As PVD City Council passes the Comp Plan out of committee, Southside residents express feelings of betrayal
"...in reality, you care about the profits and making sure we're making toxic operators in the Port happy."
“When I last spoke to you less than two weeks ago, I was here to thank you all for your visionary leadership and the amendments you proposed to the comprehensive plan,” said Julian Drix, Chair of Providence’s Sustainability Committee, to the Providence City Council’s Ordinance Committee on Monday night, speaking about the City’s proposed Comprehensive Plan, a once in a decade land-use and growth roadmap. “I submitted a letter to you all on Friday that said, unfortunately, that gratitude was premature. Since the original amendments were introduced, in just one week, they were essentially gutted to appease powerful industry lobbyists who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo that is poisoning our communities. I know many negotiations are happening with those industries, the Mayor’s office, and others interested in maintaining the status quo.”
Drix continued:
“I recognize that some small changes have been made since then and that there is a short list of things listed as ‘shall prohibit.’ While I appreciate that, it is not nearly enough because the things that are being listed as ‘shall prohibit’ are either things that will not be expanded because there's no place or need to expand them, such as power plants - we already have two power plants in this area, so they will not be expanded more. The [ban includes] noxious or toxic chemical manufacturing, which is already a use that is prohibited under the current zoning ordinance. That is not offering us anything. In addition, [there is a ban on] ethylene oxide manufacturing, which is not a current use in the port or anything I've ever heard being proposed. So there is no political give on that.
“It leaves the rest of the list as abbreviated, condensed, not specific, and without real promises we may prohibit. It's asking us to trust that the zoning process will have better results than what we have just seen take place, which is that the industries that are making financial gain from the poisoning of our communities and the maintenance of a toxic status quo will continue to use their power and their backroom lobbying to protect their interests at our expense.
“The sustainability commission just met down the hall immediately before this meeting to review the proposed changes that were modified. We are here to say that nothing has changed. It is still not enough. We need strong language. We need to say "will prohibit" because this is our chance to say what we want our city to be in the future.
“I appreciate the Council President's remarks that our city fights for its residents. I ask you to do the same with this comprehensive plan. Do not water it down or undercut the progress that you are so close to making.
“Earlier, I spent the day in Superior Court testifying on behalf of the Rhode Island Attorney General in the case of Rhode Island Recycled Metals and the receivership hearing following the three fires they had recently and the ongoing toxic pollution and contamination that they have directly across the street from the Providence Community Health Center's Chafee Health Center, and making the case before a judge around environmental justice and the impacts in this neighborhood that federal data shows are the worst that you have around the country. It is in the 99th percentile of the combined polluting industries, risk factors, and health impacts on the community.
“So, while the lobbyists who are here representing industry are telling you to protect the status quo and making money off of that, the children in our community have hospital visits for their asthma. They have cancer diagnoses that are coming from the pollution that is here. There is so much that we can agree on.
“I provided some of the language added to the amendments that I stand by, which says we can agree that there are industrial uses [in the Port and] that we need to transition to a green economy. We said, let's say what we can promote. Let's make sure it is union. Let's prioritize a just transition and build towards a healthy and sustainable future for all of us, including the community and workers. That needs to be what we work together on, but we cannot do that while we continue to bow and cave to the asphalt, petroleum, chemical, and toxic industries that are poisoning our communities [and] making us sick. This is our chance to say enough is enough, and I need you all to stand by the community. Do what you say you want to do, ‘prohibit.’ Say you will do it and stand by it so we can make real change happen.”
As revised by the Ordinance Committee, the plan represents compromises with the Mayor, who had pledged to veto the Comp Plan over language prohibiting the construction of new gas stations in the City, and with lobbyists and land-use lawyers eager to protect future polluting industries in the Port.
The latter is vital because more critical than the weakened language prohibiting gas stations was the weakening of language that would have protected the neighborhoods around the Port of Providence from the expansion of new polluting industries.
I wrote about the short-lived visionary Comp Plan here. I wrote about the successful efforts of lobbyists and land-use lawyers to weaken the Comp Plan here. You can watch Monday evening’s Ordinance Committee meeting here. You can read the Providence City Council’s press release on the Comprehensive Plan in the footnote.1
“I am a resident of Washington Park. My child is suffering from asthma,” said Providence resident Ellen Tuzzolo. “And as I was coming here tonight, I was thinking, ‘Do I express my anger? Do I express my sorrow? Do I cheerlead and remind you that you have the opportunity to make real change?”
