mere inconvenience. In fact, it could be argued that it will resut in loss of all beneficial use - a burden that is not even applicable in the subject circumstance. Ill, Major Land Development Regulations - General Requirements Section 14-28(c). General Requirements. ‘The requirements listed below shall be applicable to all land developments.... submitted for approval...the Board shall make positive findings on all of the standards listed below..: (1) “Each land development...shall be consistent with the requirements of the Scituate Comprehensive Community Plan and shall satisfactorily address the issues where there may be inconsistencies.” The in-depth results of the Neighborhood Analysis, Comprehensive Plan and Affordable Housing Consistency Analysis above, clearly conclude that the proposed redevelopment will not alter the general character of the surrounding area or impair the intent or purpose of either the Ordinance, Comprehensive or Affordable Housing Plan, (2) “Each jot in the land development....shall conform to the standards and provisions of the Scituate Zoning Ordinance." Refer above to addressing the requisite standards for the granting of the special use permit, and burdens for the requisite dimensional deviations. (3) ‘There will be no significant negative environmental impacts from the proposed development as shown on the final plan, with all required conditions for approval.” (4) "The land development...as proposed, will not result in the creation of individual lots with ‘such physical constraints to development that building on those lots according to pertinent regulations and building standards would be impracticable.”LDP and ZBR Application Page 22 0f 26 193-Unit ‘Hope Mil’ Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development ‘Main and Mil Streets The subject property will be throughly served by appropriate infrastructure, and thus the reason for permitting greater density. Furthermore, the property is presently already well disturbed. Redevelopment will only cure many existing site deficiencies, as well as eliminate a neighborhood blight, Professional respective testimony will be provided. (8) “All proposed land developments...shall have adequate and permanent physical access to. @ public street.” The subject property has direct access to Main Street and Mil Street, albeit Main Street will be the primary means of ingress and egress. Mill Street neighborhood intrusion will be averted. (6) “Each land development...shall provide for safe circulation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic, for adequate surface water run-off, for suitable building sites, and for preservation of natural, historical, or cultural features that contribute to the attractiveness of the community.” The primary basis for the redevelopment is to realize preservation of the historical Hope Mill site, which Will also entail upgrading the entire site - a site that presently is both a blight and fails to meet any current environmental and/or engineering principles. VRC review and approval has already been attained, further evidencing the appropriateness of the subject Proposal. Redevelopment will greatly assist the surrounding neighborhood, and town in ‘general, by eliminating a blight and introducing residential usage, which is what is in character with the surrounding neighborhood. (7) “The design and location of streets, building lots, utilties, drainage improvements and other improvements in each land development...shall minimize flooding and soil erosion.” (8) “Site planning and design shall be in conformance with the Low Impact Development Manual as may be applicable to the project, these Regulations and/or as determined by the Plan Commission.” ‘To be answered by the respective engineering and other experts. WV, Section 13 - Multi-Family Site Plan Review Standards - Addressed Out of an Abundance of Caution There are a series of requisite SPR standards that must be satisfactorily addressed, prior to being issued an affirmative decision. Albeit, the proposed development is being properly defined as a Major LDP (requisite standards addressed above), this land use consultant nevertheless addressed the SPR Standards as well, out of an abundance of caution. It must be emphasized that given the property's presence within the Hope District, and specifically improved with the Historic Hope Mil, the VRC likewise had reviewing authority, already concluding that the proposal is consistent with the unique character of the Village and relationship with its’ neighbors. The requisite SPR standards are individually addressed below. D. Standards for review: “Sif and with the corre ive or operate businesses noise, congestion, smoke, dust, odor, glare, stormwater runoff, efc).” (eg.LDP and ZBR Application Page 23 of 26 193-Unit ‘Hope Mill’ Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development Main and Mill Streets “Additional objectives include the preservation of the natural resources of the town; the creation of @ better and safer living environment; and the enhancement of man-made resources including the town's architectural and historic heritage; protection of the Scituate Watershed and Reservoir.” 