The Design Review Committee of the East Providence Waterfront Commission voted unanimously on Thursday, Nov. 14 to offer a conditional recommendation of approval regarding the proposed Metacomet development, which seeks to build a vast, mixed-use, commercial and residential complex at the former Metacomet Golf Course.

The committee’s decision does not mean the project has been given a full green light, as the project still requires approval from the East Providence Planning Board that it adheres to the City’s comprehensive plan; a vote of approval from the Waterfront Commission’s Hearing Panel regarding three variances; a vote of approval from the full Waterfront Commission; as well as multiple permits and approvals from various state agencies.

However, the outcome provided signals that many of the sticking points regarding the development have been successfully ironed out over the course of the many months that the project has been deliberated.

During their presentation to the committee, representatives for the developer, Marshall Properties, Inc., made clear that they would not be seeking full approval from the full Waterfront Commission during their meeting on Thursday, Nov. 21.

“We are aware and fully cognizant of the fact that we have further procedural hoops to jump through before we seek the full approval of Waterfront,” said Marshall’s lead counsel, Josh Berlinsky. “We think this process has been both informative and efficient and has resulted in a more refined and better product. And I’m hopeful that this committee feels similarly.”

The project is proposed in three phases. The first phase — a revitalization and reworking of a portion of the former golf course — was completed over the summer. The second phase includes the building of a supermarket space and most of the commercial elements of the project, and the third phase would build out a majority of the 845 proposed residential units. If approved, there is an estimated 10-year buildout of the remaining elements.

Following the vote, Design and Review Committee Chair Steve Amoroso expressed gratitude for the many public comments they received throughout the long deliberation process on the project.

“I’d definitely like to thank everyone for the several months of meetings that we had here,” he said. “As Mr. Berlinsky mentioned, the project is better for it. I believe that we’ve done our best to accommodate the public comments as well as the applicant’s comments. And I think that the overall impression of this process was a good one. It took a while.”

Ten conditions of approval
The committee attached a list of 10 conditions for their recommendation of approval, which would require Marshall Properties to obtain the aforementioned approvals of the Planning Board and the Hearing Panel of the Waterfront Commission — which are charged with deciding if three requested variances (to place a nonconforming sign at the entrance of the development on Veterans Memorial Parkway; to offer fewer than the required amount of parking spaces; and to provide less than required fenestration percentage on certain buildings) should be accepted.

Within the conditions is also a requirement for Marshall to conduct additional impact studies for noise, traffic, and public safety impact once they complete the second phase of the project (the commercial element of the project, which includes a supermarket), and prior to starting construction of Phase 3 (the residential portion, where most of proposed 845 housing units will be constructed within multiple buildings).

Marshall must also create a construction management plan prior to the beginning of Phase 2 construction, and hold an informational meeting with members of the public to discuss that plan. The plan must also be shared with the East Providence Building Department and Fire Department.
The conditions also require the developer to receive approval from the East Providence Departments of Public Works, Water Department, Engineering Department, and Fire Department regarding all aboveground and underground utility infrastructure required for the development.

One condition mandates that a proposed roundabout on Veterans Memorial Parkway to provide entry and egress from the development also includes a pedestrian walkway to provide a safe access path to the East Bay Bike Path.

The conditions also require Marshall to receive approval from the Rhode Island Historic Preservation and Heritage Commission regarding archaeological surveys currently being conducted on the property, to ensure that no significant historical artifacts or burials are being disturbed. They must also receive the relevant permits from Rhode Island DOT, the Scenic Roadways Commissions, and the Coastal Resources Management Council (CRMC).

Lastly, the conditions set forth expectations that the developer will identify pre-qualification services and ongoing certification needed for the provided affordable housing units to be constructed within the site (which will amount to 10% of the total units). It also dictates that the developer will be responsible for trash removal and maintenance of the development’s landscaping, interior streets, stormwater basins, utilities, public access points and open spaces.

Projected emergency costs updated
One noteworthy update to come from the meeting was a report from East Providence Fire Chief Michael Carey, which indicated that the estimated cost of providing fire and rescue services to the proposed complex exceeded an original report commissioned by Marshall from 2023, which concluded that the development would result in between 301 and 359 additional fire and rescue calls.

According to Chief Carey’s updated review, he anticipates that number would be closer to 650 additional trips for fire and rescue, amounting to around $2.7M in additional municipal expenses once the development is fully built.

Berlinsky said that Marshall Properties accepts Chief Carey’s findings, but made the point that the anticipated revenue from the development would offset those increases expenses.

“The project is projected to generate in excess of $4.9 million of revenue in taxes every year,” he said. “Taking his extrapolation and projections as to what the additional cost is to the city, there is more than enough revenue to accommodate that cost.”

Berlinsky said that they would adhere to the requirement to conduct updated public safety impact studies as the project is built to assess how many calls are being made to the development.

“We’re talking about a 10-year build,” he said. “We’re sensitive to cost escalation, maybe it’s lower and maybe it’s higher. But we want to make sure that it’s nothing that the city can’t afford.”

In their newsletter following the committee’s decision, executive members of Keep Metacomet Green — the advocacy group dedicated to fighting the project — took issue with the $4.9 million tax revenue statement from Berlinsky, referencing a peer-reviewed report from RKG Associates Inc., finalized in April of 2024, that specified the anticipated $4.9M in net gross tax revenue should actually be split between net tax revenue generated for the municipal budget, and net tax revenue that benefits the school department.

“The peer review by RKG Associates actually pegged the net fiscal benefit to the City closer to $2.3 million,” the emailed recap of the meeting states. “With the increased costs associated with public safety, the net benefit seems to have become a net deficit. This is far from what we were told four years ago.”

Archaeological surveys continue
Berlinsky provided an update on ongoing surveys being conducted at the site to assess whether or not there are any significant indigenous artifacts or burials located within the site.

He reported that no evidence of human remains were found during a Phase 1 survey done over the summer. He said additional, more extensive testing procedures would be ongoing in the coming days, overseen by the Narragansett Tribal Historic Preservation Office and officials from the State Historic Commission.

“I can assure members of this committee that representatives of that office have been present at each and every testing and surveying event that took place this summer, as well as at the subsequent testing going on right now,” Berlinsky said. “Whatever that recommendation is from State Historic, my client is prepared to comply.”