NORTH SMITHFIELD – After a months-long process that nearly included spending of more than $17,000 for an environmental study, the Town Council abruptly approved the junk yard license for a business on Iron Mine Hill Road this week under guidance from the town solicitor.
HT Auto, doing business as Leo’s Auto, can continue to operate on a property that has long held a salvage yard despite the objections of neighbors.
“I sympathize with you. I wouldn’t want to be in that position,” Councilor John Beauregard told those assembled at the meeting Monday night.
The unanimous decision to grant the license brought a quick end to an issue first brought before the board last year. Owner Edward Hernandez Terrero was initially hoping the council would approve an extension of hours as part of the business’s annual licensing process in late November.
Instead, Building & Zoning Official Leo Cote asked that the council hold an evidentiary hearing to discuss the operations, pointing to concerns the salvage yard wasn’t following town ordinance. The business, he noted, was lacking proper fencing and had expanded the scope of work in accepting not just cars, but other junk and debris. At the time, the property at 955 Iron Mine Hill Road was also in violation of fire code, with countless junked automobiles blocking access for emergency vehicles.
When that hearing took place in December, several from the residential neighborhood used the opportunity to air their grievances, also pointing to trucks blocking their narrow roadway, operations outside of legal hours, an unsightly mess on the property and the possibility of environmental hazards.
In response, councilors ordered Hernandez Terrero to seize operations – with no new materials to come in until hundreds of cars were crushed and removed.
Cote has since said the owner has made substantial progress in addressing his concerns, and fire officials said last month the business was up to code.
“He’s moving toward compliance,” Cote said at the meeting on Monday, March 2. “He’s very close.”
The building inspector said that around 30 percent of the 4.5 acre lot has been fenced, and there is a large portion of the property where it’s not required, such as wetlands and a forested area. The remaining portion, Cote said, should be completed in a few months once the weather improves.
“He wasn’t able to get around the whole yard with the storms we’ve had,” said Cote.
Beauregard was not present at a meeting in February where councilors considered hiring GZA Environmental to evaluate the owner’s compliance with environmental standards at a cost of $17,500. Councilors held off on that decision citing concerns with the cost, and there was no mention of the proposal this week during the seeming about face – which followed an hour-long executive session with Town Solicitor David Igliozzi.
“We can only base our decision tonight on the complaint that was made by the building inspector that came before us,” said Beauregard. “All of the other stuff, although legitimate, has to be brought up maybe at another time. Those complaints are not what was brought before us. That’s just the way it has to go.”
This week, Attorney Christopher Zangari submitted 75 pages of documentation on the owner’s behalf, including a vehicle log, and compliance and inspection records with the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management.
Beauregard made a motion to approved the license with the condition that the fence is completed “to the satisfaction of building officials and the town council” by May 1. Some in attendance left the meeting expressing anger.
Councilor David Punchak was not present at the Monday gathering.
Hi David. The junkyard was here first. But the junkyard has expanded way past the point where it was when it became pre existing and non conforming. This operation was much smaller when i moved into the area. Unfortunately over time this business has run unchecked by the Town, the State and many regulatory bodies. It has now gotten to the point where it is an environmental hazard, a safty hazard and a blight to the neighborhood. The latest owner has no respect for the neighborhood or the town and operates in a very unprofessional and reckless manner. The junkyard is currently operating under a consent order from the RI Department of Business Regulation that also must issue a license for this business to operate. The DBR has warned this business that it must keep proper records of all vehicles in and out of this yard. They failed to keep any records for four years. They have also warned them that they must fence the yard, not trespass on the neighbors property and must follow their hours and days
of operation. All things that they have violated both before and after the issuance of the Consent order. They do not have the permits required by the EPA or RI Wetlands and they are operating along side wetlands and over the largest aquifer in the area. This is a problem that needs the attention of several agencies and the neighbors are attempting to get the attention and needed help fro these agencies.
Why has the Town’s Environmental Advocate not done any environmental assessments of the problems here? Between the lack of hazardous materials removal and the people defecating on the property and on the p[properties of abutters, one would thing he would have investigated and reported upon the conditions there.
Instead, the town was looking into hiring an outside consultant.
Why does the Town have a position of Environmental Advocate if the individual who assumes that role, does no work in that capacity? I had an APRA request regarding his actions in that position and it did not return a single instance of any environmental advocacy.
Is the Town superficially filling this position with the Town Planner just to check a box off for State or Federal support?
What came first, the junk yard or the neighbors. If neighbors moved in next to an operating junk yard then it’s time to shut up or move
Those words sound like they come from a person with no context to the meaning. The junkyard of old and the junkyard of the present are so unrelated that your conclusion could only be considered nonsense.
How dare the neighbors try to hold a company in compliance…
Actually David, my house came first before the junkyard. Im an abutting neighbor. My grandfather who established Leo’s auto salvage in 1969, built my house before Leos was established. My father(his son), still lives in this house and was here before the junkyard was established. Infact before Leo’s was established it was my family’s farm. The barn and the house burnt down, and my house had to be rebuilt. After my house was rebuilt and since the farm fire, my grandfather decided to establish Leo’s Auto salvage.
The junkyard is not the problem, the present owner of the junkyard is the problem. Every neighbor surrounding the junkyard lived there and never had a problem with other owners. Because again…its not the junkyard.
I myself, have lived in my house for 44 years. I have had no problems with the junkyard because that is what I grew up with, although I do have a problem with the things happening now with this new owner and what he is doing to the neighborhood. So with all do respect, since my house has been here before the junkyard and my family actually established the junkyard and still lives here. I would say if you arent caught up to the situation then maybe you should read up or shut up. With all due respect, of course. This has all been mentioned in earlier articles. This is where “think before you speak” adage comes in handy to save yourself some embarrassment.
Sincerely,
The neighbor established first.
Here’s the dilemma as I see it. According to the town solicitor the Town Council can only consider legal citations from the town inspector when assessing whether to renew a license for a business that has operated apparently without regard to the rights of the neighboring citizens. No one including the applicant denies that there were many documented violations. The town inspector decided not to pursue those documented violations even though at a meeting 2 months prior the Town Administrator was requested specifically by councilwoman DeCristofaro to have them researched further. So the town council’s hands were bound by an administration that chose to look the other way and be more concerned about the potential lawsuit from a business rather than the welfare of the neighborhood.
I seriously find this alarming, but not at all surprising. It is standard procedure and I feel it is time to change that procedure.
Did you ever think that maybe the solicitor is wrong and does not want to deal with a potential legal issue or the applicants lawyer and the solicitor are friendly. The solicitor if he wanted could come up with a legal argument to deny the license. The town could have just denied the license over environment, health and safety concerns and then made the applicant on his own dime prove that his junk yard does not pose a health, safety, or environmental concern with a certified unbiased study. The town could also make the applicant procure a traffic study to see if the junk poises a safety concern. The junk was also conducting business outside of the prior approved license hours of operation so that is another violation. This is a case of some council members or one in particular that are ok with anything as long as it is not in their back yard.