1. "The town's natural resources shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible.” Rehabbing the mill site property in the manner so-described will assure protection of all Natural resources. It is one of few properties, situated outside the watershed, that is capable of accommodating greater density. All improvements will be entirely located towards the rear of the existing facility, as required by Ordinance, and remain pervious to enhance both property aesthetics and drainage. 2. “Erosion and sedimentation shall be controlled during and after construction and shall not adversely effect adjacent or neighboring property or public facilities or services. All erosion control shall meet the standards of the town's erosion and sedimentation ordinance and the Rhode Island Erosion and Sedimentation Control Manual.” ‘To be answered by the respective erosion and sedimentation expert. 3. “Increased runoff due to the development on the site shall not be injurious to any downstream property owner or cause hazardous conditions on adjoining streets.” To be answered by the respective engineering expert. 4, “Direct discharge of untreated storm water run-off to a wetland or watercourse from impervious surfaces, including, but not limited to, roadways, parking lots, driveways, basements, and roofs shall not be allowed.” To be answered by the respective engineering expert. 5. “The proposed development shall not result in pollution of ground or surface waters, other than that anticipated under normal development practices with adequate mitigating measures to prevent significant impacts. All development stormwater control shall meet the standards of the Rhode Island Stormwater Management Manual and be of nonstructural character fo the extent possible.” ‘To be answered by the respective engineering expert. 6. “The movement of vehicular and pedestrian traffic within the site in relation to access streets shall be safe and convenient and adequate provision shall be made for snow removal.” New on-site parking and circulation patterns will be introduced. This will ensure appropriately engineered stall and aisle width dimensions. Furthermore, all improved surfaces will remain pervious, so that drainage (quantity, direction, and qualty) is properly controlled and regulated. 7, “Vehicular entrances and exits shall not be located within seventy-five (75) feet of any street intersection, where possible.” Primary ingress and egress point will be from Main Street, realizing full compliance.LDP and ZBR Application Page 24 of 26 193-Unit ‘Hope Mill” Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development ‘Main and Mill Streets 8. “Traffic generated by the development shall not creete significant congestion on the adjoining and nearby street system." To be answered by the respective engineering expert, 9, “Adequate off-street parking and loading shall be provided to prevent on-street traffic congestion; all parking spaces, maneuvering areas, entrances and exits shall be suitably ‘identified; the interior circulation system shail be designed to provide safe and convenient access to all structures, uses and/or parking spaces; parking areas shall be protected with suitable bumper guards, guard reils, islands, crosswalks, speed bumps, guard rails and similar devices when deemed necessary by the plan commission to protect life and property; and provisions shall be made for safe pedestrian movement within and adjacent to the property." Will realize full compliance. 10. “Parking lots containing twenty (20) or more spaces shail be planted with at least one tree er eight (8) spaces, no smaller than two-inch caliper, each tree being surrounded by no less than forty (40) square feet of permeable unpaved area, Trees required by the provisions of this ‘section shall be at least five (5) feet in height at the time of planting and shall be of a species characterized by rapid growth and by suitability and hardiness for location in a parking lot. To the extent practicable, existing trees shall be retained and used to satisty the provisions of this As illustrated throughout this report, the subject property is well-screened on all sides by vast ‘natural vegetation. The proposed improvements will be situated towards the rear, and away from almost all visual vantage points. The subject area is likewise already naturally screened by vast vegetation. Nevertheless, the applicant has agreed to introducing even more landscaping to assure sufficient buffering. 11. “Within village areas parking areas shall be located only at the side or reer of buildings unless sufficient evidence is presented to justify parking within the front yard setback area.” Will realize full compliance. 12. “No development shall be allowed where there is unrestricted access to the public streets or where the public street must be utilized to maneuver in and out of a parking space." Not applicable. 