News & Features

However, despite voting in favor of the findings of fact, a majority of board members came out against the project. According to the court's review, Chairman O'Connell and Martin Cohen cited the negative impact on the neighborhood for their opposition, while Board member Michael Martin pointed to the perceived dangers of a series of manmade retention ponds.

But as Nugent wrote, "After review of the entire record, the Court is satisfied that… the finding that the proposed use would not be harmonious with the neighborhood was not supported by substantial evidence."

In fact, the court found there was "uncontradicted expert testimony" that the development would indeed fit with the area and would positively benefit property values.

"Four of the five Zoning Board members expressly found that the proposed use 'is consistent with and in harmony with the surrounding area,'" Nugent wrote. "What is further perplexing to this Court is the fact that Chairman O'Connell specifically accepted Mr. Pimental's testimony as credible with regard to his opinion that the proposed use would be harmonious with the surrounding area. However, his 'additional findings' inexplicably contradicted this initial finding."

He continued, "Where there is no competent evidence to offset that of an applicant's experts, the Zoning Board's denial of the application may be characterized as arbitrary and an abuse of discretion."

After reviewing the record, Nugent ruled that the board's denial was "clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence of the record and was clearly arbitrary. Substantial rights of R.I. Core have been prejudiced. Accordingly, this Court reverses the decision by the Zoning Board of Review of the City of Newport."

He concluded simply, "R.I. Core's application for a special use permit is granted."

Whether the city plans on appealing the decision is not clear. A phone call to Core Investment's offices on Tuesday was not returned in time for press.