BURRILLVILLE – The Town Council voted unanimously on Monday to submit a legal appeal of a decision by the Burrillville Planning Board to reject an application for an athletic complex at Burrillville High School that would include installation of a synthetic turf field.
Planners rejected the project in a 5-2 vote on Monday, April 28, at a meeting where shouting from turf field opponents frequently interrupted the proceedings.
The process resulted in the filing of an official decision that lacks much of the information normally included in such planning documents. A decision filed with the Burrillville Town Clerk this week notes “none stated” in the area where findings of fact would normally be listed. Beneath, in a field where Goff must document actions taken by the planners, the filing notes, “Motion made by Bruce Ferreira on the basis that he is not comfortable with the turf field.”
“This was unusual,” said Planner Ray Goff of the turf ruling.
Now, that decision will be challenged in court, as decided by the Town Council at a meeting on Monday, May 5.
Contacted this week, Goff noted that he and Town Solicitor William Dimitri tried to provide guidance to planners before they voted on the application – as is typical at such hearings – but were unsuccessful.
In video of the meeting, published by resident Norman Desjarlais here, both Dimitri and Goff can be heard suggesting that planners may want to table the application to request additional information from the applicant. But when Planning Board Chairman Stephen Foy suggests a continuance, he is interrupted by yelling and booing by residents in attendance.
“I don’t think people are ready necessarily to vote it down or up,” Foy says of the application amid yelling from the crowd, with admonishments including, “We are your public.”
Roughly 100 residents were in attendance at the Monday night gathering that led to the decision, held in the auditorium of the East Avenue school. Many voiced opposition to the project at the public hearing, citing concerns about the synthetic turf and its perceived potential to affect well water in town, as well as other environmental concerns.
The meeting followed a ruling in Superior Court that was largely favorable to proponents of the project.
Renovations to the high school’s Gledhill Field were discussed by councilors, school officials and various town boards for years, but after the town signed a contract for FieldTurf Inc. for installation of a synthetic surface, opposition mounted, based largely on the concern that chemicals from the field could leech into town water.
But town officials have said the project presents no threat to public health, pointing to testing that discovered only trace chemicals in the turf and moved forward last year based on those findings.
Construction was already underway when a lawsuit field by resident Robertta Lacey brought the project to a halt. Lacey was granted a request for a restraining order in September pending a legal hearing, in litigation stating that the project failed to go before the proper town boards and could pose a threat to her well.
A ruling on Lacey’s claims was issued on Friday, April 25, and Associate Justice Melissa Darigan found that her attorneys had failed to prove that she stood to suffer irreparable harm from the project. Darigan agreed, however, that an application for the athletic improvements should have gone before the town’s Planning Board.
That application had already been submitted by the time of the Superior Court ruling. Although construction of the complex – set to include new lighting, an ADA-accessible viewing plaza, a six-foot-wide walking path and a 1,000-seat grandstand – was underway, the town of Burrillville and the Burrillville School Department submitted a joint application to planning in March. At the time, Town Manager Michael Wood said the action was taken to remove one potential hurdle to the project out of abundance of caution.
And so, when the controversial project finally went before planners on April 28, opponents included Lacey’s lawyer and a crowd ready to mount their concerns.
But yelling from the crowd brought a quick end to a meeting after the 5-2 ruling, with few facts included in the rejection decision.
Goff said in his years as a planner, it is the first time he has entered a decision stating “none” in the findings of fact. Asked if planners should have received more guidance he responded, “We tried to do that.”
Councilor Dennis Anderson, who serves as liaison to the Planning Board said of the hearing, “It certainly wasn’t how I expected things to go.”
Wood noted on Friday that a challenge of the decision has not yet been filed with the state judiciary, but that the town has 20 days from the planning decision to submit an appeal.
