Providence Team Secures Ruling for Rhode Island Town Backing Denial of Application for Recycling Plant Project

Providence, R.I. (June 3, 2025) - Providence Partners Michael J. Marcello and Todd Romano recently obtained an opinion from the Rhode Island Superior Court that rejected a property developer’s appeal of a Tiverton Zoning Board of Review decision upholding the town Planning Board’s denial of a master plan application for a recycling plant.

Superior Court Judge Jeffrey A. Lanphear found no fault in the Zoning Board of Review’s May 2014 decision, which upheld the Planning Board's denial of the master plan application submitted by Eagleville Road Realty and Pleasant Sales & Construction (collectively referred to as "Eagleville" in the court's opinion).

Eagleville's master plan application envisioned a recycling plant including two 25,000-square-foot buildings. The application was heard by the Tiverton Planning Board between September 2012 and April 2013, and faced opposition from neighbors in nearby residential areas, as well as the town's Police Chief and Director of Public Works. The opponents of the proposed development expressed concerns with heavy traffic and potential environmental pollution.

While Eagleville offered to cut the per-day tonnage from the site in half to alleviate traffic issues, the Planning Board found that this proposal didn't adequately address safety concerns. The board ultimately denied the application in a unanimous vote, concluding that Eagleville's proposed development ran afoul of multiple provisions of the town's Comprehensive Plan. The Zoning Board of Review upheld the Planning Board's determination.

Eagleville then turned to the Superior Court for further review. The developer argued that the Planning Board and Zoning Board of Review had applied an erroneously heightened standard to its master plan application - which was conceptual in nature - and also failed to properly weigh evidence and expert testimony in multiple respects.

In his opinion, Judge Lanphear stated that, while the master plan application was not required to include all building plans and permits, the Planning Board still had to determine whether the concept for the development was permissible under Tiverton's Comprehensive Plan. Furthermore, Eagleville was required to affirmatively address any potential inconsistencies with the Comprehensive Plan but failed to do so, the judge held.

"Eagleville carried the burden to establish the proposal of a waste and recyclable facility is reasonable and that these potential issues were of no concern or adequately addressed," Judge Lanphear wrote. "There is insufficient evidence to indicate that Eagleville successfully established this before the Planning Board. Thus, the Court concludes that the Zoning Board relied upon substantial evidence within the record when upholding the Planning Board’s decision to deny the Application for failing to meet the required elements of the regulations consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.”

Judge Lanphear analyzed all of Eagleville's additional objections to the Planning Board and Zoning Board of Review's treatment of evidence and expert testimony and rejected each of them in turn.

"Despite Eagleville’s arguments otherwise, the Zoning Board adequately considered all the evidence in the record properly before the Planning Board when issuing a decision," the judge wrote. "The local board is granted deference in findings of fact. Neither the Zoning Board nor the Planning Board’s decisions needed to address every scintilla of evidence. There was no unjust disregard or ignoring of evidence beneficial to Eagleville. This Court finds the decisions rested on substantial and reliable evidence within the record."