18. "Buildings and the grounds adjoining them shall permit eesy access and operation of fre, police, and other emergency vehicles.” Circulation will be designed so as to permit free-flowing emergency vehicular access throughout the facility and adjoining grounds. 14, “Sensitive environmental land features such as steep slopes, wetlands and large ‘outcroppings shall be preserved and protected.” Although, the property is surrounded by the Pawtuxet River, it is an already disturbed site. New construction will avert any impact, as will be substantiated by the respective experts.LDP and ZBR Application Page 25 of 26 193-Unit ‘Hope Mill” Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development Main and Mill Streets 18. “Existing trees and vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible.” Minimal, if any, existing vegetation will be disturbed. In fact, additional vegetation will be introduced, as the property will be entirely redeveloped from a landscaping and buffering perspective. 16. "Buffering elements in the form of architectural design and landscape design that provide a logical transition to adjoining existing or permitted uses shall be provided." Once again, minimal, if any, existing vegetation will be disturbed. In fact, additional vegetation will be introduced, as the property will be entirely redeveloped from a landscaping and buffering perspective. 17. "Scenic views and historically significant features shall be preserved.” ‘The primary basis for the redevelopment is to realize preservation of the historical Hope Mil site. VRC review and approval has already been attained. 48. “Glare from the installation of outdoor lights and signs and from the movement of vehicles on the site shall be shielded from the view of adjacent properties in a residential zone." To reiterate, lighting installation will be both shielded and downward directed, Existing vegetation is more than sufficient to screen any vehicular lights. Nevertheless, additional vegetative screening throughout will be introduced to avert any lighting disturbance. 19. "Abutting properties and town amenities shall not be degraded by undue disturbances caused by excess or unreasonable noise, smoke, vapors, fumes, dust, and odors.” Redevelopment will greatly assist the surrounding neighborhood, and town in general, by eliminating a blight and introducing residential usage, which is what is in character with the surrounding neighborhood, 20. “The design of the project, including buildings and landscape shail be visually compatible with the character of the surrounding area, including building materials, massing, scale, and building roof form." Compliant, as evidenced by the subject report. Furthermore, already attained VRC approval. 21. *The design of the project and the site plan shall conform to the town's comprehensive plan.” Already addressed throughout this report. CONCLUSION Itis this Land Use Planning and Zoning Consultant's professional opinion that the proposed development is consistent with the Comprehensive and Affordable Housing Plans and furthers the respective Policies, Goals and Objectives of said Plans, and can therefore be fully supported by all respective Scituate Boards and Commissions. My professional opinion isLDP and ZBR Application Page 26 of 26 193-Unit ‘Hope Mill’ Multi-Unit Residential (Affordable Housing) Development Main and Mill Streets based upon the manner in which the development can be incorporated into the overall fabric of the general area. All approvals must carefully consider the many benefits posed by the applicant's redevelopment, not the least of which is the provision of 76-units (or approximately 40%) of both elderly and family rental housing,* Exhibit B” PIMENTEL CONSULTING, INC. (401) 529-0647 - Cellular Edward Pimentel, AICP Tax ID No. 56-2331684 26 Avon Road on-line: edaicp@vahoo.com Cranston, Rhode Island 02905 SUMMARY of QUALIFICATIONS Forward-thinking, pragmatic urban planning professional with twenty (20+) years of practical experience. Skilled in a variety of neighborhood and commercial planning and zoning activities, frequently in a supervisory or managerial capacity. Solid track records with proven effectiveness in, but not limited to, the following areas; = Zoning Boards of Review > Community Planning and Consulting = Planning Boards / Commissions => Subdivision Review and Planning = City / Town Councils => Superior Court => Code Enforcement = Residential, Commercial and Industrial Development SELECTED EXAMPLES of ACCOMPLISHMENT + Testitied before numerous boards, commissions and councils on matters of residential, ‘commercial, and industrial development, as well as changes / amendments to Zoning Ordinances and Comprehensive Plans. * Testified before Municipal and Superior Court on matters of code enforcement and general land use planning. * Authored various documents including Cost of Community Services Study, Revitalization Plans, Zoning Ordinances, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and the first Telecommunications Ordinance in the State of Rhode Island. * Responsible for reviewing all development