Tuzzolo continued:
“But where I'm at is just wanting to express deep sorrow and dismay at the changes that have been made to the recent version of the Comprehensive Plan. I implore you to make a firm commitment to Black, brown, and low-income communities in the city and be strong in your commitment that the city "will" and not "may" prohibit the very long list of things that never should have been able to exist in the neighborhood that I live in in the first place.
“From what I understand, and I think Julian really spoke powerfully to this, the recent changes are just promising these environmental justice communities many things that are already prohibited while at the same time giving the moneymaking toxic machine that operates in the Port exactly what it wants. I want you all to know that we are not confused about that.
“I was on the City Council's website looking at the sort of B-roll that you all have in the background. It's very cute. Check it out. It's Providence kids. There's Black and brown kids. They're on swings, they're dancing, they're spending time outside having cookouts. There are some white kids there, too. And you know what? There are even some seasonal pumpkins. Very cute. I want to tell you what is not cute. What is not cute is the pattern of community members coming here, spending hours providing testimony, retelling our trauma and pain, being promised changes, even thinking that we've won changes in these proposed documents, and then, behind the scenes, they're torn apart by lobbyists. It's not cute. It's really not.
“Many people before me and probably after me spent hours testifying at these types of things. I couldn't help thinking that I wish the City and these other regulatory agencies would just be upfront and tell Providence residents, especially from South Providence, that in reality, you care about the profits and making sure we're making toxic operators in the Port happy.
“I'm tired of telling the same story about not being able to open my windows in the morning, about trips to the hospital with my kid for asthma attacks, about illnesses my neighbors and their kids are having related to the stinking toxic air. I am trying to have hope. There are a lot of people here trying to have some freaking hope to believe in democratic processes, to think that all of our time here is worth something. Please give us some hope.”
The Ordinance Committee offered Ellen Tuzzolo little hope. Instead, it approved the amended Comp Plan. The Providence City Council’s Committee on Ordinances approved the Comprehensive Plan on a 4-1 vote.2 The plan now moves to the full City Council, where it will be voted on twice before moving to Mayor Brett Smiley’s desk for a signature.
COUNCIL APPROVES TRANSFORMATIVE AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The amended plan provides a forward-thinking framework for growth, addresses housing, homelessness, climate, affordability, and design
Providence, RI – Tonight, the City Council’s Committee on Ordinances approved the Comprehensive Plan, the city’s ten-year roadmap for land use and growth, with a series of transformative amendments from Councilors. This was the fifth Council-hosted public hearing on the Comp Plan. The approved amendments tackle key policy areas, including housing affordability, environmental justice, preserving neighborhood character, increasing sustainable infrastructure, and uplifting our most vulnerable communities. Crafted with input from community members who attended public meetings and submitted hundreds of letters of testimony, the amended Comp Plan demonstrates the Council’s commitment to chart a visionary people-first course for growth and development.
The steps taken tonight build on previously approved amendments, including Councilor Justin Roias’ strikethrough of language seemingly endorsing the relocation of the RIPTA bus hub and Councilman John Goncalves’ prohibition of new gas station development. New language to the gas station prohibition was added tonight, providing an exception if the land is unsuitable for residential development. A subsequent Zoning Ordinance will formally enact many of these amendments, providing necessary, effective, and long-term solutions for the people of Providence.
The amended version of the Comp Plan will go to the full Council for first passage at the November 7th regular Council meeting. Key amendments with quotes from lead Councilors can be found below, with additions highlighted. You can view the full redlined, amended Comprehensive Plan HERE.
INCLUSIONARY ZONING AND ANTI-DISPLACEMENT MEASURES
Council is committed to ensuring that Providence residents can remain in their neighborhoods without being priced out. As such, Council will take a people-first approach to both increase affordable housing stock and prevent displacement. New provisions include advocating for tenant protections for renters, studies to identify areas with high displacement risk, and, most importantly, a plan for inclusionary zoning. Inclusionary zoning is a key tool to ensure new developments set aside affordable units, with necessary subsidies allocated to make the policy feasible. This policy, proven effective in cities across the country, will help meet the high demand for affordable units in Providence. The new language in the amended Comp Plan, introduced by Council President Rachel Miller, will align with a future ordinance to enact this policy.
“Right now, rent and homeownership are untenable for Providence residents across income brackets,” said Council President Rachel Miller (Ward 13). “If we’re serious about stopping the cycle of displacement, we have to make affordability the rule, not the exception. That’s why we’re working towards inclusionary zoning — it’s a proven tool to fight gentrification, promote economically diverse neighborhoods, and build a fair, affordable housing market. By making sure developers set aside affordable units, we ensure that the working families can stay in the neighborhoods they call home.”
