Two months after bringing the matter up, Smithfield’s Planning Commission continued to discuss on May 13 whether to revise the maximum density allowed in the downtown neighborhood residential zoning that overlaps with much of the town’s historic district. But aside from recommending a minor change in side yard buffers, the commissioners failed to reach a consensus.

The current 5-unit-per-acre maximum dates to 1998 when the Town Council adopted a massive overhaul of the town’s zoning ordinance. It’s why developer Vincent Carollo, who purchased eight lots spanning just over an acre at Washington, James and Clay streets last year, recently sought a change in that verbiage that would have allowed him to apply for a special use permit for 10 homes, up from the eight approved when the land was formerly owned by Joseph Luter IV. The density limit is also the reason the current Town Council voted 4-2 in March to deny Carollo’s request, though data that Community Development and Planning Director Tammie Clary presented to the Planning Commission on May 13 shows some areas of the historic district already exceed the 5-unit-per-acre limit.

Town Attorney Bill Riddick, who’s been in his role since the early 1990s, said special use permits were intended during the 1998 overhaul to give flexibility to the restrictive density limits enacted that year. But four of Smithfield’s seven Town Council members, each of whom campaigned on reining in growth and development during the 2024 election, have been more reluctant than their predecessors to grant exceptions to the town’s zoning ordinance.

“It’s time for the Town Council, starting with this project, to stand up to developers and say, ‘Adhere to our zoning requirements,’ not ask us to rewrite them,” Councilman Darren Cutler, who also serves as the council’s liaison to the Planning Commission, said during the March vote on Carollo’s request.

“If you’re just going to say you can’t have a special use permit, we’re not going to grant them, you have to stay within our density except in rare cases, the ordinance doesn’t work anymore,” Riddick said.

Commissioner GiGi Smith noted there’s a 1.79-acre area in downtown Smithfield with 16 homes that predates the 5-unit-per-acre limit, equating to just over eight homes per acre.

Commissioner Thomas Pope also brought up the town’s low-density “neighborhood residential” zoning district, which specifies a maximum density of two units per acre but requires a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet, which would equate to three units per acre.

“None of it has ever made sense to me,” Pope said.

“Where I live it’s very dense and that’s the character of the neighborhood,” said Planning Commission Chairwoman Julia Hillegass. “And what we need to be building in the future is in keeping with the character of the neighborhood.”

Cutler denied that he, Councilwoman Mary Ellen Bebermeyer, Vice Mayor Bill Harris and Mayor Mike Smith – who were each endorsed in 2024 by the Smithfield-based Citizens for Responsible Leadership political action committee for their controlled-growth platforms – are 100% opposed to special use permits in every circumstance.

“I think we saw last week with the ‘Cottages’ a perfect example of working together to create a development, and two special use permits got approved and two were removed by the developer to meet the desires of the town,” said Cutler, referring to the 104-home development slated for 14 acres behind Royal Farms convenience store on South Church Street that the Town Council voted 6-1 on May 6 to approve. 

The project’s developer, Suffolk-based Quality Homes, returned with the lower-density concept after a 130-home version stalled upon reaching the Planning Commission in November. Cutler had cast the dissenting vote despite the 20% reduction in units.

“The perception is reality for the people in town who voted for no growth. They didn’t hear you say controlled growth; they heard you say no growth, and that’s the perception,” GiGi Smith said. “I’m seeing it on Facebook. I’m seeing it on Nextdoor.”

Pope, who said he personally has “sunk a lot of money” into a 900-square-foot addition to his medical practice due to town requirements, was still critical of the new Town Council’s stance and the amount of money that developers would have to spend on revising their plans each time the Planning Commission or Town Council desires a change.

“Every time we tell them to go back,” he said, “I just cannot imagine the amount of money they’re wasting and they’re sinking into this just to satisfy us over some of these little details … that we’re getting hung up on when in the grand scheme of things, does eight houses and 10 houses at the corner of James and Washington make a hill of beans on anything? … And then you’re going to turn around and say your houses are not affordable.”