Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Access topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission grants continuance for Vaughn Lane project as neighbors press right-of-way concerns
Summary
The commission continued a development application for Vaughn Lane to Oct. 7 after neighbors and the applicant clashed over title evidence for road access; the applicant agreed to submit a title search and related documents by Sept. 25 and to extend the decision deadline to Dec. 15.
The Cranston Planning Commission on Sept. 2 continued review of a master-plan application for a multi-lot development on Vaughn Lane, after abutters objected that the applicant had not timely produced title evidence showing legal access along Vaughn Lane and Winnie Street. The commission set Sept. 25 as the deadline for the applicant to deliver the requested title materials and related documents and voted to continue the matter to Oct. 7, with the applicant agreeing to extend the statutory decision deadline for the commission to Dec. 15.
Why it matters: the applicant bears the burden to show legally sufficient access; neighbors argued the developer waited months to hire a title attorney and still lacked proof. The access question affects whether street widening would require removing or relocating private structures such as garages and stone walls.
Attorney Tanesa Azar, representing the applicant, told the commission the developer had engaged a title attorney, who was searching historical records and expected to finish in time for the Oct. 7 meeting. Abutters’ attorney Steven Bridal said the title evidence appeared weak and urged the commission to deny the continuance and decide the matter that night. Neighbors provided a timeline of the case and said the developer had been granted multiple earlier continuances and had not satisfied prior requests for a plan showing encroachments, stormwater answers, and stakes marking alleged encroachments.
Resident Jessica Salter summarized the public record: the development plan review committee first saw the master-plan presentation May 21; the public and staff raised concerns about privately owned structures along Vaughn Lane and recommended a survey cataloguing encroachments. She said the developer did not produce stakes at a July site visit and waited until August to retain title counsel. Abutters asked who would pay for demolition if the city were later to require widening and whether property owners would receive compensation.
Commissioners debated options. Commissioner Lamphere urged the applicant to waive the 90-day decision clock to give the commission time to review complex evidence. Other commissioners favored a one-month continuance to Oct. 7 with a buffer that would allow the commission to decide without violating the statutory time clock. Director Guerrero and others emphasized the legal and technical distinctions between a road’s paved width and its recorded right-of-way and asked the applicant’s title attorney to clarify those points.
The commission voted to continue the application to Oct. 7 on the condition that the applicant submit the requested documents by Sept. 25 and that the applicant agree to extend the statutory decision deadline until Dec. 15. The vote carried after a motion to continue passed; the motion and extension were seconded and approved by voice vote.
Next steps: applicant to provide title-search materials and responses to abutters’ written conditions by Sept. 25; commission to review the record and the solicitor’s guidance and to return the matter for decision on Oct. 7 (with Dec. 15 as an extended deadline if needed).
