[{"_1":2,"_97":-5,"_98":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,85],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6089216,"mediaKeyId","2875253-15e3a240bf37ec44938fae67bdbd96f3","parentId",2875253,"title","Votes at a glance: Charlestown Planning Commission (Jan. 22, 2025) — extension, regulations, and subcommittees","audioSeconds",2240,"startMs",3275000,"endMs",5515000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2875253-15e3a240bf37ec44938fae67bdbd96f3&start=3275&end=5515","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2875253-15e3a240bf37ec44938fae67bdbd96f3/thumbnail_3275000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6089216/Charlestown/Washington-County/Rhode-Island/Votes-at-a-glance-Charlestown-Planning-Commission-Jan-22-2025-extension-regulations-and-subcommittees","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6089216-6889de83d2bbe55bc263f3c86b8106db/orig.mp4?Expires=1771058058&Signature=JVKqnIEqHnPR8~NB0EmGixo-mtDx8F5EyFaRhKRbzWDLuK4dtWA39LVuX~LkpHzpyjHHILie~QMd-HWtRHAgPeT1TAM6l4QyWJYErleNLnNopiDslN3F-OssHkh57sPQmBY3gFAJsGV4abka5jYuRwppOJ961WiWJIYyRVdlmU8KOE57FnxZVQd2YoUnZ40CUC4kFvf31RgAfmvZ3XE4ok5Fe9Scxy1sAYZxdZDBEaS4zFJzAYyFLJ7RBLZ9YQeNrmNEaRxNweGIrj~eYGWS77zsBh2SLYaBUXDy1WMJXnwBY7HSnzP8dy~TxUEufvwUrjYLuQdf6zpdaJ7uuMPBBQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Charlestown Town Council","date","2025-01-22T00:00:00Z","article","At its Jan. 22 meeting the Charlestown Planning Commission recorded several formal actions and votes. The items below summarize each motion, the recorded outcome as reflected in the meeting transcript, and next steps.

Votes at a glance

1) Ricky’s Storage Buildings — second one‑year extension of preliminary plan approval
- Motion: Approve a second one‑year extension of the approved preliminary plan for the Ricky’s storage buildings (owner/applicant recorded as Richard Sarah, doing business as Rippies Companies, Inc.). The extension preserves the original conditions of approval and requires final plan submission prior to the extension expiration.
- Key deadlines/notes: Transcript notes the final plan must be prepared and submitted prior to 01/22/2026 (the staff memo dated Jan. 13 was referenced for statutory authority and expiration timing).
- Vote: Unanimous voice vote recorded as “Aye.” No roll-call tally was recorded in the transcript. Outcome: approved.

2) Amendments to Charlestown land development & subdivision regulations — advertise for public hearing
- Motion: Order advertisement of proposed amendments to the land development and subdivision regulations, as compiled and modified that evening, for public hearing.
- Noted statutory linkage: Commissioners discussed incorporating Rhode Island General Laws 45‑23‑46 (improvement guarantees) by reference and aligning local language (maintenance bond caps, phased guarantees) with state law.
- Vote: Unanimous voice vote. Outcome: approved; staff to prepare the public notice and line‑numbered draft for the hearing (motion record includes a date for the hearing as recorded in the meeting: 02/26/2020). Staff to add statutory reference and present final packet before advertising.

3) Commercial village design standards — create joint subcommittee with EIC
- Motion: Create a planning‑commission subcommittee (three planning commissioners) to work with the Economic Improvement Commission (EIC) on converting commercial village guidelines into possible standards and to determine whether elements should be regulatory or advisory. The planning commission appointees named in the motion were Frances, Carol and Ruth; the EIC will name three members.
- Next steps: Staff to support the subcommittee, ensure Open Meetings Act compliance and post meetings; subcommittee will coordinate scheduling with EIC members.
- Vote: Unanimous. Outcome: approved; staff to notify EIC and schedule meetings.

4) Ordinance review ad hoc committee — planning commission representative
- Motion: Appoint a planning commission representative (Ruth) to the ongoing ordinance‑review ad hoc committee that is reviewing the town code for non‑substantive edits and the remaining substantive zoning/ordinance issues.
- Vote: Unanimous voice vote recorded. Outcome: approved; committee continues work on code reorganization and substantive policy changes for later council action.

