Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utility Easement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Providence council approves underground utility easement for Fluidwood Avenue development
Summary
The Providence City Council Public Works Committee approved a permanent underground public utility easement beneath a portion of Waterman Street to serve a new development on Fluidwood Avenue.
Get email alerts on the Utility Easement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A resolution granting a permanent underground public utility easement beneath a portion of Waterman Street to serve a development on Fluidwood Avenue was approved by the Providence City Council Public Works Committee.
The petition, filed by Samuel A. Broadway, Squire, Chase, Zuchenberg & Whitman LLP on behalf of the owner 159 Williams Associates LLC, requested a public utility infrastructure easement that would permit Narragansett Electric, now doing business as Rhode Island Energy, to locate a transport/transfer vault and distribution equipment under Waterman Street. The developer'to'utility and city'to'developer easement documents and an engineering plan were provided to the committee.
Aaron, identified in the meeting as a deputy in the council'policy office, described the documents as a standard form easement used by the city and said the infrastructure would both serve the new development and allow the utility to extend electrical service to adjacent parcels in the area.
Council members had no substantive objections at the hearing. The committee took a motion to approve the easement; the motion was moved and seconded and passed by voice vote.
The petition package on the agenda listed the petitioner'law firm and the owner 159 Williams Associates LLC; the easement documents identify Narragansett Electric / Rhode Island Energy as the downstream utility. The transcript records a referenced area of about "184 square feet" in describing the easement footprint; that figure was spoken during the meeting and appears to be an approximate measurement.
No additional conditions or funding obligations for the city were recorded in the committee'level discussion. The easement was presented as a routine utility accommodation using a form previously reviewed by city staff.
The committee moved on to subsequent agenda items after voting to approve the easement.

