Valley Breeze

The Valley Breeze & Observer 05-09-2019

The Valley Breeze Newspapers serving the Northern Rhode Island towns of Cumberland, Lincoln, Woonsocket, Smithfield, North Smithfield, Pawtucket, North Providence, Scituate, Foster, and Glocester

Issue link:

Contents of this Issue


Page 4 of 51

SMITHFIELD SCITUATE FOSTER GLOCESTER EDITION | VALLEY BREEZE & OBSERVER | MAY 9-15, 2019 SMITHFIELD 5 daycare will support the district's growth, so will a facility for dogs. Phillips recommended at an April 18 meeting that the Planning Board allow Camp Bow Wow at 37 Thurber Blvd. The Planning Board approved master plan approval and gave a positive recommendation to the Town Council after discussion of whether it fits the needs of the dis- trict. Planning Board member Michael Moan said the doggie daycare is not compatible with the zone's planned uses and said he felt Camp Bow Wow should continue looking for other locations. "I have concerns about going for- ward and establishing a precedent," Moan said. The 13,000-square-foot building with a proposed 2,000-square-foot enclosure would be located in a planned corporate zone inside the economic growth overlay district. According to a town ordinance, a dog daycare cannot be within 300 feet of residential areas. Attorney William Bernstein, representing Camp Bow Wow, said the building will be 750 feet from the nearest abutter, which he said was one of the primary reasons the Thurber Boulevard location was chosen. "We spent a lot of time and resources looking for an appropriate place to put these," Bernstein said. "We allow daycares for kids. This is an appointment center where people come and drop off kids and go to work. It's the same way with pets. Pets are now a lot of people's children," Phillips said. He added, "I see this as an asset to the growth of the overlay that we're trying to build. I believe it would be compatible with the growth of the district." With its recommendation, the Planning Board reduced the num- ber of proposed parking spaces from 30 to 20, despite the require- ment of 43 for the building. Joe Casali, professional engineer, pre- senting for Camp Bow Wow, said most customers will park for a few minutes for drop-off or pick-up during regular hours of 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. Casali said reducing parking will decrease the amount of paved area on site, and if in the future the building changes ownership, the Planning Board may require addi- tional spaces to be added. According to the September 2015 economic growth overlay ordinance, the zone was created to develop a 730-acre growth center, containing 87 lots, to revitalize planned corporate zoned land by opening growth for a variety of compatible land uses. Acceptable uses include residen- tial homes, nursing and life-care facilities with fewer than 120 beds, medical and dental buildings, health management organizations, urgent health clinics, hotels with 100 rooms or fewer, conferences centers, dry-cleaning businesses, personal service establishments, communication antennas, child care centers, theaters, health and fitness centers and office buildings. Larger buildings are acceptable for larger hotels, hospitals, office and restaurant space in the zone by special use permit. CAMP BOW WOW From Page One Notice of Fiscal 2019-2020 Town Budget Dates Public Hearing on Proposed Budget: Tuesday, May 14, 2019, 7:00 p.m. Smithfield High School Auditorium 90 Pleasant View Avenue Annual Financial Town Meeting: Thursday, June 13, 2019, 7:00 p.m. Smithfield High School Auditorium 90 Pleasant View Avenue Copies of the proposed budget will be made available at the meetings and will be available online at If communication assistance is needed (readers, interpreters, captions), or any other accommodation to ensure equal participation, please contact the Smithfield Town Manager's Office at 401-233-1010 at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting. Carol A. Aquilante, CMC, Town Clerk and Clerk to the Board of Canvassers ATTENTION SMITHFIELD RESIDENTS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS GINA M. ALONGI, as ADMINISTRATOR, INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL 4 HEALTH AND WELFARE, PENSION, ANNUITY AND SAVINGS FUNDS, LABOR-MANAGEMENT COOPERATION TRUST, and HOISTING AND PORTABLE ENGINEERS LOCAL 4 APPRENTICE AND * TRAINING FUND; and INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS NATIONAL TRAINING FUND, Plaintiffs, v. BR STEEL, LLC, Defendant, MEMORANDUM AND INJUNCTION BURROUGHS, D.J. Currently pending before the Court is Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction to obtain a payroll audit from Defendant BR Steel, LLC pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(a). For the reasons stated herein, the motion is GRANTED. This action was filed on December, 27, 2018. [ECF No. 1 ("Compl.")]. Defendant was served with the Complaint and summons on January 9, 2019. [ECF No.4]. Defendant failed to appear and answer the Complaint by January 30, 2019, as required. On January 30, 2019, Plaintiffs filed the instant motion for a preliminary injunction requiring Defendant to permit a payroll audit. [ECF No. 5]. On February 19, 2019, the clerk entered a default. [ECF No. 9]. By defaulting, Defendant conceded the truth of the factual allegations in the Complaint. In re Home Restaurants. Inc., 285 F.3d 111, 114 (1st Cir. 2002) (citing Franco v. Selective Ins. Co., 184 F.3d 4, 9 n. 3 (1st Cir.1999)). Under Rule 65(a), "the court may issue a preliminary injunction only on notice to the adverse party." Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a). Here, Defendant was served with the Complaint, which included notice that Plaintiffs were seeking a preliminary injunction. [Compl. at 6]. Defendant conceded liability through default. Although an evidentiary hearing is ordinarily required before a preliminary injunction may issue, Defendant's concession of all facts alleged renders a hearing unnecessary. See Rosario-Urdaz v. Rivera-Hernandez, 350 F.3d 219, 223 (1st Cir. 2003) (finding that the need for a hearing before issuance of a preliminary injunction must be determined flexibly); HMG Prop. Investors. Inc. v. Parque Indus. Rio Cana . lnc., 847 F.2d 908, 915 (1st Cir. 1988) (evidentiary hearing not compulsory for issuance of preliminary injunction in instances where "[t]he taking of evidence would serve little purpose" (citing SEC v. Frank, 388 F.2d 486, 490 (2d Cir.1968))). As stated in the Complaint, on or about September 1, 2017, Defendant agreed to be bound to the terms of agreements and declarations of trust establishing certain funds administered by Plaintiffs ("Plaintiff Funds"), to be bound by the terms of collective bargaining agreements requiring contributions to those Funds, and to be bound by the terms of any successor agreement. [Compl. ~ 11]. As a result, Defendant is a party to the current collective bargaining agreement ("CBA") with the International Union of Operating Engineers Local4. [Id. ~ 12]. The CBA requires Defendant to contribute to Plaintiff Funds for each payroll hour covered by the CBA, plus interest on late payments. [Id. ~ 13]. Defendant is also required to make payroll deductions for union dues and, at an employee's election, make contributions to a social action committee. [I d. ~ 14]. Defendant made no contributions for work done under the CBA for September, October, and November 2018. [Id. ~ 15]. Although the CBA allows Plaintiffs to inspect the Defendant's payroll and such other records as are deemed necessary and pertinent to determine whether it is paying contributions due, the amount due from Defendant is presently undetermined because Defendant has not permitted an inspection. [Id.; ECF No. 6 at 2-3]. Plaintiffs request injunctive relief allowing them to audit Defendant's payroll. Given Defendant's default, Plaintiffs have demonstrated ( 1) their likelihood of success on the merits; (2) the potential for irreparable harm; (3) that a balancing of the relevant equities favors granting the motion; and (4) that the public interest favors granting an injunction. See Gately v. Massachusetts, 2 F.3d 1221, 1224 (1st Cir. 1993). NOW, THEREFORE, Defendant BR Steel, LLC and its agents shall permit an audit of the Defendant's books and records for the period September 1, 2017 to the present to determine the amount, if any, Defendant owes the Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs are not required to post a bond. SO ORDERED. Date: February 15,2019 Is/ Allison D. Burroughs ALLISON D. BURROUGHS U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE Civil Action No. 18-cv-12648-ADB AGENDA TOWN OF SCITUATE ZONING BOARD OF REVIEW Of Hearing on Applications for Special Use Permits, Variances and Appeals under the Zoning Ordinance: Notice is hereby given that the Zoning Board of Review will be in session at the Town Council Chambers, 195 Danielson Pike, N. Scituate on Tuesday, May 28, 2019 at 7:30 pm when all persons interested will be heard for or against the granting of the following applications for Special Use Permits, Variances and Appeals under the Zoning Ordinance. Pledge of Allegiance CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS MEETING: Case #1230 Gaglione, Frank (owner MJV Enterprises., LLC). Location of premises east of 17 Field View Road; Assessor's Plat 10 – Lot 159; RS60/80 under the Zoning Ordinance. Request for a Dimensional Variance for rear yard setback of 47' (60' required; 13' variance) and a Dimensional Variance for a front yard setback of 25' (50' required; 25' variance) to build a new home, pursuant to Art. III Section 2(E). Case #1231 Gaglione, Frank (owner MJV Enterprises., LLC). Location of premises west of 17 Field View Road; Assessor's Plat 10 – Lot 154; RS60/80 under the Zoning Ordinance. Request for a Dimensional Variance for rear yard setback of 47' (60' required; 13' variance) and a Dimensional Variance for a front yard setback of 25' (50' required; 25' variance) to build a new home, pursuant to Art. III Section 2(E). NEW APPLICATIONS: Case #1235 D'Angelo, Tom (owner James Poole). Location of premises William Henry Road, Assessor's Plat 14 – Lots 12 & 13; RR120 under the Zoning Ordinance. Request for a Dimensional Variance for Lot #12 for Lot Width 200' (300' allowed; 100' variance) and Dimensional Variance for Frontage 200' (270' allowed; 70' variance). Lot #13 Lot Width Variance of 166.3' (300' allowed; 133.7' variance) and Frontage of 166.3 (270' allowed; 103.7' variance). Case #1236 Scituate Preservation Society (owner/applicant). Location of premises 706 Hartford Pike, Assessor's Plat 30 – Lot 1; RR120 under the Zoning Ordinance. Appeal of the Letter/Notice of Violation issued by the Zoning Official on April 10, 2019 and the Building Official on April 17, 2019. Meeting Minutes – April 23, 2019. Applicants must submit all documentary evidence (i.e. expert reports, drawings, surveys, deeds, photographs, etc.) to the Zoning Clerk no later than five (5) days prior to the date of the hearing. This also applies to objectors (abutters) who seek to introduce documentary evidence for the Zoning Board of Review to consider at the hearing. Abutters shall be provided with a copy of this requirement as part of the notification they receive in advance of the hearing. If the applicant or objector fails to submit documentary evidence in advance of the hearing, the Zoning Board of Review may, in its sole discretion, continue the hearing to a later date to allow for a review and evaluation of the proffered documentary evidence. By order of the Zoning Board of Review, Kenneth P. Borden, Chairman Individuals Requesting Interpreter Services For The Deaf Or Hard Of Hearing Must Call 647-2822 Seventy Two (72) Hours In Advance Of Said Hearing. TTY #1-800-745- 5555.

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Valley Breeze - The Valley Breeze & Observer 05-09-2019