Procedural notes: All four motions were passed by unanimous voice votes as recorded in the transcript; in several cases the record shows no named mover or seconder or a voice second was given but not recorded by name. Where the transcript did not record a named mover or seconder, the vote is recorded as a voice roll call outcome (unanimous). The minutes show staff follow‑up tasks assigned (prepare public notice and draft code text; staff to support subcommittee scheduling and posting requirements).","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Planning Commission Regular Meeting 1/22/2025 7:00 PM","oneSentenceSummary","The Planning Commission recorded a set of procedural votes at its Jan. 22 meeting: a unanimous one‑year extension for an approved preliminary plan, a unanimous vote to advertise subdivision regulation amendments, and unanimous formation of two advisory subcommittees (commercial design standards and ordinance review).","taxTitle","Charlestown, Washington County, Rhode Island","taxId",79687,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":44,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":50,"_51":81,"_53":82,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":83,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":84,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6089221,"Planning Commission moves to advertise subdivision regulation changes tied to new state law on improvement guarantees",1914,5189000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2875253-15e3a240bf37ec44938fae67bdbd96f3&start=3275&end=5189","/articles/6089221/Charlestown/Washington-County/Rhode-Island/Planning-Commission-moves-to-advertise-subdivision-regulation-changes-tied-to-new-state-law-on-improvement-guarantees","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6089221-46538137e7df9b2d79a8aa86092e5212/orig.mp4?Expires=1771058058&Signature=hdA8TFVtnic3a0xK--x35cpA6VJiHfhWFSV-lNWBchQkTSdGZtpRbCALyUeeK3ZDv35UmwNqH~Dk8kBD54-tpSvktZ7xLqHPVpZlc8DXtM1hwtPEbo05gsF~nHNpamLLe0y4cqUdr34vPu-BZE6bKA3INTjF7~SL7jIkuIxnHLOeB~7~l9mIdkNHXKd3pDOxkGKN~J4s5KM7gn0k5T0ZWt0PMNz~8YUXSKUDbpoctz0gKr~fOh7kAWgwJ7POZb8xaV7Cn9uufZ9j1gdGG1RoslLbxortQmMBtX11QIvGtseV8-tVZnoTInphdGMT3CxDlIYQSyC2GA4H-3dJdDL6yg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Charlestown Planning Commission voted Jan. 22 to order advertisement of proposed amendments to the town’s land development and subdivision regulations so they conform with recent changes to state law governing improvement guarantees.

What the commission decided: By unanimous voice vote the commission instructed staff to advertise the package for a public hearing, with staff to incorporate editorial and targeted legal references. The vote authorizes planning staff to present the amended regulations at a public hearing (advertisement to proceed as modified that evening).

Why it matters: Commissioners and staff discussed a state law change (cited in the meeting as Rhode Island General Laws 45‑23‑46) that requires local permitting authorities to accept one of three forms of assurance for completion of public improvements before final plan approval: (1) completion of construction prior to final endorsement, (2) improvement guarantees, or (3) a combination of the two. Town staff recommended a short, clear incorporation by reference rather than pasting the full statute into local regulations.

Key discussion points raised during the review:

- Improvement guarantees and maintenance bonds: Staff and commissioners noted the state law includes provisions on maintenance bonds and caps (meeting discussion referenced a 10% cap on maintenance guarantees and the requirement that local regulations be consistent with the statute). Commissioners discussed where in the local rules to add a construction/improvement bond provision (suggested location: Section 12.11).

- Phased construction: The group discussed how improvement guarantee requirements should apply to phased construction, and staff said local practice already requires the permitting authority to specify improvement guarantees for each phase and record only lots completed to final standards.

- Delegation of authority and technical review: Planning staff recommended specifying who carries out technical reviews (the transcript noted an earlier, broader comment that “town” should be specified consistently as the planning commission or other named authority) to avoid ambiguity about which body performs approvals and technical review steps.

- Advertising and public notice: Commissioners agreed the legal notice will be brief (one or two paragraphs) summarizing the scope of amendments and indicating where the public can find full draft language. The commission set a hearing date in the motion as recorded in the meeting record.

Action and next steps: The commission voted to advertise the amended regulations, as compiled and modified that evening. Staff will prepare the public notice, add a short incorporation‑by‑reference to R.I. Gen. Laws 45‑23‑46 for construction/improvement guarantees (rather than pasting the entire statute), and present the full package at the scheduled public hearing.

Ending: The motion to advertise carried unanimously; commissioners asked staff to return to the commission with a clean, line‑numbered draft and a summary of proposed changes before the public hearing.

