New shrubbery ordinance triggered by ANY project that requires a building permit
 |
| Charlestown in the good old days - aerial view shows Route One (bottom) and 1a (middle). Notice all the lush forest and shrubbery |
Charlestown has 9.4% unemployment and fewer and fewer local jobs as small businesses close or move because of the town's notorious anti-business reputation.
Just what Charlestown needs are two more ordinances designed to make life hell for small business as Planning Commissar Ruth Platner (CCA) pursues her vision of Charlestown in the "good old days" (whatever and whenever those were).
She can’t get away with simply passing an ordinance banning all businesses in Charlestown, so instead, she uses these ordinances to inflict a death by a thousand cuts.
Just what Charlestown needs are two more ordinances designed to make life hell for small business as Planning Commissar Ruth Platner (CCA) pursues her vision of Charlestown in the "good old days" (whatever and whenever those were).
She can’t get away with simply passing an ordinance banning all businesses in Charlestown, so instead, she uses these ordinances to inflict a death by a thousand cuts.
In this article, I’ll give you a summary of what happened at
the September 9 Council meeting on two new ordinances (one on shrubbery, the
other on parking) and will get into the detail behind the first of the two, Ordinance
#359 which I call the “Shrubbery Ordinance” (yes, I know it's officially called "Landscaping," but I never miss a chance to do a homage to Monty Python).
I’ll do the same for its
companion, Ordinance
#360 on Parking in a separate article tomorrow. Both ordinances will come up again at the Council's next meeting on October 7.
Every business owner in Charlestown has a direct stake in
this and should be prepared to weigh in when the Council meets again on October 7. That’s one week earlier than usual meeting
day due to Columbus Day.
Faulty public process
 |
| Boss Gentz says "you don't need to know and I don't need to listen." |
Even though the CCA Party claims to be devoted to open and
transparent government, their town leaders, especially Ruth Platner and Tom
Gentz, use every trick in the book to sneak bad decisions past the taxpayers
and voters.
These two ordinances amend Charlestown’s existing zoning
ordinance. However, they were published for the September 9 Council meeting without showing what was actually amended.
Usually, the advertised versions of such ordinances show what language in the
current ordinance is being changed or deleted through cross-outs. New language
is shown in bold.
But not this time.
But not this time.
Platner’s ordinances simply showed the existing ordinances
crossed out and the new language presented as if it was all new. That’s unfair
if not downright dishonest and perhaps even a violation of the state Open
Meetings Act. Not that this matters to the CCA Party officials who lead Charlestown town government. They've racked up lots of open government violations.
There wasn’t time for public comment and Council debate
because these items were held until the very end of the agenda. Despite the
late hour, Boss Gentz tried to force the Council to vote to pass these ordinances – either by cutting short public
comments and Council debate, or by extending the meeting until they were
finished.
Other Council members objected. When Gentz attempted to make
his Council colleagues agree to extend the meeting, the other Council members
voted him down, 3-2. For the first time in my memory, the Council rejected an
initial time extension to go an additional 15 minutes.
To listen to the debate on both ordinances and the surprising rebellion of the Council against Boss Gentz, click here and listen all the way through to the end. It's an eye-opener.
To listen to the debate on both ordinances and the surprising rebellion of the Council against Boss Gentz, click here and listen all the way through to the end. It's an eye-opener.
So these ordinances are now scheduled to be debated at the
October Council meeting, which will be held on October 7, one week earlier than
usual due to the Columbus Day holiday.
Read the ordinances to judge for yourself
Residents should actually read these ordinances. Town Planner Ashley Hahn added a color-coded version
at the end of the advertised version - you can see the "before" and "after" with the "after" version showing the language the way it should have been presented in the first place.Click here for Ordinance 359, the “Shrubbery Ordinance” and click here for Ordinance 360, the “Parking Ordinance.”
Make sure you read through
to the color-coded section. As you will see, you learn very little about the
proposed changes by reading the advertised version which was all that the
public had going into the September 9 Council meeting.
You may also discover, as Beth Richardson noted in her
comments from the podium on September 9, that Charlestown already tries to
micro-legislate plantings and parking in its current ordinances; the proposed
changes take that approach to a far greater extreme.
Here’s a run-down on what Charlestown will expect from
business owners and subdivisions if Ordinance #359 is passed. Most of the
narrative is my interpretation of the obtusely written text. If you see words below
in quotation marks, that’s quoted directly from the proposed ordinance.
Ordinance #359: An Ordinance in Amending Chapter 218 – Zoning: Landscaping
 |
| One of the volunteer corps of Platner's Plant Police |
§ 218-74-A-(2) and (3) Commercial property not being used
for the business must be left in its natural state or must receive prior
approval for a “planting plan” that
is part of any application. This also applies to any part of the property that
is disturbed by construction but ends up not being used for business buildings
or infrastructure. There will be a
potential bonanza for landscape architects to draw up these required plans.
§ 218-74-B (1), (2) and (3) All plants used must be
resistant to drought, wet, salt, “urban
conditions” (whatever that means), bugs and other stressors, must need
minimal care, and not need watering, pesticides, fertilizers. Alternatively, you can buy some artificial shrubbery at the
new Michaels in Westerly. Look up permissible plants in the URI Coop’s
“Sustainable Trees and Shrubs.” You may not use any plant on the Rhode Island
Invasive Species Council’s list. A big, foreseeable problem with this section is that none of
the terms are actually defined – maybe we’ll just have to let URI decide.
§ 218-74-B (4) through (7) Minimal measurements when planted:
shade trees at least 12 feet high; ornamental or fruit trees at least 10 feet
high; evergreens at least 6 feet high.
