POLICY 01
Duplex & triplex conversions
Use permissions and extra-land tests still restrict conversions.
East Providence · Housing & Growth
More possibilities.
A stronger city.
Compare our rules with the Strong Towns recommendations. Prioritize the changes. Test what they could make possible.
6housing reforms in the deck
25local rule & practice topics
13,710residential parcels in the model
4wards to compare
More housing choices. Small projects on existing streets. Public investments that can support their next maintenance cycle.
Interactive tools are unavailable until their scripts and data load. Saved comparisons below remain readable. If this message stays visible, reload the page.
01 · Compare
What the recommendations meet here.
All six housing reforms, plus the dimensions, process and fiscal practices that affect whether they work.
POLICY 02
Backyard cottages
Lot area, coverage, parking and size rules shape the existing ADU pathway.
POLICY 03
Starter homes
Review the 620 net sq ft minimum and where small homes are permitted.
POLICY 04
Minimum lot area
Distinguish ADU thresholds from principal-home and subdivision rules.
POLICY 05
Parking mandates
Required spaces can compete with housing and consume land.
POLICY 06
Simple approvals
Use objective review for compliant small projects while retaining safety checks.
Open the full comparison · 25 topics
This is a scoped housing and incremental-growth audit, not every provision of the city code. District overlays, parcel-specific approvals, state law and later amendments still matter. Proposals are advocacy options; they have not been adopted.
25 of 25 topics
| Rule / practice | Current baseline | Direction to test | Status / source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Duplex / triplex permissionConversions | Duplexes: prohibited R-1–R-3; special use R-4–R-6. Multifamily permissions vary. | Permit internal two- and three-home conversions in all residential districts through objective review. | ChangePriority group 1§19-98 ↗ |
| Extra land for a duplexConversions | Special-use duplex lots: R-4 +75%; R-5/R-6 +50% over district minimum. | Remove extra-land requirements for conversions within existing buildings. | ChangePriority group 1§19-360.10 ↗ |
| Multifamily densityConversions | Bedroom-based density rules apply. | Audit density limits alongside conversion rights so one reform does not cancel the other. | ChangePriority group 1§§19-216–218 ↗ |
| ADU permissionBackyard cottages | One ADU per residential lot. | Keep the existing ADU permission; simplify the rules that block practical use. | Partial progressPriority group 2§19-181(b)(1) ↗ |
| Detached-ADU lot minimumBackyard cottages | 5,000 sq ft for new detached ADUs or footprint expansion. | Remove the ADU-specific lot minimum; retain building safety, access and environmental review. | ChangePriority group 6§19-181(b)(2) ↗ |
| Existing-building conversionsBackyard cottages | State law protects qualifying existing-footprint conversions and accommodations. | Publish a distinct conversion pathway; do not apply the detached-new-build lot screen to it. | Protect progressPriority group 2RI §45-24-73 ↗ |
| Size and bedroomsBackyard cottages | Two bedrooms maximum; size relates to principal-home floor area. | Review whether the local size formula blocks otherwise safe family-sized or accessible units. | ReviewPriority group 2§19-181(b)(3) ↗ |
| Utility serviceBackyard cottages | Common utilities specified. | Publish utility-capacity and shared-service guidance; price necessary upgrades before applicants commit. | ClarifyPriority group 2§19-181(b)(5) ↗ |
| ADU parkingParking | An extra space is triggered by two bedrooms or insufficient existing parking. | Remove the ADU parking mandate; permit voluntary parking and manage curb access separately. | ChangePriority group 3§19-181(b)(6) ↗ |
| Other housing parkingParking | Two spaces per single-/two-family unit; three-family: 1⅓ per unit. | End residential minimums; retain accessible parking and safe access obligations. | ChangePriority group 3§19-284 ↗ |
| Minimum home floor areaStarter homes | General minimum: 620 net sq ft. | Allow 400–800 sq ft starter homes subject to building code; clarify ADU treatment. | ChangePriority group 7§19-156 ↗ |
| Attached homesStarter homes | City reports an August 2026 townhome amendment in multifamily zones. | Build on that progress; distinguish attached-home rights from small detached homes in every residential zone. | Partial progressPriority group 7§19-360.12 announcement ↗ |