","The commission voted to advertise proposed amendments to the Charlestown land development and subdivision regulations to align local rules with amended state law, including references to Rhode Island General Law 45‑23‑46 on improvement guarantees. Commissioners discussed drafting options, maintenance bond caps and timing for public notice.",{"_33":86,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":87,"_41":88,"_43":89,"_45":90,"_47":91,"_49":92,"_51":93,"_53":94,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":95,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":96,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6089227,"Developer previews mixed-use plan for Village at Cross Mills; planners raise water, parking and affordability questions",2923,327000,3250000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2875253-15e3a240bf37ec44938fae67bdbd96f3&start=327&end=3250","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2875253-15e3a240bf37ec44938fae67bdbd96f3/thumbnail_327000.jpg","/articles/6089227/Charlestown/Washington-County/Rhode-Island/Developer-previews-mixed-use-plan-for-Village-at-Cross-Mills-planners-raise-water-parking-and-affordability-questions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6089227-1c43039a0889efd3160a38e3cb63fb39/orig.mp4?Expires=1771058058&Signature=H1ns8FGTuDDg4YXwLYs5gKrtue7or-f9b~Yn3yldBCNBvp4yEiW-bQ1fTDxlhsXQ5FHJXoEUEh3OEt6DL~J-XzrGcTp~OgGIoABOYw1EBQNN-GSM9dCILo~cWJantB2rpSl8Gs~XfqOtrghEvLhNvHrNDbMGjJAxyZBDrvmfpLVjDB9teHzIPBrT8bBBejq~mRV-Onikxul7TmBEft9OrjIARY0Hkb7S7NV0yPen~pVTpYZrQSqfIfcJ4qb~5-vD78HhyENgr4CZK5a1ygMZ7F~ywBNWoQrvIu9LSb08SjNh-Ks0CENucoQ3px5652Ps70t1Ps6OTf8qYNjhKjVSxg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Carl Johnson, the owner-applicant for a project he called the Village at Cross Mills, presented a pre-application to the Charlestown Planning Commission on Jan. 22 for redevelopment of a 0.75-acre parcel near Old Post Road. Johnson said the proposal envisions three mixed‑use buildings with commercial space on lower levels and one‑bedroom residential units above, built in phases starting with a corner building intended to reflect the stone architecture of the existing Cross Hall building.

Commissioners and staff welcomed the design and the applicant’s attention to materials and scale but spent the bulk of the meeting pressing for information about services and regulatory constraints. Planning staff and commissioners repeatedly asked Johnson to confirm the project’s stormwater approach, septic system siting and whether the site’s private well will constrain commercial uses.

Why it matters: The property sits in a village commercial area with residential neighbors and environmental constraints. Commissioners said any redevelopment must protect groundwater and the existing neighborhood character while complying with state health and housing rules.

Commissioners and staff asked about several technical and regulatory points that the applicant will need to address before a formal application:

- Water and wells: Planning staff and commissioners noted the site uses a private well and reminded the applicant that state rules treat a public water supply differently once a development serves 25 or more people. Commissioner comments and planning staff advised the applicant to check Department of Health classification and whether proposed commercial uses would require public‑water standards or impose limits on food preparation or public restrooms.

- Septic and nitrogen: The applicant described plans for an advanced Fuji sand‑filter septic system and said he has used similar systems elsewhere. Commissioners stressed the town’s long‑term concern about nitrogen in groundwater and encouraged advanced wastewater treatment and other measures to limit nitrogen loading.

- Stormwater and parking: Johnson said he is investigating Coltec chambers and a depressed, planted retention area with pedestrian features to manage runoff and meet regulations that prevent increases in off‑site runoff. Staff noted that site stormwater calculations will be required and that parking counts in preliminary sketches showed “20 plus” spaces; commissioners asked the applicant to study pervious paving or pavers for parking to reduce impervious cover.

- Building program and LMI units: Johnson said the residences would be one‑bedroom units, and that the project would include some LMI units. Planning staff reminded the commission that under local rules an “every other” approach applies (for example, three units would require one LMI unit) and that Rhode Island Housing standards and certification may apply; staff urged the applicant to coordinate with Rhode Island Housing or Narragansett Housing for units to “count” as LMI under state programs.

- Possible commercial uses and compatibility: Commissioners noted the village zoning limits certain industrial or contractor uses and flagged that garage‑style facades can appear as carriage‑style doors while still serving tenant storage. Grace (planning staff) reminded the commission that contractors’ uses are not allowed in some parts of the village and asked the applicant to avoid proposing an enclosed storage facility and to show tenant types in later materials.

Applicant response and next steps: Johnson said he favors a phased approach beginning with the corner building to secure a desirable tenant, then build remaining structures as demand warrants. He said he intends to retain the existing stone wall on Old Post Road, protect buffers to abutting residences, and is consulting engineers and landscape designers on stormwater and parking. He told the commission he will coordinate with Narragansett Housing and other local housing partners about the LMI units and will return with engineered site plans, stormwater calculations and septic design.

Ending: Because the presentation was a pre‑application, no vote or formal action was taken. Commissioners asked the applicant to provide engineered plans and to consult early with the Department of Health and Rhode Island Housing so that outstanding technical issues — septic siting, stormwater, parking and the disposition of LMI units — can be resolved before a formal application is submitted.

","Carl Johnson presented a pre-application for three mixed-use buildings at Cross Mills that would include ground-floor commercial space and one‑bedroom residences above. Commissioners and staff praised the design but pressed the applicant on stormwater, septic, well capacity, parking and low- and moderate-income (LMI) unit requirements.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: Charlestown Planning Commission (Jan. 22, 2025) — extension, regulations, and subcommittees

Planning Commission moves to advertise subdivision regulation changes tied to new state law on improvement guarantees

Developer previews mixed-use plan for Village at Cross Mills; planners raise water, parking and affordability questions