§ 218-74-B (8) For lawns, fine fescues are preferred though
not required. Just imagine how much fun Ruth Platner and her colleague Gordon
Foer will have torturing applicants over the extent to which they are seeding
with “fine fescues.”
 |
| Make sure you have at least two inches of natural mulch or you will be subject to citizens' arrest |
§ 218-74-C. (1) (a) and (b) Topsoil must be restored and
cultivated to at least a 6 inch depth and (c) covered with at least two inches
of mulch. Mulch should be “natural, unpainted, unstained, and designed to
retain moisture where applied.” This
provision will provide great fun for competitors or hostile neighbors…they can measure
your mulch and turn you in if your mulch is short of two inches. Building
Official Joe Warner just loves getting pulled into these kinds of feuds.
§ 218-74-C. (2) (a) and (b) Lawns in commercial areas are
only allowed in the front of the property and must be at least six feet in
width. Exceptions: turf is allowed over areas “reserved for utilities, grass
swales, or alternative parking surfaces.” Beth
Richardson questioned this provision at the September 9 Council meeting, asking
if this meant a business couldn’t have a picnic area for employees to eat lunch
out in back of the property. She didn’t get an answer.
§ 218-74-C. (3) (a) If there is no existing forest, trees
must be included as part of the development plan.
§ 218-74-C. (c) Dig a hole 2.5 times the diameter of the
root ball and deep enough to cover it. Duh,
I thought all you had to do is drop the tree on the ground and it’ll grow. (d)
Make sure you stake them. (e) Make sure they don’t hit overhead wires or, when
you dig, you don’t hit underground utilities. If you can’t understand these instructions, read “Tree Planting for
Total Idiots.”
§ 218-74-C. (f) “When planted closer than seven (7) feet
from the edge of any pavement, vertical barriers shall be installed to
discourage the growth of tree roots into and immediately under the pavement
area. Alternative tree planting methods such as the use of 'CU-structural
soilTM2' to prevent damage to pavements and enhance tree growth are
encouraged.” Again, consult “Tree
Planting for Total Idiots.” Also ask yourself why the Planning Commission
felt it was necessary to include this.
§ 218-74-D. Site protection. (a) Dig only where you must and
keep the topsoil you remove nearby to reuse. (b) Remove trash, potentially
harmful materials (such as plutonium or toxic waste barrels), debris, roots,
stumps, cleared foliage, etc. in a timely manner. I made up the thing about
toxic waste and plutonium, although if you find them, they really will have to
be removed. Actually, I'm surprised Platner didn't include plutonium removal in this ordinance.
§ 218-74-D (c) Stay at least four feet away from any shrub
or tree you plan to maintain. Construct a protective barrier at least three
foot high to protect our little green buddies. Read a book to them or play
soothing music. (d) Keep vehicles, equipment, trailers, stockpiled materials
either where the permanent structures are going to be or on an impervious
surface. Again, I made up the part about reading and playing music to your
shrubbery.
§ 218-74-D (e) Keep all existing stone walls and work them
into your site design to the maximum extent practicable. None of this is defined, nor is an enforcement mechanism defined. From
comments she made at the September 9 meeting, it sounded to me like Faith
LaBossiere (CCA Party) plans to volunteer to be the stone wall enforcer.
§ 218-74-D (f) If you are going to restore a disturbed area
to natural re-growth you must, at minimum, grade and loam the area and seed it
with wildflowers, perennial rye grass, a meadow or “conservation” native grass
mix or similar varieties.
§ 218-74 E. (1) and (2) You’re going to need buffer areas
around your property to protect your neighbors from any offending dirt, litter,
noise, lights, signs, unsightly buildings, parking areas, odor or danger from
fire or explosions. I’m not making any of this up.
§ 218-74 E. (3) You may
not use play fields, stables, swimming pools, tennis courts or similar
active recreation as buffer. You might
be able to use pedestrian, bike, or equestrian trails, provided that you don’t
remove any living trees. I’m not making any of this up either.
 |
| Building Official Joe Warner modeling the suit he will be wearing when he goes out to enforce the shrubbery ordinance |
§ 218-74 E. (4) Required Buffers must be 20 feet if land is
being used for public, institutional, or utility services and abuts a
residential area. For commercial property, the buffer must be 20-25 feet,
depending on the part of town and must consist of either an evergreen hedge or
fence with evergreen plantings at least 6 feet high. The buffer is 50 feet for
industrial use unless the industry is green energy generation, in which case
the buffer must be 50 miles. I made
that last part up.
§ 218-74 F. Owners must maintain the property, meaning at
minimum, mowing, litter removal and pruning.
§
218-74 G. Plan Required. A separate landscaping plan shall be required for
review as part of the development review process when required or as part of the
construction plan required for the issuance of a building permit. This
is the Catch-22. If a business owner wants to do any alterations on his or her
property that would require a building permit, the construction plan must be
accompanied by a “separate landscaping plan.”
Every
time. Even if the construction is something like installing new lighting in a
restroom. This is similar to the trigger that Platner tried to get into the
controversial dark sky lighting ordinance that would have required
businesses to come into full compliance with the lighting ordinance anytime they made any improvements to their property, whether or not
it involved lighting.
This provision is counter-productive since it serves as a
disincentive for any owner of a business or subdivision from making any improvements since it will then
lead to a landscaping plan that must not only be approved, but after
installation, will require Town Building Official Joe Warner to use probes,
calipers, yard sticks, measuring tape and a micrometer to measure every mulched area
and every tree, shrub and plant before he can issue a Certificate of Occupancy.
In the next article, I’ll go section-by-section into Ordinance
#360 on Parking.
