The July 31 Town Council meeting included several license requests and renewals, accessible parking space requests, and board and commission resignations and appointments, but it was the work of one town board in particular — the Harbor Commission — that consumed most of the discussion last Wednesday night.

The matter of the proposed pool boat, to be docked and serve as an amenity for the use of Bristol Harbor Inn guests, was continued from the May 29 meeting with the Coastal Resources Management Council (CRMC) public comment period extended to Aug. 15.

At the May 29 meeting, Howard Sutton, President of the Stone Harbor Board of Directors, submitted a request to the Town Council on behalf of the Stone Harbor Condominium Association, asking the Council to file a letter of objection to the CRMC. Another letter submitted by Sutton and dated July 31 went a step further and asked the Council to withdraw a letter written by Town Administrator Steven Contente in support of the project that was sent to CRMC last year, dated June 6, 2023.

Additional supporting documentation from the objectors to the pool boat included a letter from a Lila Delman real estate agent asserting that the pool boat will affect property values at Stone Harbor, as well as a letter from the attorney representing Stone Harbor Condominium Association, which raises several safety and environmental concerns which have been disputed by TSL, LLC, owners of the Bristol Harbor Inn.

The matter was initially continued in order to allow the Harbor Commission to discuss the matter and submit their recommendations to the Council. This they did, meeting on July 1, together with the Harbor Commission Advisory Committee. Following two hours of public testimony and discussion, they voted 4 to 1 in favor of recommending that the application meets the criteria of the Bristol Harbor Management Plan and is within the riparian rights area of the applicant, does not cross the Harbor Line, and does not interfere with navigation in Bristol Harbor.

The Harbor Commission did note that it is concerned with potential water pollution from the treated pool water, danger to nearby riparian and littoral structures in the event of a hurricane, public access to the waterfront by physically handicapped individuals, and possible danger to pool users in the event a large vessel navigating nearby might lose power or control and collide with the pool boat.

Accordingly, the Harbor Commission recommended four conditions: a written plan indicating how the pool water will be treated, how the waste from any backwashing filtration system will be disposed, and confirming that there will be no discharge of such filtration system water into Bristol Harbor; a Storm Action Plan indicating the actions proposed for storms and identifying the contractors who will empty the pool water and the marine facility that will haul the pool boat out of the water; certification from an engineer that the access to the pool boat from the shore will meet ADA requirements; and the installation of additional barriers, which might include additional pilings, to prevent any out of control vessel from colliding with the pool boat and endangering pool users.

Is it a boat or a marina expansion?

Attorney Mark Ryan, representing the Stone Harbor Condominium Association, asserted that the pool boat is not a boat at all, but a marina expansion, which, if true, would undercut the affidavit submitted by Harbormaster Gregg Marsili that asserts that the proposed pool boat is in fact a boat “…that would have to be properly registered and operated as a boat under applicable Rhode Island and Bristol legal requirements…I would allow such a boat to dock at a marina facility as long as it complies with any and all restrictions to all boats docked at that marina.”

Marsili further noted that “I have not ever referred boats with recreational amenities on them, including but not limited to pontoon boats with jacuzzi tubs on their decks, for Coastal Resources Management Council permitting before docking at Bristol marinas.”

Speaking on behalf of the proposal, TSL principal Larry Goldstein maintained that it is indeed a boat, and one that will have a hard, locking cover and remain under surveillance during in-season closing hours. Out of season, it will be removed from the water and stored, like any other boat.

In addition to presenting detailed plans for the siting of the pool boat and images of a prototype in situ, TSL included a letter from Justin Grimes, director of a Kennebunkport, Maine resort that has had a similar pool boat on their dock for 6 years. He reported that, although their neighbors expressed many of the same concerns that have been expressed by the Stone Harbor Condominium Association, they have not experienced issues with noise, raucous behavior or safety, and the pool boat is “a conversation starter and has become a mainstay of our marina.”

Contente’s letter called into question

While the conversation repeatedly veered into individual opinions of who this project would benefit and whether or not there is a “need” for it, it eventually circled back the Stone Harbor Condominium Association’s request that the Council somehow overrule Town Administrator Steven Contente and withdrawal the letter of support he sent to CRMC in June of 2023.

Asserting that the letter was based on erroneous information provided to Contente by TSL, attorney Mark Ryan claimed that letting that letter stand would “confuse” CRMC in their evaluation of the proposal.

“I disagree, and I have the right to,” said Contente, defending his position that the Bristol Harbor Inn is an important business in the community, its guests patronize other local businesses, and a pool is a popular amenity. “I will withdraw my letter if the Council wants me to but I do see a benefit…I looked at it, I thought it was nice and would be run well,” noting that writing letters in support of local businesses is a routine part of his job.

“It’s not the Council’s place to direct the Town Administrator,” said Council Chairman Nathan Calouro. “I have a lot of respect for Administrator Steven Contente; we work well together.” Calouro also signaled his appreciation for the guidelines devised by the Harbor Commission and the CRMC regulatory process. “I think it’s important that this moves forward; I’m not looking to support or object.”

However, there was some further discussion that, in light of the public support from Contente and Marsili, a silent Council would read like an assenting council. The motion was amended to submit to CRMC the concerns and recommendations submitted by the Harbor Commission along with the draft minutes from both the Harbor Commission and Town Council meetings, in an effort to share with CRMC the fullest scope of the dialogue on the issue.

The motion passed 4-1, with Mary Parella feeling the Council should be taking a more overt stance in opposition.