associated with the Quonset Point / Davisvile Industrial Park, an approximately 3,500 acre industrial park, site of the former Sea Bee Navy Base, numerous mil rehabilitation projects, including Pocasset Mil, Johnston, Rl (Comprehensive Plan Amendments). ‘*_ Responsible for reviewing numerous residential subdivisions, especially expert in the field of Comprehensive Permits (Affordable Housing). Work product cited by the Rhode Island Supreme Court. * Represented clients before numerous Zoning Boards of Review throughout the State of Rhode Island, on a variety of variance and special use permit petitions, with a greater than 0% success rate.EDUCATION MASTERS OF COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT University of Rhode Island - Masters Received 1904 University of Florida - Studied City Planning - 1991 / 1992 BACHELOR OF ARTS ~ URBAN AFFAIRS; MINORS IN MATHEMATICS AND PHILOSOPHY University of Rhode Isiand - BA Received 1990 ACCREDITATION: AMERICAN INSTITUTE of CERTIFIED PLANNERS ~ May 1996 PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Land Use Consultant PIMENTEL CONSULTING, INC. East Providence, Rhode Island Zoning Officer CITY OF EAST PROVIDENCE East Providence, Rhode Istand ce PI TOWN OF BARRINGTON Barrington, Rhode Island ‘Town Planner TOWN OF WAYLAND Wayland, Massachusetts Principal Planner TOWN OF NORTH KINGSTOWN, North Kingstown, Rhode Island Assistant Planner CITY OF EAST PROVIDENCE, East Providence, Rhode Island Planning Consultant NEWPORT COLLABORATIVE Newport, Rhode (sland Planning Intern CITY OF ORANGE CITY Orange City, Florida RHODE ISLAND AIR NATIONAL GUARD Plans and Implementation Communications Specialist Rhode Island Air National Guard 1995 ~ Retired 2013, ‘Security Police Officer Rhode Island Air National Guard 1987 - 1990of ce af eSiated rele in 'e Zoning Ordinance affecting the following ‘he grounds hereinate set forth, ahi cation form Mus be filled out wamPletely and signed bY all property OWnGES oF their Jawtal Fpresentatives. 41) Petitions must be i mPleted in fail and Contain all reauested i ion Placed on an agenda, § Zoning Distions) in ‘hich premises are cated {Corer Masco tg TOV Onetey Diag 6 When wit ae 7. regret Ts there a building on the premises at present? Yer Yes, size(s) 92,494 9. PPO use of property Residential Apertmenty 10. Give size Of proposed bu; 92,494 5 ft existing Ma ling(s)14, Provision of Zoning Ordinance under which this application for relief is made: Please see Attached Zoning Submission Lette dated Janutry 27,2017 Article Section Subsection 15, Dimensional Variance(s) related to: 3 Principal Building(s) ot Accessory Building(s) lease see Attached Zoning Submission Letter dated January 27, 2017 U Coverage © Height O Lot Width Allowed __sq. ft Allowed ___feet Allowed __ feet Roquested sq. ft. Requested feet Requested feet Relief sought sq. f. Relief Sought feet Relief Sought __feet % Setback Requirements Please se Attached Zoning Subalsion Letter dated January 27,2017 Front Side Rest Allowed Allowed. Allowed _ Requested, Requested Requested 16. Other Variance or Special Use Permit Please se Attached Zoning Submission Later dated Janay 27,2017 17, State grounds for the Variance, Special Use Permit or Appeal in this case: Please see Attached Zoning Submalssion Letter dated January 27, 2017 18, Additional information provided with this application has been attached as follows: Please see Attached Zoning Submission Leter dated January 27, 2017 Reports from expert witnesses should be submitted with the application or ten (10) days prior to the hearing to give the Zoning Board suflicient review time. If a repor is submited atthe time of the hearing, the Chairman may rule on whether the Zoning Bosrd will continue to another meeting to give the Zoning Board time to review the report. The undersigned declares that he/she has received, read and understands the Filing tnstructions sre nc inrpatop eso fyso be bes oth orbelnoweigeand bet, Applicant GPE away, Telephone # Mero owner LOR G Powe [Reewwr pe Telephone #_ Ol. 273-Peer> a th WS Counsel. Telephone #5B DiPrete Engineering Hope Mills Prepared for Paramount Development Group attn: Richard Derosas, 1165 Hunt Road Chelmsford, MA 01824 617-548-8333 Lot Owner Information PE ‘Assessor Plat § Lots 1 and 114 and Assessor Plat 3 Lot 8 {Lots in the Town of Scituate) Assessor Plat 102 Lot 5 (Lot in the Town of Coventry) Boyajain, Harrington, Richardson & Furness (in receivership) 182 Waterman Street Providence, RI 02906 401-648-6346 Assessor Plat § Lot 117 (Lot in the Town of Scituate) Paramount Apartments, LLe 60 State Street ~Sulte 700 Boston, MA 02109 BOSTON PROVIDENCE NEWPORT | TwoStafford Cour Cranston, Rhodeisiand oag20 | 401-9434009 vin. diprete-eng.com. Exhibit D wo; BD DiPrete Engineering January 27, 2017 Town of Scituate Zoning Board of Review 195 Danielson Pike Scituate, Ri 02857 (401) 647-5901, RE: Hope Mills— FEMA AE Floadplain Explanation ‘AP3 Lot 8; AP 5 Lots 1, 114, 117 in the Town of Scituate ‘AP 101 Lot 5in the Town of Coventry Settuate, Rhode Island Project #: 1272-002 