A Fundamental Change In Charlestown
On January 8 the majority on the current Town Council enacted a sweeping zoning ordinance change that allows the construction of a second dwelling unit, called an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU), on any residential lot in Charlestown. Even though the state legislature is working on improvements to the state law regulating ADUs and the original initiative by the Town Council was limited, the Town Council decided to forge ahead and enact its wide-ranging ordinance.
Because of the Town Council majority’s action, single-family zoning no longer exists in Charlestown, and residential lots that could once have only one dwelling unit can now have two, effectively reducing the size of residential lots by half.
The Planning Commission cautioned that these units could, in our coastal community, be constructed primarily to be used as seasonal rentals, making affordable year-round rentals scarcer than ever. The Planning Commission advised, therefore, that the maximum size of an ADU be the same as that previously permitted in Charlestown and that the occupant of the ADU be a resident of the town. Because the new ordinance allows these units in “existing” structures, the Commission also advised that the date when these structures came into existence be clearly stated in the ordinance; it also recommended a yearly affidavit be filed in the town’s Land Records by the owner of the property stating that they live on the property.
The Planning Commission’s advice was ignored. Councilor Carney did not want an ordinance that would be too narrow. Councilors Stokes and Serra stated that these units should be larger than previously allowed and that the residency requirement would not be easy to enforce. Mr. Stokes expressed that a residency requirement would be a burden on a family like his where his parents maintain a primary residence elsewhere. Mr. Serra observed, as he has on many occasions, that people should be able to do what they want to do with their property. Mr. Serra also expressed his personal displeasure with the Planning Commission, saying, “The Planning Commission will rule us all to death so we cannot do anything. I know that for a fact.” He was perhaps talking about his current application before the Planning Commission where, in hearings and on social media, he has objected vigorously to long-standing town regulations regarding protecting the town’s groundwater and screening his commercial property from residential abutters.
Councilor Cooper, who would have supported a sensible ordinance to fill the gap between what the town has been able to permit for years and what the state ultimately will require, voted against an ordinance that did not incorporate the Planning Commission’s advice regarding residency, and the like.
The new ordinance was adopted on a vote of 3-1. There is now additional evidence that the current Town Council majority favors development and an increase in the density of that development. This new ordinance, rather than helping to increase the supply of affordable, year-round rental housing, will encourage, instead, very profitable seasonal rentals. What will remain at risk is the degradation of our groundwater (the sole source of our drinking water), unhealthy freshwater and saltwater ponds, and ultimately an increase in our tax rate when these negative environmental effects need to be mitigated.
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 governance issues in Charlestown.
The banner image is a photo of a frog in a Charlestown pond. Charlestown’s land use regulations, natural resource protection, water quality, and tax rate are all related. How well we protect our natural resources has a direct impact on our financial stability and our tax rate.
February 7, 2024 @ 9:03 am
No question that the CRU majority of the current town council represent special interests that endanger the whole community. Little by little the CRU has used its majority to make changes that will permanently change for the worse our beloved town. For years now our elected officials have struck a balance between development and preserving the delicate balance that has kept our town an attractive place to live. Pay attention Charlestown just read and attend meetings to see for yourself. The CRU candidates need to be returned to the minority or completely voted out this coming November.
February 1, 2024 @ 2:15 pm
This is a bigger part of ruining communities like the government and elected officials did to the cities. Make sure you know who and what the policies you are voting into office!! This law was and the money given to the states for infrastructure allowed for this to happen!
January 24, 2024 @ 5:21 pm
Thanks Bonnie, well said. It will indeed be sad to see Charlestown become another crowded coastal community like Westerly, South Kingstown and Narragansett. If this increased density forces us to put in town water and sewers how much will this cost? Did the council consider this and get a professional assessment of it?
January 24, 2024 @ 3:54 pm
LET’S KEEP IT THAT WAY..