A Rhode Island Superior Court judge has sided with the Little Compton Zoning Board and building official after they were taken to court by a couple who claimed they were wrongly denied the right to expand one of two homes they own at 21-23 Long Pasture Drive. 

In 2021, building official Peter Medeiros denied an application from Nicholas and Dedie Coch to increase the square footage of a house located adjacent to their primary residence by more than 50 percent — from 2,250 square feet to almost 3,400 square feet. 

Court documents refer to the home that was to be expanded as an accessory dwelling unit known as “the Cottage.” It, along with the Cochs’ 3,227-square-foot main home and a barn, sits on 2.36 acres a short distance south of the town commons.

When he denied the application, Medeiros wrote that town ordinances do not permit expansion of an accessory family dwelling. The Cochs appealed that decision to the zoning board of appeals, which in April 2022 let the building official’s ruling stand, citing concerns about “setting a precedent for accessory dwellings that are larger than principal structures.”

The Cochs then appealed to the state Superior Court, arguing that their plans were consistent not only with town ordinances but with the Comprehensive Community Plan, which “expressly allows accessory dwelling units and encourages affordable housing that allows multiple generations to live in the town.” In this case, the Cochs’ son and his wife have lived in the home known as the Cottage for 15 years.

But on Friday, March 1, Newport County Superior Court associate justice Peter J. Lanphear sided with Medeiros and the zoning board, noting that the town's "clear and unambiguous" zoning ordinance restricts any proposed accessory family dwelling unit to 40 percent of the gross floor area of the principal structure.

While acknowledging that the town's Comprehensive Plan endorses accessory dwelling units as a way of “allowing multiple generations to call the town home,” Lanphear wrote that future housing developments should be “appropriately scaled.” 

"No language in the Comprehensive Plan encourages unlimited size for accessory dwelling units or allows for expansion of structures to accommodate families beyond the size limitations expressed in the Little Compton Ordinances,” he wrote, concluding that the building official and zoning board were correct in denying the Cochs’ building permit.