| Principal-home lot areaLot size | District minima: 5,000–18,750 sq ft. | Remove minimum lot area in established neighborhoods; assess subdivision and service capacity separately. | ChangePriority group 6§19-145 ↗ |
| Width, depth and old lotsLot size | Width/depth standards and substandard-lot provisions also apply. | Align width/depth rules and protect legal lots of record when reforming area requirements. | ChangePriority group 6§§19-132, 19-145 ↗ |
| Front setbackFront yards | Standard district fronts: 15–30 ft; block-alignment exception. | Test smaller front yards and context-based standards; preserve sight lines and access. | Test locallyPriority group 10§§19-136, 19-145 ↗ |
| Multiple street frontagesFront yards | Corner and through lots can have multiple fronts. | Evaluate all street-facing lines; review small-lot options explicitly. | ReviewPriority group 10§19-141 ↗ |
| Side/rear and building gapBackyard cottages | Eligible accessory structures: 5-ft lot-line and principal-building gaps. | Use 5 ft as the baseline; evaluate any change separately with fire/access requirements. | Retain baselinePriority group 2§19-144 ↗ |
| Detached accessory heightBackyard cottages | Detached accessory limit: 20 ft. | Check whether garage apartments fit within the height envelope; retain structural review. | ReviewPriority group 2§19-144(c) ↗ |
| All buildings share one capCoverage | Building coverage: R-1 20%; R-2–R-6 25%. | Test a modest higher cap or an objective small-home allowance with stormwater safeguards. | Test locallyPriority group 5§19-145 ↗ |
| Paving and buildings togetherCoverage | Impermeable coverage is building cap +20 percentage points. | Evaluate paving reduction before increasing impervious coverage. Changing one cap need not change both. | Retain safeguardPriority group 5§19-145 footnote ↗ |
| Discretionary vs administrativeApprovals | Special-use findings and review routes apply; qualifying state ADUs have administrative review. | Use a clear administrative path for compliant small projects. A 24-hour zoning target is aspirational, not a construction-permit guarantee. | ChangePriority group 4Article II; RI §45-24-37 ↗ |
| Fees, checklists and timelinesApprovals | Local fee authority exists; actual small-project times/costs are not in this dataset. | Publish one checklist, fee schedule, contact and processing-time dashboard; use pre-reviewed plans. | Measure firstPriority group 4§19-14; review procedures ↗ |
| Neighborhood business opportunityLocal businesses | Mixed-use and neighborhood-business permissions depend on district/overlay. | Audit small storefronts, home businesses and adaptive reuse next; measure low-cost pilot results. | Next auditPriority group 8§19-98 and overlays ↗ |
| Long-term public obligationsCity finances | Project-level lifecycle practice has not been audited here. | Require maintenance, replacement, capacity and incentive costs beside expected recurring tax receipts. | Audit firstPriority group 9Deck pp. 12–18, 28–43 |
| Getting the first small project builtLocal builders | Local mentorship/financing coverage has not been verified. | Offer a small-builder contact, peer network and lender introductions; pilot before committing public capital. | PilotPriority group 8Deck pp. 95–97 |
Progress already made matters: East Providence adopted its broader ADU ordinance in 2025 and announced attached-home changes in August 2026. This page builds from that baseline.
02 · Prioritize
Which changes offer the most value?
Start with housing options, use of existing infrastructure, access for ordinary households, and ease of implementation.
These are transparent planning judgments, not measured returns. Scores rank potential value and practicality. They are not forecasts of homes, savings or tax revenue. Reforms overlap; scores and parcel gains must not be added together.
How the ranking works · change the weights
Each priority is rated 1–5 on four criteria. Weighted score = sum(rating × weight) ÷ sum(weights) × 20. Ratings and default weights are editorial assessments for this workbench. Confidence and missing evidence are shown separately.
Fiscal resilience favors reusing existing sites and infrastructure while recognizing maintenance and service costs. Household access favors smaller entry costs and opportunities for residents and local builders.