To whom it may concern: This letter is in reference to the letter titled “Hope Mills ~ Zoning Submission” prepared by DiPrete Engineering dated January 27, 2017 to accompany the Town of Scituate Amended Zoning Board Decision Submission dated January 27, 2017 being made by Paramount Apartments, LLC for the Hope Mills project located in Scituate and Coventry, Rhode Island on the above referenced Assessor's Plat and Lot ‘numbers. This letter is intended to address any concerns about floodingand describe the pre to post development conditions within the small portion of the site located within a FEMA Flood Zone AE. ‘The Zone AE area is a special flood hazard area inundated by 100-year food. The specific area on site that is impacted is located between the southwest corner of the existing saw-tooth portion of the mill building and the Pawtuxet River and is located betweer FEMA flood elevations 190-189 of the Pawtuxet River Sloodway, This area of the Site exists as grassed area with minimal woods and ar Imporvious path providing access to the rear ofthe Site. A field survey was conducted ofthis area and the exterior grades at the southwest corner of the sawtooth butlding (identified as Building 3 an all plan sets provided) is at an approximate elevation of 186.8, creating a depressedarea in the AE zone. There is an existing boulder retaining wall that runs parallel with the Pawtuxet Riverthat the field survey shows as being slightly below the flood elevation of 189, Studles and historical records show that during the 100- ‘year flood event this area receives flood water from the Pawtuxet River, ponds, then travels east along the saw-tooth building, reentering the Pawtuxet River ata lower elevatin of approximately 184 where there isa breakin the existing on site berm. See Figure A and full plan set provided by DiPrete Engineering for addtional information. Post development conditions propose the main drive aisle and a pedestian sidewalk access to be constructed within the AE Flood Zone and a very small portion ofthe Floodway. The sites proposed parking areas lie outside of the AE Flood Zone. Proposed grading in thisarea provides a slightly greater flood storage volume than existing conditions, therefore, no off or on ste compensation storage is proposed. The area is graded in such a way to promote positive drainage flaw away from the face of the building and contain all floodways within the same reach ofthe river aspre development conditions. Two Staford Cour Cranston, Rhode sland 02920 | 401-943-1000 wu diprete-eng.com BOSTON PROVIDENCE NEWPORTPage2 of 4 Hope Mills Scituate, Ri January 27, 2017 No impact on the floodway is proposed. The existing/proposed finish elevation of Building 3 is 191.2, which is 2.2 feet higher than the flood elevation of 189 within the Zone AE aree. Post development conditions provide similar and improved flow paths for capturing and discharging the floodwaters as compared to pre development conditions. To mitigate post development stormwater flows on site, all paved parking and drive aisle areas are to be constructed of permeable pavement which consist of a stone reservolr and filter course for storage and conveyance. Stormwater runoff is also directed into the stone reservoir within the permeable paverient area. This system has been designed to control runoff from the 2 through 100 year storm events, capturing and infiltrating the smaller storms and discharging overflow from the larger storms to an overflow area located along the ‘western edge of the Pawtuxet River and at a lower FEMA flood elevation. In the event ofa large storm, the permeable pavement and overflow piping will act as a conveyance system to direct all storm and flood waters to the overflow area and away from all buildings within the development. Secondary access to the rear parking area is available to Mill Street in the event that the primary access to the site is within the AE Zone is flooded. The site work portion of the project will be constructed in ane (1) phase. The AE Flood Zone portion of the site shall remain in such a condition to comply withthe requirements set forth within the regulations stated in Section 10.02(E}(c){v) of the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management Rules and Regulations during all demolition and construction activities. No stockpiling, vehicle or material storage shall be allowed within the flood zone. Atno point during the duration of this project shall the area located within Zone AE be graded or alteredinsuch a way to lessen the existing volume of flood water storage from pre development conditions. See Figure B below and full plan set provided by DiPrete Engineering for additional information. I you have any questions regarding the site design of this development, please contact our office at 401-983-1000, Sincerely, DiPrete Engineering Assc Jasbn P. ea PE Senior Project Engineer Rhode Island Registered Professional Engineer No. 9110 ociatgs, In BOSTON PROVIDENCE NEWPORT | TwoStafford Coun Cranston, Rhedelando2920 | 4al-949-1000 www diprete-eng.comPage 