New language in the Housing Chapter Opportunities Commitment section reads:
“In addition to these strategies informed by the Anti-Displacement and Comprehensive Housing Strategy study, the City will prioritize supplementary anti-displacement strategies such as inclusionary zoning, securing protections for those at-risk of displacement, and proactively monitoring affordable units to ensure long-term residents of Providence are not displaced. The City is committed to ensuring gentrification and displacement do not characterize Providence in the face of increased development as it has in and many other cities. Instead, the City will balance a steady growth of housing supply while protecting its residents who want to continue living in the capital city.”
Additions to Housing Chapter Objective H2 include:
M. Continue to support and establish new programs that encourage developers to build housing that is affordable to all, including by
evaluating the market feasibility ofadopting inclusionary zoning measures that are calibrated with tax and subsidy policy changes to enhance development feasibility.T. Work with Community Development Corporations (CDCs) to conduct an analysis of displacement risk across the city to understand which neighborhoods are most vulnerable and ensure they are prioritized for affordable housing development.
U. Advocate for stronger tenant protections for renters who are defined as being the most vulnerable to displacement.
REDUCE OR ELIMINATE PARKING MINIMUMS
Required parking minimums drive up housing costs, underutilize valuable parcels of land, and deter developers from building housing. Council has approved updated language, introduced by Council President Miller, to prioritize the reduction and elimination of parking minimums. Developers already lack a profit motive to build affordable units, and noncompliance fees for parking minimums further disincentivize affordable housing construction. Removing this requirement wherever possible is crucial to effectively expand affordable housing stock, while decreasing reliance on personal vehicles. This step reaffirms Council’s dual commitments to expand affordable housing and promote climate-conscious transportation options.
“We need to break down the barriers that stifle our growth,” said Council President Rachel Miller (Ward 13). “A key example of this is outdated parking minimums, which have tied our hands and limited our potential. Reducing and eliminating parking minimums cuts through the red tape that slows affordable housing construction. This is a smart, necessary step that will free land for better use and incentivize developers to build the homes we clearly need. We cannot have concrete plots sitting unused.”
Changes to Land Use Chapter under Objective LU12 (with similar changes to LU2) include:
B. Reduce or eliminate off-street parking requirements
in areas where high-density housing is permittedfor appropriate development types and in appropriate zones, in coordination with management and enforcement of on-street parking and implementation of transportation demand management measures.C. Ensure that parking regulations strike a balance between the demand for parking and the ability to develop land to its fullest potential by reducing parking minimums.
CD. Prioritize the elimination of parking minimums wherever feasible.
PROTECTIONS FOR THE PROVIDENCE PORT AND SOUTH SIDE RESIDENTS
For generations, the area in and around the Providence Port has been a dumping ground for heavy industries, endangering the health, safety, and well-being of South Side residents. Council moved to approve language, introduced by Majority Leader Pedro Espinal, that prompts the city to prohibit power plants dependent on fossil fuel combustion, noxious or toxic chemical manufacturing, and ethylene oxide manufacturing and storage in M2 and W3 zones. The new language encourages expansion of sustainable infrastructure in these areas to ensure our waterways are utilized without harming the environment or surrounding communities. The specific prohibitions will be made in the forthcoming zoning ordinance.
“For far too long, South Side residents have suffered due to inadequate environmental regulation in the Port of Providence,” said Majority Leader Pedro Espinal (Ward 10). "Responsible development of the port both ensures our city’s economic future and protects the well-being of our communities. We’ll keep working hard to protect our residents and prioritize environmental justice.”
In the Land Use Chapter, "How Do We Grow" section, the following changes were made (with the same language for W3 zones):
In the General Industrial District, M-2, the city shall prohibit the following future uses: power generation plants dependent on the combustion of fossil fuels or via processes that produce emissions at levels that are established to impact public health, noxious or toxic chemical manufacturing, and ethylene oxide manufacturing and storage facilities. Via the city zoning ordinance, the city may prohibit future industrial uses in the General Industrial District, M-2, that it determines go against the public interest of (a) public health and quality of life in near-industry neighborhoods or (b) realizing fossil fuel emissions reduction goals in response to climate change, and will encourage future industrial uses that promote environmentally just development and a just transition for workers currently maintaining fossil fuel dependent infrastructure and industry.