Weights: housing 35 / fiscal resilience 30 / household access 20 / ease 15.
| Rank | Change & why | Score / 100 | First useful action |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Make internal conversions predictable A second home inside an existing building can use the same site and street. Remove use restrictions and extra-land tests together. Policy 1 · PDF p. 53 · Ratings 5 / 5 / 5 / 3 Evidence: Potential mechanism; interiors and utility capacity uninspected. | 94Planning judgment | Draft by-right duplex/triplex conversion standards with an objective safety checklist. Measure: Units created, approval time, rehabilitation cost, safety upgrades. |
| 2 | Make backyard cottages practical ADUs already have a local pathway. Coordinated lot, coverage, parking and process changes matter more than a permission alone. Policy 2 · PDF p. 54 · Ratings 5 / 4 / 5 / 4 Evidence: Parcel geometry modeled; current-law eligibility incomplete. | 91Planning judgment | Review the 5,000 sq ft minimum and publish a separate garage/internal conversion route. Measure: New permits and completions, cost, accessible units, retained tree canopy. |
| 3 | End residential parking mandates Let households choose parking rather than requiring housing projects to buy more paved space. Pair reform with curb-access management. Policy 5 · PDF p. 57 · Ratings 4 / 4 / 5 / 5 Evidence: Local ADU parking relief requested at 53–55 School Street; decision unverified. | 87Planning judgment | Draft removal of residential minimums while retaining accessibility and safe access. Measure: Spaces actually built, paving avoided, permit costs, curb occupancy. |
| 4 | Give small projects a clear route Predictable review reduces time at risk for homeowners and small builders. Building and environmental approvals still apply. Policy 6 · PDF p. 58 · Ratings 4 / 4 / 5 / 5 Evidence: Timing and cost data still needed. | 87Planning judgment | Publish one checklist and a service target for complete, compliant applications. Measure: Median days by review stage, resubmissions, fees and completions. |
| 5 | Test the shared coverage bottleneck A small ADU competes with the existing house and garage for the same coverage allowance. The model can isolate this constraint. Local implementation test · complements policies 2–4 · Ratings 5 / 4 / 4 / 3 Evidence: Recalculated on the same subset of parcels with standard residential zoning matches. Preliminary statewide mapping; City confirmation and other site constraints remain. | 84Planning judgment | Test a 30% or 35% building-cap scenario; keep the existing impervious cap and require drainage review. Measure: Extra screened parcels, drainage effects, canopy and project cost. |
| 6 | Let established small lots evolve Removing area requirements creates options only if width, setbacks, coverage and use permissions also permit a home. Policy 4 · PDF p. 56 · Ratings 4 / 4 / 5 / 3 Evidence: ADU lot-size effect modeled; subdivision capacity not modeled. | 81Planning judgment | Coordinate area, width/depth and legal-lot-of-record standards in established neighborhoods. Measure: Small-lot permits, parcel splits, completed homes and service capacity. |
| 7 | Legalize modest starter homes Smaller legal homes can reduce the amount a household must build or buy. Price and affordability still depend on land, finance and construction. Policy 3 · PDF p. 55 · Ratings 4 / 4 / 5 / 3 Evidence: General 620 net sq ft rule identified; vacant lots and construction quotes needed. | 81Planning judgment | Review the zoning floor-area minimum and clarify the relationship to ADUs and building code. Measure: 400–800 sq ft permits, price/rent, ownership opportunities. |
| 8 | Help local builders start small Clear rules need people and finance to turn them into homes. Start with guidance and peer connections before a funded program. PDF pp. 95–97 · Ratings 3 / 4 / 5 / 4 Evidence: Local builder/lender inventory not yet collected. | 77Planning judgment | Pilot a small-builder contact and collect barriers from the first applicants. Measure: First-time applicants, loans closed, small-project completions. |
| 9 | Price the next infrastructure cycle A high assessed value does not establish a net city benefit. Count services, future replacement and incentives as well as taxes. PDF pp. 12–18, 28–43, 63–74 · Ratings 3 / 5 / 3 / 4 Evidence: Accounting framework; project cost inputs remain unknown. | 75Planning judgment | Use the lifecycle worksheet below before approving new public obligations or tax incentives. Measure: Recurring fiscal margin, replacement reserve, public cost per home. |
| 10 | Test front-yard flexibility Street setbacks shape the usable envelope, especially on corner lots. Compare actual boundaries before making a citywide estimate. Local implementation test · supports small lots · Ratings 3 / 3 / 4 / 2 Evidence: Parcel-specific user-marked geometry test with preliminary mapped district suggestions; frontage and current zoning require verification. | 61Planning judgment | Use the front-yard lab and verify representative lots with Planning. Measure: Usable area and sampled fits, sight distance, street trees and access. |
Test the assumptions, collect results, then update the order. A lower score does not make a reform unnecessary.
03 · Apply changes
Turn the recommendations into a scenario.
