Harrisville Planning Commission recommends Ordinance 562 to create affordable‑housing overlay

The Harrisville Planning Commission voted to recommend Ordinance 562, a proposed affordable‑housing zoning overlay, to the City Council after approving staff‑recommended revisions and a change to wording about preliminary‑plat review.

The revision the commission approved replaces a sentence saying the planning commission “will approve” preliminary plats with language that the commission “may approve” preliminary plats after review by appropriate city departments, a change intended to avoid implying the commission is merely a rubber stamp for administrative actions.

Commissioners discussed several substantive details before the recommendation. City planner Sarah Wicker summarized implementation: the ordinance creates an optional overlay developers may apply to specific projects; the overlay takes effect once the City Council adopts it and a developer applies to use the overlay for a particular site. “So right now, we’re just implementing the ordinance, which gives the opportunity for developers and builders to approach us and apply this to their particular projects,” Wicker said.

Commissioners raised three main issues during deliberations. First, several members urged using the state’s definition of “owner‑occupied” rather than broader locally drafted language that would allow trusts; Wicker read the state wording into the record: “Occupier means an individual who owns solely or jointly a housing unit in which the individual lives as the individual's primary residence.” Commissioners said adopting the state definition would reduce potential loopholes where a trust could be used to claim owner occupancy without sole or joint ownership.

Second, the commission debated design standards and how strictly to allow deviations. Commissioners kept a provision that design standards are the expectation but that a developer may present a “compelling reason” to deviate; commissioners said major design changes would require strong justification because the standards are intended to set expectations before a developer applies.

Third, the commission considered and then removed a proposed requirement that developers submit cost estimates and expected profit margins with concept plans. Several commissioners expressed concern that cost submissions could become negotiation leverage and that contractor bids vary widely. Commissioners agreed to retain the ordinance’s target price and affordability focus while removing the requirement for detailed cost or margin disclosures.

Commissioners also discussed parcel size and how projects might be assembled. Staff cited the city’s moderate‑income housing report and an example used in concept planning that a 5‑acre parcel in an A‑1 zone could support five homes under the ordinance’s assumptions; staff noted many projects could instead combine contiguous parcels and that the ordinance could be used for infill sites as well.

A commissioner made a motion to recommend Ordinance 562 with the revisions outlined in the city planner’s memo dated Oct. 8, 2025, and with the specific wording change replacing “will approve” with “may approve” in the preliminary‑plat paragraph. The motion was moved by Commissioner (speaker 4); a second was not recorded in the transcript. The motion passed by voice vote; members present voiced “aye” and the commission proceeded to the next agenda item.

The commission noted it had already held the public hearing on the ordinance at an earlier meeting and that the recommendation to the City Council is the next formal step. City staff will prepare the revised ordinance language and materials for council review; no City Council hearing date was given in the transcript.

The commission’s discussion included references to state reporting requirements for the city’s moderate‑income housing report and to broader statewide goals to increase single‑family housing, but final adoption and implementation depend on City Council action and on developers filing overlay applications.