Adds an additional purpose to the standard provisions list that a zoning ordinance is required to address.
Summary
H5796 amends Rhode Island’s zoning ordinance statute to expand the list of purposes that municipal zoning ordinances must address. The bill adds a new required zoning purpose focused on allowing residential use options beyond single-family detached homes in areas with available public water and sewer capacity, specifically in municipalities that include any area within the state’s urban services boundary as shown on statewide planning maps. In effect, the measure directs cities and towns to consider a broader range of housing types in appropriate serviced areas when drafting or updating zoning rules.
The bill also makes several related clarifications to existing zoning standards. It requires zoning ordinances to exclude basement area from floor area ratio calculations, states that slope may not be excluded when calculating buildable lot area or minimum lot size, and preserves municipal authority to set minimum lot sizes within state and local limits. The act takes effect on January 1, 2026, and would apply prospectively to local zoning ordinances and development regulations.
Impact
This bill would amend § 45-24-33 of the Rhode Island General Laws, which governs the standard provisions that zoning ordinances must address. Its main legal effect is to add a housing-oriented zoning purpose that encourages municipalities with public utility capacity and urban-service-boundary areas to permit residential options other than single-family detached housing. It also changes how certain development measurements are calculated by excluding basements from floor area ratio calculations and by prohibiting the exclusion of slope from buildable-lot and minimum-lot-size calculations. Municipalities retain discretion over their own minimum lot sizes, but local zoning ordinances would need to conform to the new statutory requirements when adopted or amended.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have generally favorable support in the legislature, as reflected by its strong vote margins: unanimous passage of the amendment in the House, passage as amended with a solid majority, and final passage in the Senate with more yeas than nays. The absence of committee transcript material limits direct insight into debate, but the vote history suggests the measure was broadly accepted as a zoning and housing policy update rather than a highly divisive proposal.
Contention
The likely points of contention involve housing density, local zoning autonomy, and the scope of state direction over municipal land-use decisions. Supporters would view the bill as a way to expand housing choices and align zoning with available infrastructure, while opponents may be concerned that it pressures municipalities to allow more multifamily or non-single-family development in serviced areas. The provisions on basement exclusion, slope calculations, and the new residential-use requirement could also raise concerns among local officials and property owners about development intensity, lot yield, and the balance between statewide housing goals and local control.