Choose the reforms. See the rule changes, detached-ADU parcel screens and separate conversion scenarios.
Parcel zoning · preliminary match
Use the district. Flag the uncertain lots.
11,589 standard residential matches; 2,121 parcels kept for individual review.
Retrieved November 13, 2026 from RIGIS / RI Land Use 2050. Overlay records cite July 8, 2025; this is not City confirmation of current zoning. Parcel outlines are from 2021.
See the matching method and excluded parcels
Intersect full parcel polygons in EPSG:3438. Require at least 99% in one standard R-1–R-6 district, no other district above 1%, and no overlay intersection above max(1 sq ft, 0.1% of parcel). Excluded parcels are not treated as failures or approvals.
- Matched residential: 11,589
- Boundary or split: 1,812
- Overlay review: 65
- Unmatched: 70
- Other district: 174
Download all parcel matches and review flags ↓
RIGIS; municipal planning and assessor offices; HR&A Advisors; Go Consulting Services, LLC.
No reforms applied. Interactive controls become available after loading.
A partial parcel screen, not a buildable-home count. Coverage now uses a preliminary parcel-to-zoning match. Standard R-1–R-6 matches use their mapped district cap; split, overlay, uncertain and other-district parcels remain outside these counts. Both cases omit front yards, parking layouts, flood/wetland constraints, utilities, existing ADUs and building suitability. Small footprints are geometry tests; the 620 net sq ft rule and ADU treatment need review.
Baseline rule settings
Existing lot minimum + mapped coverage
Mapped mode uses each included parcel’s preliminary district. Uniform tests apply one cap to that same subset; they do not add uncertain parcels.
3,145parcels passing these screens
157 illustrative homes at 5% participation.
Your scenario
Change the lot and coverage rules
Higher building coverage is a separate local test, not a percentage prescribed by the deck. Impervious limits remain unresolved.
3,145parcels passing these screens
157 illustrative homes at 5% participation.
Saved baseline: both cases use mapped district coverage, a 5,000 sq ft lot minimum and a 500 sq ft footprint. Interactive controls become available after loading.
Baseline settingsScenario settings
| Ward | Parcel screens | Baseline | Scenario | Change | Homes at entered participation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 1 | Matched subset | 882 | 882 | +0 | 44 → 44 |
| Ward 2 | Matched subset | 339 | 339 | +0 | 17 → 17 |
| Ward 3 | Matched subset | 743 | 743 | +0 | 37 → 37 |
| Ward 4 | Matched subset | 1,181 | 1,181 | +0 | 59 → 59 |
Counts use one detached footprint per parcel. Lot minimums use recorded area; coverage uses mapped parcel area and mapped buildings plus the selected footprint. Areas and outlines are dated. A sampled search can miss a fit. Reforms interact: removing a lot minimum does not remove coverage or other constraints. Construction is not predicted.
What each selected reform changes
A different route · existing buildings
What if a small share of houses became duplexes or triplexes?
The assessor dataset identifies 11,425 single-family parcels in the selected wards. Interior space, safety, existing legal units and service capacity have not been inspected. This is a participation illustration, not measured conversion capacity or a reform-attributable gain.
—illustrative additional homes
Select the by-right conversion reform to explore this scenario.
Keep routes separate. The same property might appear in the ADU and conversion pools. These figures are not added together.
Starter homes, parking and approvals · what can be quantified now?
Starter homes
Net interior area differs from the gross footprints above. Vacant-lot/subdivision records are needed to count new principal homes.
Parking
Removing a requirement does not mean all owners remove parking. No paved area or citywide housing gain is assumed.
Approvals
One day is a test target for complete, compliant zoning checks. It is not an existing city promise or a substitute for building permits.
04 · Front-yard lab
See what a setback takes off the table.
Choose a parcel, mark its street-facing boundaries and compare the standard front yard with a test distance.
Front lines are marked by you, not automatically verified. Include every street frontage on corner and through lots. Standard fronts are R-1 30 ft, R-2 25 ft, R-3/R-5 20 ft, R-4/R-6 15 ft. The block-alignment exception may change the required distance; use a verified override when needed.
Load the map to start.
Click numbered boundaries on the map or below to mark all fronts.
Choose a parcel to see its preliminary mapped district.
No parcel selected.
Parcel geometry loads when you choose “Load parcel map.”