Future M-2 prohibited industrial uses may include, but are not limited to:
• Facilities that import, store, process, or distribute fossil fuels
• Facilities that import, store, manufacture, or distribute flammable, hazardous, or explosive chemicals or waste products
• Facilities that generate or result in harmful air pollution emissions
• Facilities that produce high carbon emissions or import and distribute high carbon content products
• Facilities that generate water pollution, including both point source and stormwater runoff pollution
This section shall not apply to publicly owned treatment works.
Future M-2 encouraged industrial uses include, but are not limited to:
• Offshore wind development and associated activities
• Solar electricity generation
• Battery energy storage facilities
• Microgrid infrastructure
• Electric infrastructure for “ship to shore” plug-in power and charging electric zero-emission trucks
• Food and commercial goods import, storage, and distribution that can be run on zero-emission electrical infrastructure
• Vocational education facilities to support workforce development for a just transition to a green economy
STRATEGIES TO REACH ZERO CARBON EMISSIONS
Spearheaded by Deputy Majority Whip Sue AnderBois, Council approved substantial language changes to increase urgency and outline specific strategies to address the climate crisis. These new provisions will drive the city forward to meet its zero carbon emissions goals and increase investment in resiliency. Changes include enforcement of anti-idling regulations, cross-agency support for the Providence Tree Plan, incorporation of stormwater mitigation in all streetscape projects, prioritizing safe active transportation options, and intensified efforts to make all municipal buildings carbon neutral by 2040. Climate-focused additions also emphasize the importance of ensuring frontline communities disproportionately impacted by climate change are at the forefront of designing solutions.
“Every issue, from housing to street safety, is intertwined with climate,” said Deputy Majority Whip Sue AnderBois (Ward 3). “These amendments are proactive steps to build a future where all of us can thrive. We’ve created a roadmap for a just transition to clean energy, expanded active transportation options, and improved, resilient infrastructure, all while ensuring those most impacted have a seat at the table. The bold, decisive actions outlined in this plan will allow Providence to successfully meet its carbon neutrality goals and secure a strong, sustainable future for generations to come.”
Language was added throughout the plan, with some key changes including:
In the Sustainability Chapter under Objective SRE1:
E. Incorporate stormwater mitigation and management into all streetscape projects.
In the Sustainability Chapter under Objective SRE2:
K. Support the implementation of the Providence Tree Plan and promote private and non-profit planting efforts that increase canopy coverage, especially in low-canopy neighborhoods. Partner across various municipal agencies to prevent disruptions to existing infrastructure (sidewalks, roads, etc) so that any trees
the trees thatplanted can be sustained and grow, without causing mobility challenges for residents.N. Expand and facilitate use of
alternativenon-carbon fuels and improve traffic circulation to reduce emissions and improve air quality. Prioritize development of non-car transportation options (biking, walking, scooting, etc) to eliminate emissions and improve air quality.In the Sustainability Chapter under Objective SRE4:
F. Continue to pursue weatherization, energy efficiency, and electrification at City-owned facilities and
inwork to comply with the City Ordinance requiring all municipal buildings to be carbon neutral by 2040.
PROTECTED RIGHTS AND DIGNITY FOR UNHOUSED RESIDENTS
Under the leadership of Majority Whip Miguel Sanchez, the committee approved additional language to ensure future city policies addressing homelessness and encampments follow guidelines outlined by the US Interagency on Homelessness. New language underscores the necessity for compassionate, humane, and housing-first solutions, which may include temporary use permits for emergency shelters, improved outreach and services to encampments, increased access to mental health and substance use treatment, and the development of permanent housing options. In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision permitting the criminalization of homelessness, this approach pushes back against punitive measures and is informed by public health best practices.
“Every Providence resident deserves to live with dignity,” said Majority Whip Miguel Sanchez (Ward 6). “This is especially true of our most vulnerable, unhoused residents. We firmly reject the notion that criminalization and punishment are effective solutions. Providence has a chance to lead by showing what real compassion looks like – finding solutions that lift people up, rather than kick them while they’re down. This plan sets us on a path to help every resident build a better life, no matter their circumstances.”
In the Housing Chapter, under Objective H3 changes include:
J. Ensure that all city policies addressing homelessness and homelessness encampments on public property follow the guidelines outlined by the US Interagency Council on Homelessness.
K. Adopt policies supporting the City’s unhoused residents including but not limited to providing temporary use permits for emergency shelters, improving outreach and social services to encampments, developing permanent housing options, ensuring access to mental health and substance use treatments, or other innovative solutions in housing, safety, and public health.
