Smithfield Planning Board approves multiple minor subdivisions, continues Amelia's Way after peer‑review questions

The Smithfield Planning Board on Feb. 27 approved a series of minor subdivisions and dimensional‑relief requests, voted to extend a final plan approval for the Smithfield Village project and continued a contentious three‑lot application at Amelia’s Way so outstanding engineering peer‑review comments can be resolved.

The board’s most substantive action was approval of a five‑lot subdivision on Reservoir Road (Assessors Plat 48, Lot 30) that required multiple area and frontage variances and included a board condition that the developer use advanced septic treatment and phosphorus‑reducing stormwater measures and record deed restrictions to notify future buyers. The board voted to approve the preliminary plan and to require deed restrictions and “innovative alternative” septic treatment and other phosphorus‑reduction controls as part of the final approval process.

Why it matters: Several of the evening’s approvals involve lot sizes near wetlands and a municipal water supply buffer; the board attached engineering and permit conditions to reduce long‑term environmental risk (septic treatment, stormwater Best Management Practices) and to make the constraints visible to future buyers through recorded deed restrictions.

What the board approved and what it continued

- Reservoir Road (ID 2411): Board approved the five‑lot road‑front subdivision on a roughly 14‑acre parcel with large area and frontage variances. The developer agreed to use advanced septic treatment (bottomless sand filters or comparable systems), apply stormwater BMPs to reduce phosphorus, and record deed restrictions noting specialized septic systems and site constraints. The board’s approval was conditional on final engineering and state permits (DEM, RIDOT) and the deed restrictions becoming part of the record.

- Amelia’s Way (260 Old County Road, ID 2405): The board continued the public hearing after a lengthy discussion between the applicant’s engineer, the applicant’s attorney and board members. Crossman (the town’s peer‑review consultant) reported remaining unresolved comments; the applicant had responded to many issues but had not yet provided all written responses. The board continued the matter to allow the applicant and Crossman to document outstanding responses and to give the board copies of the peer‑review exchanges before a final decision. The applicant agreed to a continuance and to “continue the clock.”

- Smithfield Village (ID 160008): The board granted an extension of final plan approval for the Smithfield Village site to allow the applicant time to submit a proposed zoning ordinance amendment and to preserve the existing plan approval while that zoning amendment and the related public process proceed. The applicant told the board a drafted ordinance amendment would be submitted to the town council next week and expects to return to the board for detailed technical review in March or April.

- Minor subdivisions and dimensional‑relief approvals: The board approved several minor subdivisions and frontage/area relief requests after public hearings. Those items included 6 Batty Drive (ID 2504), 111 Tarkland Road (ID 2409), 49 Williams Road (ID 2503), 117 Mapleville Road (ID 2501), and a two‑lot split that separates 18 and 20 Edmond/Esmin Street (ID 2502). Each passed on majority voice votes with usual conditions (easements, final plan review, and compliance with town technical requirements).

Public comment and fiscal concern about a separate condo proposal

At the end of the meeting the board heard public comment about a separate project not on the agenda — a proposed condominium development at Lime Rock Road. Several residents asked the board and town staff to consider potential fiscal impacts to the school district and the town. Those remarks were recorded as public comment and the town planner was asked to accept submitted signatures and materials for inclusion in the record when the project comes before the board in the future.

What’s next

Most approvals were given as preliminary plan approvals conditionally subject to final engineering, state permits (Department of Environmental Management and RIDOT where applicable), peer‑review sign‑offs, and recording of required easements or deed restrictions. The Amelia’s Way item was continued to the board’s March meeting to allow Crossman and the applicant’s engineer to close out outstanding peer‑review items in writing.

Votes at a glance (select actions taken Feb. 27, 2025): - Smithfield Village (ID 160008): Motion to grant extension of final plan approval — approved (voice vote; board noted 9 in favor). - Amelia’s Way (ID 2405): Motion to continue the public hearing to next meeting to allow peer‑review follow‑up — continued (voice vote). - Reservoir Road five‑lot subdivision (ID 2411): Motion to approve preliminary plan with conditions (innovative septic, phosphorus‑reduction BMPs, deed restrictions) — approved (voice vote). - 6 Batty Drive minor subdivision (ID 2504): Motion to grant frontage/area relief and approve — approved (voice vote). - 111 Tarkland Road two‑lot subdivision (ID 2409): Motion to approve per previously recorded 1992 zoning resolution and record plan — approved (voice vote). - 49 Williams Road (ID 2503): Motion to approve lot split with frontage relief — approved (voice vote). - 117 Mapleville Road (ID 2501): Motion to approve two‑acre lot cut with 40‑foot frontage relief — approved (voice vote). - 18–20 Edmond/Esmin Street (ID 2502): Motion to approve minor subdivision splitting the two houses into separate lots with required relief — approved (voice vote).

Board members, applicants and staff present said final engineering, DEM and DOT permits, peer‑review signoffs and recording requirements will be completed before any certificates of zoning compliance or building permits are issued. The board set obvious expectations that final plan documents, peer‑review responses and required permits be on file before administrative final approvals are signed.

Ending note: The board’s next meeting date was mentioned by applicants seeking continuances and follow‑ups; multiple applicants said they intend to return in March or April after circulating responses to peer reviewers or after town council action on proposed ordinance amendments.