Existing structuresBaseline front-yard exclusionSpace recovered in test
Choose a parcel and its front boundaries to compare usable mapped space.
Tests use the selected footprint above, 5 ft from other lot boundaries and all mapped buildings. Coverage, height, impervious area, parking and environmental rules are not applied here. This parcel result does not change citywide counts. Shapes and boundaries are not surveys.
05 · City value
What comes in. What we commit to.
Use the selected housing scenario to test recurring tax receipts against services, maintenance, public capital and abatements.
Unknown costs stay unknown. Construction spending is not assessed value. Taxes at a fixed rate are not a forecast of city revenue or tax relief. New development can shift the tax base; levy policy, exemptions, state aid, school capacity and service changes affect the actual result.
Existing baseline · Tax per Acre data
Start with what we already know.
13,710 matched residential parcels · all four wards · FY2026 source extract. This broader tax baseline includes parcels outside the detached-ADU zoning subset.
From the Tax per Acre page ↗ and its FY2026 source CSV. Existing whole-property figures, before exemptions; not actual bills or collections. This subset covers the residential parcels in the model. Future added assessments and costs remain separate assumptions.
157 illustrative added homes from the detached-ADU participation scenario.
Prefilled rate: 2026 residential $13.35 per $1,000, from the City Assessment Division ↗. Enter added taxable assessed value after applicable exemptions. Do not also use the homestead-adjusted effective rate. Future rates and added city costs are not assumed.
Enter added taxable value and city costs to calculate a fiscal result. Blank costs remain unknown.
Calculation and limits
Gross annual taxes = illustrative added homes × entered added taxable assessed value × tax rate ÷ 1,000. Recurring margin = gross taxes − entered annual service costs − entered annual maintenance/replacement reserve. During an abatement term, gross taxes are reduced by the entered percentage. Present value discounts each year’s modeled margin and subtracts upfront public capital once. Annual reserve represents future replacement costs; do not also include the same costs in the service entry. Amounts stay constant in real terms; rate and value changes, financing, state aid, and levy decisions are outside the calculation. Zero is an explicit assumption; a blank is unknown.
The deck’s payback periods and examples from other cities are not East Providence fiscal results. No tax abatement is assumed necessary for ADUs; the default here is zero. Any incentive needs its own documented purpose and costs.
MEASURE THE FIRST PROJECTS
Permits → completions
Connect the Development Tracker to approval dates, conditions, actual building permits, completed homes and post-project assessments.
PRICE THE NEXT CYCLE
Maintenance before expansion
For each public obligation, identify who owns it, its replacement schedule, realistic renewal cost, annual reserve and capacity limits.
START SMALL, CHECK RESULTS
Pilot, observe, repeat
Try a low-cost access, street or business-support improvement. Record the budget, user experience and results before scaling it.
Read · Meet · Get involved
Keep learning. Find your people.
Explore the ideas behind this work and connect with people putting them into practice.
The national framework
Strong Towns
Housing choices, productive places and financially resilient communities.
Here in Rhode Island
Neighbors Welcome! RI
A statewide housing-advocacy network with community meetings, trainings and opportunities to get involved.
Books to start with
These titles are by Strong Towns authors. Check your library for borrowing and audiobook options; formats and availability vary.
01 · THE FOUNDATION
Strong Towns: A Bottom-Up Revolution to Rebuild American Prosperity
Charles Marohn Jr.
How development patterns shape public finances and neighborhood resilience.
Official book information ↗02 · STREETS & PUBLIC COSTS
Confessions of a Recovering Engineer: Transportation for a Strong Town
Charles Marohn Jr.
Transportation choices, street safety and the costs communities take on.
Official book information ↗03 · HOUSING
Escaping the Housing Trap: The Strong Towns Response to the Housing Crisis
Charles Marohn Jr. and Daniel Herriges
Housing as shelter and investment, and practical ways to create more choices.
Official book information ↗Upcoming meetings & events
Listings checked November 13, 2026. Times below are Eastern. Check the organizer’s page for changes, availability and registration.
NOV 17–19, 2026 · NATIONAL / IN PERSON
YIMBYtown 2026
Raleigh, North Carolina · 500 S Salisbury Street.
Strong Towns lists Charles Marohn’s participation on November 18. Consult the conference schedule for session times.
Event details ↗NOV 19, 2026 · RHODE ISLAND / IN PERSON
RWU Housing Clinic Awards Program
3–4 PM · Rhode Island State House, 82 Smith Street, Providence.
