Narragansett council reviews mixed-use zoning amendment aimed at creating affordable units

The Narragansett Town Council and the Planning Board met in a public workshop on Jan. 27 to review a proposed amendment to Section 17 of the town zoning code that would authorize mixed commercial and residential uses in the BB zoning district and create incentives for affordable housing.

The Planning Board chair, Mark Brady, introduced the item and asked the council to send the draft back to the board for further work. “This is an important initiative in my mind,” Brady said, describing a multi-year effort that began in 2021 with the Affordable Housing Trust Collaborative and has been refined by planning staff and the board.

The proposal creates two categories: a Mixed Use Land Development (one or more lots, multiple buildings) and a Mixed Use Project (single lot, single building). Planning staff member Jill Radey told the council she highlighted three main purposes from the draft — promoting housing (including affordable housing), encouraging economic development that supports residents, and preserving commercial areas — and said the town’s BB zone is the initial focus. “I pulled out only 3 because I thought these 3 were important,” Radey said.

Key details in the draft presented to the council include use and design rules, density calculations, and several incentives aimed at producing affordable units:

- Mix limits: the draft sets a cap that would allow up to 45% of a building’s gross floor area to be commercial and up to 65% residential for mixed-use projects as currently written.

- Density and incentives: residential density would be calculated by bedroom count (the draft uses 3,000 square feet of land per one-bedroom unit as an example). The ordinance would allow residential units to be increased by up to 75% where a minimum of 50% of the proposed units are reserved as low- and moderate-income (LMI) housing.

- Affordable-unit standards: the draft requires LMI units to be indistinguishable from market-rate units (minimum unit sizes and exterior appearance standards). The draft ties for-sale affordable units to about 101% of area median income (AMI) and rental affordable units to about 80% AMI, using the state AMI formula that changes annually.

- Hours and short-term rentals: the draft limits commercial hours in mixed-use to roughly 5 a.m. to 11 p.m. and includes language discouraging short-term rentals (rentals of less than 30 days) in mixed-use developments; staff proposed preserving preexisting nonconforming hours where applicable.

- Review and relief process: large mixed-use land developments would go through the Planning Board using unified development review (a change enabled by state statute), and applicants may request waivers/variances where standards conflict with existing conditions. Planning staff noted recent state statutory changes in 2020, 2023 and 2024 that affect review standards.

Planning board member Cliff Tyler told the council the draft had been discussed jointly by the Planning Board and the Affordable Housing Trust Collaborative going back to 2021. “There was a subcommittee between the planning board and the Affordable Housing Trust Collaborative,” Tyler said.

Planning board member Rupert summarized the ordinance goals as balancing housing creation with preservation of commercial uses: “The idea of mixed use is to create some affordable housing, create housing opportunities, not to displace commercial,” he said.

Councilors expressed general support for pursuing mixed-use tools while asking staff and the board to clarify specifics (setbacks, how the 100-foot proximity rule applies to existing lots, whether smaller lots require different standards, how landscaping percentages apply, and the handling of preexisting nonconforming buildings). Councilor Torrelday said the measure aligned with campaign priorities. “Bluntly, yes. We’re we’re all invested in this,” Torrelday said.

The Planning Board asked the council to refer the draft back to the board for revisions and error correction before final council action. The town manager noted the council has a public hearing on the item scheduled for Feb. 3, 2025; that hearing is open and the council may continue it or refer the ordinance to the Planning Board with a date certain for return. “The public hearing that was previously scheduled was continued with a date certain, which was February 3,” the town manager said.

No formal council vote was taken at the workshop. Planning staff told the council they expect to correct drafting errors in the use table, clarify calculations and performance standards, and return a revised draft. The Planning Board also invited council members to attend a working meeting on Jan. 30 to suggest priorities and projects.

Next steps: the Planning Board will estimate how much time it needs to revise the draft; the council may continue the Feb. 3 hearing to a new date certain to allow re-advertising if substantive changes are made. Staff cautioned that re-advertisement requires time for public notice if the council chooses to accept a substantially revised ordinance.

The workshop focused on policy details and did not include any formal votes or adopted amendments.