Unwinding 35 Years Of Mitigating Environmental Impacts In Charlestown Subdivisions
A number of citizens attended a special meeting of the Charlestown Town Council meeting on June 1 to watch as members of the Town Council discussed, among themselves, significant changes in the regulations governing the development of large parcels of land in Charlestown.
Changes to these regulations had been authorized by the Town Council majority because some developers had asked for more “choice.” The changes were presented at the meeting as a new ordinance authored by Councilor Stephen Stokes—an ordinance that bears little resemblance to any cluster ordinance that Charlestown has ever enacted, going as far back as 1988.
Councilor Susan Cooper objected from the outset of the meeting to the options presented in the ordinance.
The new ordinance eliminates the requirement that open space contain any upland (developable areas), in spite of the fact that developers of major subdivisions have been required to set aside upland areas while clustering their lots since 1988. The number of lots that a developer has available to develop has not been reduced by this requirement, but the negative environmental impact of new residential development has been reduced. There is wide agreement that this method has worked.
Instead, the new ordinance allows open space to be made up entirely of the following: wetlands, floodplains, water bodies, streets, storm-water treatment structures, drainage basins, utility rights-of-way, power line easements, ledge, cemeteries, and any other land that can’t be developed.
Councilor Cooper emphasized that protecting our groundwater is of prime importance and maintained that, to protect our groundwater (the source of our drinking water), open space needs to include undisturbed upland to provide for recharge of the aquifer by rain and to clean the groundwater.
In response, Councilor Stokes asserted that our groundwater is protected in other ways and argued against provisions that have been part of the ordinance for almost 35 years. Councilor Rippy Serra stated that developers should be able to do whatever they want with their property, regardless of the impacts on their neighbors or the environment.
At the end of the meeting, the Town Council majority agreed that they want to prioritize giving developers “choice,” even though, as was pointed out, developers have considerable flexibility in the current cluster ordinance.
Further, it appeared that the Council majority remained in favor of giving developers a choice between a very weakened version of cluster, or essentially no clustering at all.
Indeed, the question that was not answered is why the Town Council majority seems to think it a good idea to unwind 35 years of mitigating environmental impacts in Charlestown subdivisions.
Bonnie Van Slyke, the author of this post, was a member of the Charlestown Town Council from 2014 to 2022. She was the Town Council Liaison to the Planning Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission, and Senior Citizens Commission. She is a former officer and member of the Board of Directors of the Frosty Drew Observatory & Science Center, a former Chair of the Zoning Board of Appeals in Harvard, MA and a former member of the Board of Trustees of the Harvard Conservation Trust. Bonnie is a freelance copy editor, technical writer, and publications specialist. Bonnie writes occasionally about land use issues in Charlestown.
June 7, 2023 @ 1:28 pm
I have lived in NY for 60 years and now own my home in Charlestown for 11 years. One of the main reasons I purchase in Charlestown RI was because they protect the land from over building and environment destruction. Allowing this change eliminates builder’s responsibility to the environment and existing homeowners.
In NY I have seen new homes built that have caused the following problems during, after or in the future to existing homeowners. Flooding of land, basements, major property runoff, Mud slides, wells going dry, springs that provide water to existing homes dried up, sewage drainage/leakage, destroying natural brooks & ponds, excess cutting of trees and stripping land, more pesticides and lawn chemicals used by homeowners, etc. The list goes on long after the builders make their money and vanish with no responsibility for what they left behind. I know housing is a problem but maybe we need to rethink the use of un-used commercial/store property for housing, The land already has been destroyed, repurpose it for living space. Stripping more land and destroying its natural eco-system CAN’T POSSIBILITY BE GREEN IN ANYWAY. ONCE WE CHANGE OUR LAND IT WILL NEVER BE THE SAME. Just look at Charlestown beach salt ponds, it’s very sad to see the growth, rot and killing of the natural water eco system due to overbuilding, waist and chemicals have done to our waters in the salt ponds.