Listed on the Neighbors Welcome! RI calendar. The posted RSVP deadline was November 10; ask the organizer about remaining availability.
Event details ↗JAN 13, 2027 · ONLINE MEETING
Virtual Friends of Neighbors Welcome! Meeting
7–8 PM · Virtual.
Meet fellow housing advocates and learn how to get involved. The organizer’s page lists January 13, 2027.
RSVP with the organizer ↗No future events remain in this checked list. Use the official calendars below for newly announced dates.
The November 7 East Providence workshop connected to the supplied deck is a past event. Read its event description ↗. This page links to these organizations and their work; it does not imply their endorsement.
Sources & next evidence
Keep the comparison accountable.
Research snapshot: November 13, 2026. Code reproduction checked against City announcements and state ADU provisions. Confirm later amendments and parcel-specific interpretations with Planning before using a result for an application.
Presentation supplied by Bethany White. PDF pages 53–58: six code reforms; 12–18 and 28–43: infrastructure and fiscal risk; 59–74: incremental projects and small public investments; 95–97: local builders and finance. Numerical examples in the deck describe other places and are not East Providence estimates.
Six housing policies and support for local builders. Framework, not an endorsement of this analysis.
Searchable code reproduction. Official code and adopted amendments control.
§§19-132, 19-136, 19-141, 19-144–145, 19-156, 19-181, 19-216–218, 19-282–284 and 19-360.10–11. Searchable reproduction reviewed November 13, 2026.
Special-use review, findings, notice, fees and unified review. No local processing-time dataset was available for this model.
Article VIII. Review route depends on the project.
Controlling ordinance source, together with later adopted amendments. The searchable reproduction may lag.
Adopted detached-ADU minimum is 5,000 sq ft. The earlier hearing notice proposed 7,500; that proposal is not used as the baseline.
State protections include existing-footprint conversions, qualifying disability accommodations and restrictions on local ADU standards.
Qualifying state-protected ADUs use administrative building-permit review. Confirm current amendments with Planning.
Townhomes permitted in appropriate zones that already allow multifamily housing; not a citywide small-home reform.
Notice requests ADU parking and size relief. A hearing notice does not establish a decision.
City GIS is the authority for confirmation. This model includes a preliminary full-polygon join to the statewide RIGIS zoning layer; street rights-of-way and frontage still need verification.
13,710 residential outlines (2021), buildings (2022), assessor records (FY2026). Preliminary statewide zoning join added November 13, 2026. Split, overlay, unknown and other-district parcels are excluded from standard residential coverage comparisons.
Residential rate: $13.35 per $1,000 of taxable assessed value. The published $11.48 effective rate already reflects a 14% homestead exemption; do not apply both that effective rate and the exemption again. This workbench uses $13.35 with a user-entered added taxable assessment after exemptions. The 2027 rate has not been substituted.
Directly matched all 13,710 modeled residential parcel IDs. Fields reused: total assessment, acreage, estimated annual tax, estimated tax per acre and rate. These are existing whole-property estimates before exemptions, not an ADU assessment increase or verified collections.
Official organization website.
Official information for the three books listed on this page.
Rhode Island housing advocacy network.
Checked November 13, 2026. Event details and registration are maintained by the organizers.
Official calendar; check dates and location before planning to attend.
Retrieved November 13, 2026. Municipal-source statewide planning data, not confirmation of current zoning. Overlay records cite July 8, 2025. Credit: RIGIS; municipal planning/assessor offices; HR&A Advisors; Go Consulting Services, LLC. Both base districts and overlay polygons were checked.
What would make the estimates stronger?
- City confirmation of the preliminary statewide zoning match, later amendments, split/overlay parcels, verified front lot lines, street rights-of-way and block alignment.
- Vacant and subdividable lot inventory, dwelling-unit records, existing ADUs, internal floor area and conversion suitability.
- Parking, impermeable surfaces, flood/wetland constraints, service capacity, and surveyed conditions.
- Permit dates, fees, decisions, completions, actual construction quotes, assessment changes and city service/lifecycle costs.
The present dataset covers residential parcels, not every city property or every legal housing route. No additional homes are assigned to an unmeasured rule change. Combined effects use one shared parcel screen, not a sum of independent gains.
This page is an advocacy and scenario tool. It does not amend the ordinance or approve development.