3 of 4 Hope Mills Scituate, RI January 27, 2017 EX STREAM J EDGE FROM BOSTON PROVIDENCE NEWPORT | TwoStafford Court Cranston, Rhodelland 2920 | 4or-g93H1000 won diprete-eng.comPage 4 of 4 Hope Mills Scituate, RI January 27,2017 BOSTON PROVIDENCE NEWPORT | Two Stafford Court Cranston, Rhode Wand a2620 | aorp43:1000 www diprete-eng.com"Behibit E ' B DiPrete Engineering January 27, 2017 Revised June 30, 2017 Town of Scituate Zoning Board of Review 195 Danielson Pike Scituate, RI02857 (401) 647-5901 eee my 5p oem shen a Hope Mills ~ Zoning Submission ‘AP 3 Lot 8; APS Lots 1, 114, 117 in the Town of Scituate AP 101 Lot Sin the Town of Coventry Scituate, Rhode Island Project if: 1272-002 ‘To whom it may concern: ‘This letter isto support the Town of Scituate Amended Zoning Board Decsion Submission dated January 27, 2017 being made by Paramount Apartments, LLC for the Hope Mlils project located in Scituate and Coventry, Rhode Island on the above referenced Assessor's Plat and Lot numbers. The purpose ofthis submission is to ‘amend an existing zoning decision for the above referenced project. A Zoning Board of review memorandum of decision was mde on December 12, 2006 under Case #987. A copy of the decision is attached for reference and a summary of the relief sought is as follows: A Special Use Permit for (a total of 155) multi-family residential apartments within the Hope Mill Structure (Zoning Board of Review Action - Approved); [A Special Use Permit for (a total of $2) multi-family residential dwelling structures, exclusive of the Hope Mil Structure (Zoning Board of Review Action ~ Approved); [A ("true”] variance for ten (10) three bedroom residential dwelling units within the Home Mill Structure (Zoning Board of Review Action ~ Denied); A dimensional valance for minimum lot size requirements (i. density) for multi-family detached ddweling structures, including two (2) single-family detached structures (Zoning Board of Review ‘Action - Approved); and, ‘A number of dimensional variances for minimum yard setback requirements for the Hope Mill structure (existing) and the proposed new development of mulamily detached units, Including two (2) single-family detached structures. Since the 2006 approval the project has changed applicants and appesranre. The new applicant, Paramount Development Group of 165 Hunt Road, Chelmsford, Massachusetts proposes o repurpose the existing mil buildings into 228 housing units consisting of one and two bedroom units. Aporoximately 50% ofthese units BOSTON PROVIDENCE NEWPORT | TwoStafford Court Cranston, Rage tondoay20 | 4019431000 worwdiprete-eng.camPage 2 of 7 Hope Mills Scituate, Rl June 30,2017 are proposed as affordable workforce units. n addition to the mill conversion, the applicant intends to bulld ‘wonevw buildings creating approximately 75 market rate priced 1 and 2 bedroom apartments, All associated roads and parking 2re2s within the development are proposed to be corstructed of permeable pavernent. The project team along with DiPrete Engineering has recently submitted and received the following permits for this project: Waster Pian approval by the Planning Board *+ Preliminary Plan approval by the Planning Board October 18, 2016 ‘+ RIDEM Wetlands approval~ Application Number 16-0250, RIPDESFile Number RIR1O1504 + RIDEM OWTS approval ~ Application Number 1530-2388 ‘+ Kent County Water Authority approval on January 5, 2017 4+ Fire Marshal approval on January 18, 2017 + RIDOT PAPA Approval ~Appicsion Number 160929 (Pending payment of Bond) Parallel to this Amended Zoning Submission, the project team has filed forFinal plan approval with the Planning Board. A copy of the revised layout and engineered pidns accompany this application. The applicant Issecking the following similar relief previously granted by the Zoning Bard: 1. Special Use Permit for 118 multifamily residential apartment unis withls the Hope Mill structure; 4, Scituate Zoning Ordinance Article 1§ 6(C) (10) ~ A use designated as spectal use in article I or elsewhere inthis ordinance shall be permitted by the board following a public hearing f such use meets the following requirements. i. {twill be compatible with the neighboring land uses i, twill not create a nuisence in the neighborhood, ii. Iwill not hinder the future development ofthe town. {twill be in conformance with the purposes and intent of the comprehensive plan ‘and the zoning ordinance. a Ingranting the special use permit, the board may imaose such additional safeguards and conditions on the proposed use as are deemed necessaryin order to conform to these requirements... The 148 multi-family units proposed within the existing Hope Mill Structures is a reduction ‘of 37 units from original Special Use Permit approval for 155 units. The overall site proposes 1193 units whereas the 2006 Zoning Approval allowed for 27 residential uns, 2. Special Use Permit for 75 multi-family residential apartment units cutside of the Hope Mill structure In two (2} new butldings; BOSTON PROVIDENCE NEWPORT | Two Stafford Court Cranston, Rhode sland ca520 | gor gas-i000 ven diprete-eng.comPage 3 of 7, Hope Mills Scituate, Ri June 30,2017 Scituate Zoning Ordinance Article § 6 (C)(10)~A use designated as special use in article i or elsewhere in this ordinance shall be permitted by the board following a public hearing f such use meets the following requirements ‘twill be compatible with the neighboring fanduses.. twill not create a nuisance in the neighborhood. TW, {twill not hinder the future development ofthe town jv.” “eile in conformance with the purposes and intent ofthe comprehensive plan and the zoning ordinance, In granting the special use permit, the board may impose such additional safeguards ‘and conditions on the proposed use as are deemed necessary in order to conform to these requirements... b. The 75 multi-family proposed in two new buildings residential units s an increase of 23 units from the original Special Use Permit approval for $2 units, The overall site proposes 193 units whereas the 2006 Zoning Approval allowed for 207 residential units. 3. The applicant is not seeking a “true” variance for any three bedroom resklential units. This request was previously denied. No three bedroom units are proposed. 4. Dimensional variance for minimum lot size requirements (density) or multi-family detached dwelling structures, including two (2) additional multi-family structures; Scituate Zoning Ordinance Article It § 3 (5) ~ Minimumlctsie for multifamily dwelings structures. More than thirty-five (35} dwellings units, one milton four hundred thousand (2,600,000) square feet plus forty thousand (40,000) square feet for each dwelling unt over 35. Calculation based on 193 units. Density Calculation Required Provided Units [Area(s ‘Area(s 3s_| 1,400.00 1403 431 se | 6,320,000 Reliet 193 | 7,720,000 | Total fi 6.316.569 b. The density relief currently sought (6,316,589 SF) Is 482,371 SF less than the original density relief granted (6,798,960 SF). Dimensional variance for: a. The previous request for relief related to two single family homes is no longer applicable to this project. BOSTON PROVIDENCE NEWPORT | TwoStafford Court Cranston. Rhaleistandc2520 | 40-43-1000 ‘winw diprete-eng.comPage 4 of7 Hope mls Scituate, RI June 30, 2017 b. Dimensional variance for minimum lot width for multifamily detached dwelling structures, including two {2} additional multifamily structures; |. Seituate Zoning Ordinance Article lt § 3 (5) ~ Minimum lat width shal be three ‘hundred (300) feet plus an additional ten (10) feet for each dwelling unit in excess of three (3). Lot Width Calculation Required Provided Units [_ widthift) wit) 3 300 3,033" 1s0 | 4,300 Reliet 193 200 | Total 1,467 “Minimum lot width in RS-120 district is the distance between the side lines of 2 lot, measured at the required front yard depth wich is ity (50) feet and which distance shall be maintained for at lest one hundred (100) feet back from the point of required minimum lot width. li, The lot width relief currently sought (1,167 FT) s approximately 573 FT less than the Criginal width relief originally granted (1,740 FT#] ‘c. Dimensional vartance for minimum parking setback from 2 boundary line. |. Scituate Zoning Ordinance Article I! §3 (10) (b - No parking shall be permitted within one hundred (100) feet of any boundaryline or within the required minimum front yard. ii The parking setheck relief currently sought (18 Fs 72 FT less than the setback ‘relief originally granted (90 FT). {n addition to the original relief granted the following relief Is now requestee: 6. Adimensional variance for minimum front yard setback for the exsting Hope Mill structure and the ‘maximum building height ofthe existing and the two new proposed structures (Because of use in M District, property shall conform to the dimensional regulations ofthe RS-120 district). The following table summarizes the dimensional relief sought and Includes the minimum lot size and minimum lot Width relief noted above. The front yard setback relief requested i for existing buildings along Main Street. The maximum building height of 30 feet is exceeded by some of the existing buildings as well as the two proposed buildings. The relief requested is associated with the two proposed buildings. BOSTON PROVIDENCE NEWPORT | TwoStaford Cour Cranston, Rhogelsland.o2g20 | 4or-pq3-1000 ‘ww ciptete-eng.comPage 5 of 7 Hope Nils Scituate, Ri June 30, 2017 ‘Scituate Zoning Ordinance Article IN § 1 (2) ~ Residential Distrie Dimensional Regulations Dimensional Regulations Zoned M District - General Manufactuing ‘To comply with zone RS-120 District for use designation Required | Provided | Relief Minimum Lot size(sf) 7,720,000 | 3,403,411 | 6,316,589 Minimum Lot wideh(ft) 2200] 1033) ,167 ‘Minimum Front Yard Depth{ft) 50 26 24 ‘Minimum Side Yard Depthift) a5] 315] w/a Minimum Rear Yard Depth(ft) sof ef WA ‘Maximum Building Coverage (%) 15 a] WA Maximum Building Hefght(t) 30 6 38 7. Off-street parking facility minimum off-street parking requirement; ‘Scituate Zoning Ordinance Article Il § 3 (10}a —Two (2) car spaces per dwelling unt (three hundred (300) sq.ft. per space) and Scituate Zoning Ordinance Article Il § 3 (10) b— no barking permitted within one hundred (100) feet of any boundary line Parking Calculation (based on 193 Units) Spaces | Area Per Space (sf) | Total Area(st) | setback(ft) Required | 386 300 215,800 100 Provided | 227 153 W731 2 [reties [159 [aay apo | as | ‘standard parking space dimensions used for design are cutlined in Scituate Zoning Ordinance Article V~ Minimum width of eight and one-taf (8%) feet and minimum length of eighteen (18) feet. 8. Sewage disposal facilities designed to leach wastes into the soil shal be located no closer than one hundred fifty (150) feet from the edge of any pond or stream Scituate Zoning Ordinance Article lV § 7 ~ Setback from water bodies Required= 150% Provided =100ft Relief=50 ft ‘An Onsite Wastewater Treatment System has been desgred and approved by RIDEM for the site. BOSTON PROVIDENCE NEWPORT | Two teford Court Cranston, Rhodelstad 02620 | gor gap-o00 worn iprete-eng.comPage 6 of7 Hope Mls Scituate, RI June 30, 07 9. Not more than one (2) main residential structure shall be permitted ona lot Scituate Zoning Ordinance Article IV § 8 = Number of residents eteuetures per lot Maximum= 1 structure per lot Proposed = 3 structures per lot (1 existing, 2 new) Relief = 2 structures eee eee see 10. All encroachments, including fill, new construction, substantial improvements to ex/sting structures and other development are prohibited, unless certification by a registered professional engineer is provided by the applicant, demonstrating that such encroachment shall not result in any increase in flood levels during the occurrence af the 100-year flood. Scituate Zoning Ordinance Article IV § 9 (B) 12 ~ See attached leter describing pre development to ost development area of site within the FEMA AE Flood zone. The plans and letter demonstrate no increase in flood levels at tis location in post development. ‘The following relief Is related to Article IV § Section 14. Village Overlay Ostricts (Reference Hope Village Overlay District Committee Decision Letter dated 05/04/2017 and two separate decision letters dated (05/08/2017) 1 Scituate Zoning Ordinance Article IV § 14.4 (A) 1. — Large scale development should take the form of village-ike groupings of small scale bulldings, rather than a large individual structure or box set bback on a large expanse of asphalt parking. New buildings should not be large, bulky masses, but should be scaled down into groupings of smaller attached or detached structures. New buildings should not exceed 2,000 square feet in footprint between facade breaks or building lines. Reference Hope Village Overlay District Committee Decision Letter dated 05/01/2017, ‘The two proposed buildings are each approximately 10,400 SF inarea which s more than the 2,000 square feet requirement noted above however, the two proposedbuildings are compatible with the scale of the existing mili complex. A waiver from this requirement was requested of and approved by the Hope Village Overlay District Committee. Reference Hope Village Overlay District ‘Committee Decision Letter 05/08/2017. 12, Scituate Zoning Ordinance Article IV § 14.4 (A) 2 - Parking Lots. Parking lots shall be located to one side or behind commercial building, particularly along Main Street, Nerth Road, Danielson Pike, Harford Pike and Rt. 116 or other heavily traveled roads within the villages. Eleven (12) parking spaces are proposed in the front of the main existing Mill building to service the proposed museum off of Main Street. Reliefs required for these parking spaces. The majority of the proposed parking is at the side and rear of the main structure. A waiver from this requirement was requested of and approved by the Hope Village Overlay District Committee. Reference Hope Village Overlay District Committee Decision Letter 05/08/2017. BOSTON PROVIDENCE NEWPORT | TwoStaford Court Cranston, thodelsland 02920 | gor 943-4000 worn ciprete-eng.comPage 7 of 7 Hope Mls Scituate, RI June 30,2017 If you have any questions regarding this assessment please contact ouraffice. Sincerely, DiPrete Engineering Associates, Inc. hr rb Jason P. Clough, PE Kevin Morin, PE Senior Project Engineer VicePresident Enclosures: Zoning Application ~ 14 copies Hope Mills ~ Zoning Submission Letter — 11 copies Hope Mills ~ FEMA AE Floodplain Explanation Letter — 11 copies Town of Scituate Zoning Board of Review Memorandum of Decision dated December 12, 2006 ~ 12 copies 300ft Radius Map ~ 4 Ful Size and 11 Reduced Coples Abutters List -11 copies Zoning Submission Set— 4 Ful Size and 11 Reduced Copies RIDEM Wetlands, RIDEM OWTS, RIDOT & KCWA Approval letters ~ 11 copies of each Architectural Plans —4 Full Size and 12 Reduced Copies Landscape Plans ~4 Full Size and 11 Reduced Copies Hope Village Overlay Approvals ~ 11 Copies Historic Preservation Office Documents ~ 11 Copies ‘Town of Coventry Letter ~11.Copies Fire Department Letter~11 Copies BOSTON PROVIDENCE NEWPORT | TwoStafford court Cranston, Rhofebland 92920 | 4oupagaoco wwu.ciprete-eng.com