North Providence planning board continues Smithfield Road townhouse hearing after questions on density, parking and stormwater

A Town of North Providence planning board hearing on March 11, 2026 was continued after the board raised technical and policy concerns about a proposal to add five two‑bedroom townhomes at 2 Smithfield Road.

Attorney Dylan Conley, speaking for the applicant, described the project as five modest, two‑bedroom townhomes located at the Providence/North Providence line and said the team sought a package of zoning relief including a front‑yard setback variance (about 3.75 feet), a side‑yard variance (previously described as 1.5 feet, later revised in plan updates to roughly 0.8 feet), a reduction in required parking and other dimensional relief. Conley said the team had also submitted modification paperwork and an expert report but was seeking full variances “to proceed,” and emphasized the team’s view that the design would improve a gateway into North Providence by closing one of two curb cuts and screening an electrical substation.

The board’s questions centered on three technical areas the applicant’s team had addressed in its presentation: parking and driveway layout; stormwater management; and emergency‑vehicle access. The applicant’s civil engineer, Katie Olija of Stonefield Engineering and Design, said the project would close the Smithfield Road curb cut, reconfigure access to improve vehicle queuing and safety and provide an underground ADS StormTech infiltration system. Olija said the design treats stormwater with pretreatment devices (she cited roughly 44% TSS pretreatment) and the system was sized to infiltrate storms up to the 25‑year event and to bypass safely at the 100‑year event.

On parking, the applicant’s team reported the post‑project site would provide 33 parking spaces (including three compact spaces) for a project that would yield 17 total units when the five new townhomes are combined with the existing building’s units; board members noted the North Providence zoning ordinance calls for 2.5 spaces per unit (which would require roughly 40–43 spaces for 17 units). Board members warned the reduction could produce a parking shortfall for existing residents: the board estimated there are about 24 surface spaces on the property today and observed the plan would reduce available surface parking for current occupants unless addressed in conditions.

Several board members also expressed concern that the applicant had not yet provided geotechnical borings or measured seasonal high groundwater data for the proposed infiltration system. The engineer said the stormwater design used NRCS soils mapping and targeted a 4‑foot separation above seasonal high groundwater (greater than the statutory minimum), but confirmed no borings had yet been performed and agreed to supply additional information. The board asked the team to submit sweep/turning exhibits for a local fire apparatus, the turning analysis for compact and full‑size vehicles, full‑size plan sheets (24x36), a traffic/queuing review and a more complete stormwater technical package before a final decision.

Chair David Parente praised the applicants’ presentation but summarized the board’s concerns, noting the density and parking impacts on existing tenants, unresolved stormwater verification, and access/turning questions. The board voted 6‑0 to continue the hearing to its next scheduled meeting on April 1, 2026 and asked the applicant to provide the missing plan sheets and the requested technical exhibits as soon as possible.

What the board asked for next: the planning board recorded multiple specific deliverables for the record, including: a ladder‑truck sweep (using the North Providence apparatus where possible), a parallel‑parking maneuvering exhibit showing the on‑site maneuver occurs without leaving the property, geotechnical borings or modeled seasonal high groundwater elevations to validate the proposed infiltration design, full‑size (24x36) plan sheets, a turning analysis for the dumpster/collection vehicle and (if requested) a traffic study focused on the revised curb‑cut geometry. The board also asked the applicant to work with Providence Water and National Grid on the final location and screening of meter enclosures and any pad‑mounted transformer if required.

The board’s continuation preserves the applicant’s ability to revise and supplement the record and keeps the project alive for further technical review without a vote on the variances. The next public session on the project was set for April 1, 2026.

Quotes that capture the hearing

“We’re talking about five townhomes … we would be blocking the view of that electrical substation,” Dylan Conley said while describing the gateway improvement the project seeks.

“Closing that circulation is going to provide a big benefit,” said civil engineer Katie Olija, summarizing the team’s safety rationale for eliminating the Smithfield Road curb cut.

“The presentation was very well organized,” Chair David Parente said, while asking for additional exhibits and plan sheets to complete the board’s review.

The next step

The board continued consideration to April 1, 2026. The applicant was asked to supply the missing plan sheets and the technical studies requested by the board in time for that meeting.