The Warwick City Council granted first passage last Wednesday to the controversial abandonment of parts of Strawberry Field Road, Murray Street, Bunker Street and Fieldview Drive in order for the Rhode Island Airport Corporation to build a berm and noise wall for the surrounding neighborhood.

The abandonment first came before the council on Aug. 19 and faced opposition from members of the public. It was eventually held until this meeting in a 5-4 vote, as RIAC did not have legal counsel present.

This time, RIAC’s legal counsel and chief of staff, Brittany Morgan, said a vote in favor of the abandonment was necessary for the full construction of the berm, which is currently planned to be 6 feet tall topped by a 9 foot tall wall.

The berm, Morgan said, was in RIAC’s master plan — a 20-year planning document looking at possible developments of the airport created in 2016 and approved by the Federal Aviation Administration in 2021. While building it was not a requirement of the FAA, Morgan said that RIAC and the city agree it will shield those living in the surrounding area from noise.

“The main concern right now, and the reason that we’re here, is so that we are able to construct that full noise and visual barrier for the residents in that community,” Morgan said. “We’ve been in discussion with the city administration on this for many years… We recognize the importance, and so our purpose here today is that petition for the abandonment so that we can complete the full construction.”

Morgan also said that if the council failed to approve the abandonment, the berm would be built with holes in it where RIAC did not control the property, providing no value to residents of the neighborhood.

What’s the land worth?

Another topic of contention at the Aug. 19 meeting was the value of the property, which RIAC assessed at $409,000. Speaking on behalf of the airport, appraiser Peter Scotti said that he based the assessment on the combined roadway surface of more than three acres for light industrial use.

“Residential use has been extinguished on those lots — you can’t build residences, you can’t use them for residences — so that left us with two choices,” Scotti said. “We could appraise the land as unbuildable residential land, which would give a value of 25 or 30 or 40 cents per square foot, which we thought was not in keeping with the highest and the best use of the property… The comprehensive plan future land use map identifies the subjects are for future use of light industrial, so we very simply looked for comparable sales of light industrial zones.”

By doing so, Scotti said, the land gained value to the point that RIAC would pay the city $265 per square foot for the abandoned streets, coming out to the $409,000 mark. RIAC paid the city the $409,000 prior to council consideration.

While multiple Warwick residents that spoke against the abandonment were concerned about the city being low-balled, most speakers against the project said that they feared the airport was looking for “just another land-grab.”

Resident Richard Langseth, who also spoke about the project at the Aug. 19 meeting, said he still believes that any deal is invalid as the State of Rhode Island is considered an abutter to the project, and that Scotti’s appraisal needed to be redone.

“[The city] would get $5 million from the airport if they had a proper appraisal,” Langseth said. “The City Council needs to recognize the fact that the revenue is incredibly important, and they should sit back and continue this and let’s get an appropriate appraisal so that we don’t get screwed out of $4 million.”

Ward 2 Councilman Jeremy Rix, who compared the airport to “a black hole in the middle of the city,” asked Morgan whether land acquisition could be used to expand airport facilities and requested an assurance from RIAC that the land being conveyed would only be used for the sound barrier. Morgan said that the FAA would not allow the airport to purchase the land with that kind of restriction, though she said there is currently “no discussion” on other developments on the land being acquired, and emphasized that there would be public input for any changes to RIAC’s master plan.

Ward 5 Councilman Ed Ladouceur was also concerned about what the abandonment could mean for future airport plans, and after Morgan said she could not promise that RIAC would be willing to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the city to allow RIAC to have an easement over the roads where the berm would be installed.

More to come?

“It’s crystal clear to me that the main intention here is not to only do a berm,” Ladouceur said. “I think that if this were strictly about the berm, then RIAC would have agreed to do the berm. But to me, it seems as though there’s a lot more down the road, and this is just another land grab by the Airport Corporation.”

Ladouceur also said he thinks RIAC believed the project would get “rubber-stamped” by the council.

Bill Facente, the mayor’s chief of staff, said the berm, once completed, would improve the quality of life of local residents, and also claimed that any discussion on future airport plans was not germane to the discussion about the berm.

“We’re not here to talk about the airport corporation, the expansion of the airport in 20, 30, 40 years,” Facente said. “We’re here to talk about the noise berm… If we do not abandon the roads, there’ll be gaping gaps in the noise barrier that the sound will go through, the view will go through, and it will be for nothing.”

Facente also noted that RIAC’s planned cargo facility, which was the cause of a dispute between the city and RIAC and the reason the city requested the berm be built, has been approved already, and would be built regardless of the vote on the abandonment.

Will the berm lessen the noise?

Resident Michelle Komar, speaking against the project, argued that the berm would not have a significant impact on noise and air quality from the airport in the neighborhood.

“The analysis indicated that a 6 foot berm and a 9 foot wall will provide noise reduction — the FAA has a measurement, day-night average — of one to four decibels to the adjacent homes. It goes on to say that a noise reduction from single noise events will be reduced by one to 13 decibels,” Komar said. “So are there any air quality mitigation benefits with the berm? That is not the purpose of the berm, so that was not studied.”

Ward 3 Councilman Tim Howe said that he had a list of residents in the neighborhood who signed a petition in support of the berm given to him by Bryan Nappa, who is running to replace him on the council and spoke in favor of the abandonment.

Abandoning the land to build the berm, Howe said, would be beneficial to the neighborhood because of the impacts of RIAC’s planned cargo facility.

“People are tired of the growth of the airport — I get it,” Howe said. “The neighbors are tired of the noise, the smell, I get it. But, ladies and gentlemen, the cargo facility, the reason why we requested this berm, is because it is [being built] on RIAC property… If we do not approve this, I’m not exaggerating, it’ll be a berm, a gap, a berm, a gap, a berm, a gap, and then the city is still responsible for the roads and the plowing and the maintenance, and that’s a waste of money because we can’t develop them.”

The abandonment passed by a 6-2 vote, with Ladouceur and Ward 9 Councilman Vincent Gebhart in opposition. Ward 8 Councilman Anthony Sinapi was not in attendance.