NEW COMMITTEE FOR NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN STANDARDS
As the Council prioritizes increasing housing stock, it has approved a plan, introduced by Councilwoman Helen Anthony, to ensure that new developments reflect the architectural strengths of Providence's neighborhoods. The approved additions include the creation of a committee to develop and enforce design standards, common in many other cities, to guide development while not adversely impacting cost or timelines. The proposed committee would be comprised of community stakeholders, developers, architects, and designers.
“Providence's rich culture and history are visible in the built environment all around us,” said Councilwoman Helen Anthony (Ward 2). “As we work to create more housing, it’s important that new developments enhance our neighborhoods, and don't just encourage cheap, generic design. This new committee will help offer a greater voice to residents who care deeply about the future of their city and its thoughtful growth."
In the Land Use Chapter under Objective LU9, changes include:
C. Strengthen design regulations in residential and neighborhood commercial areas to promote a high-quality built environment, while ensuring new design regulations do not unnecessarily increase the cost of development or make the development review process less efficient or unpredictable.
F. Establish an ad hoc committee to advise on the creation of design regulations. The committee should include developers, architects and designers, and community stakeholders.
G. Conduct staff and board level design review processes to ensure compliance with new design regulations.
The one “no” vote was from Councilor Justin Roias, who explained his rationale on Twitter, reprinted here:
“Last night, as a member of the Ordinance Committee, I voted no on Providence’s Comp Plan—not because I disagreed with much of its content. There are significant victories within the plan that we, as a Council and a city, should be proud of.
“But one issue kept weighing on me throughout this process, and I struggled with it right up until the moment of the vote: the Port of Providence. After three rounds of revisions, the amendment intended to limit the expansion of polluting activities at the Port remains alarmingly weak. It feels like we’ve diluted the language to the point where these industries aren’t being told “no”—instead, they’re given a “maybe.” This ambiguity creates a dangerous opening for expansion, precisely when we should be shutting that door.
“The language in this final version of the amendment is riddled with vague, hard-to-enforce conditions about limiting pollution. My concern is that these loosely defined terms could be easily exploited by special interest groups who are determined to protect these polluting industries. This amendment not only leaves us vulnerable but also arms these bad actors with our very own Comp Plan, giving them a tool to undermine future efforts for stricter zoning regulations. Why hand them that power?
“Had I supported the Comp Plan with this weak Port amendment, I would have felt we were signaling to the residents of South Providence and Washington Park—the very communities that have been long ignored as they suffer the consequences of environmental degradation and public health crises—that we’ve given up the fight before it even began. There’s an argument that the amendment could still allow for stricter measures at the Port, and I hope my colleagues will join me in the coming weeks to move in that direction.
“Let’s reflect on how we reached this point with the Port amendment. Special interest groups have been pushing a narrative that halting expansion will result in job losses—specifically union jobs. But let’s be clear: the existing industries are not going anywhere; they’re grandfathered in and have the legal right to continue operating. What we’re seeking to prevent is their expansion, and that’s not just a moral stance—it’s a necessary one.
“The economic cost raised by these groups has been exaggerated and, in my view, presented in bad faith. In doing so, we’ve lost sight of what truly matters: the human cost of allowing polluters to expand their operations at the Port. I may not represent South Providence or Washington Park directly, but these are still my neighbors—some of the most economically and racially disadvantaged residents in our City. And maybe this issue hits home for me because one of the neighborhoods in the North End I represent, Wanskuck, is a frontline community—alongside Washington Park, South Providence, and the West End, they account for the majority of asthma-related ER visits in our City.
“Our city leaders love to point to the industrial waterfront as Providence’s economic driver, but let’s not forget that it’s also driving some of the highest rates of childhood asthma and hospitalizations in the region—not to mention developmental disorders, cancer, and a host of other health issues linked to neurological and respiratory damage. With another generation’s health on the line, I can’t, in good conscience, support an amendment that falls so far short of what we need.
“As this amendment progresses to the full Council for a vote, along with the rest of the Comprehensive Plan, I want to be clear: I am committed to working with my colleagues to establish the strongest zoning laws possible. Anything less than a complete ban on new polluting industries at the Port is a betrayal to the children of South Providence. They deserve better than this watered-down amendment because we cannot afford to sacrifice yet another generation.”
So blatantly corrupt, wrong, backstabbing, greedy!
Lobbying is out of control!!! There are more voters than lobbyists!
We are not weighed equally through voting WHEN MONEY = SPEECH!
By passing the mayors version the government of providence has screwed the public and discarded much of what the public repeatedly asked for