The Brattleboro Selectboard held a special meeting Tuesday evening to take care of a bit of regular business, but primarily to hear about and discuss the new zoning and land use regulations being proposed for adoption. If all goes according to plan, the new regulations will go into effect this fall.
Liquor Commissioners
The Brattleboro Selectboard, acting as Liquor Commissioners, granted a special events permit to Hermit Thrush Brewery for a Brewery Pint Night. Two actually, one scheduled for July 3 and another for July 24.
Window Replacement at Gibson Aiken Center
Two local bids were received for replacing windows at the Gibson-Aiken Center on Main Street, one from Vermont Vinyl and the other from GPI Construction. The GPI bid was over twice that of Vermont Vinyl.
Vermont Vinyl will be replacing the windows for $29, 645, just shy of the $30,000 budgeted for the project.
Quite a few windows will be replaced. Carol Lolatte, Director of Recreation and Parks, said that all of the first floor windows, all of the Gymnastic Room windows, plus eight windows on the third floor and some in an emergency stairwell would be be upgraded, for a total of forty one windows.
David Schoales wanted to make sure the Vermont Vinyl bid had windows of the same quality as the other bid, and was reassured that they were all to specification. Lolatte speculated that the big price discrepancy in bids was not due to windows, but to the fact that GPI would contract out the work.
This is the first phase of a total window replacement for the building.
Permitted and Conditional Uses in Proposed Zoning Districts
The bulk of the meeting was reserved for the Brattleboro Selectboard’s fifth and final in-depth look at the proposed zoning and land use regulation changes.
Chair David Gartenstein said that the presentation would be in two parts. The first would cover “what you are allowed to do” by district, and the second would address concerns raised at an earlier meeting by Adam Hubbard.
Gartenstein said that Hubbard’s questions about the new rules using a hodgepodge of planning methods, and statements about new rules being overly complicated and complex, caught his attention and he asked for an evaluation. “To what extent will this be overlapping layers of mesh preventing anything from getting through, or is it mainstream?
Brandy Saxton, a consultant for the project, joined Rod Francis and Sue Fillion from the Planning Services department to answer questions and offer explanations.
The three reviewed for the board, district by district, all proposed changes to uses for properties. Some previously prohibited uses are now allowed, some that were conditional uses are now allowed, some permitted uses have changed to conditional, some current uses are now prohibited, and some new uses that weren’t allowed before are now agreeable.
For nearly two hours the explanations went on, occasionally interrupted with clarifying questions from selectboard members. A few highlights:
– Rod Francis said it took a while for them to figure out that the community wants to preserve the view, “so we control something in the foreground so it doesn’t obliterate the background.”
– Donna Macomber asked how the planners got their data about changing patterns of land use and how we use buildings. “We watch this stuff,” said Francis. “It’s what we do.” he explained they had a compulsion for noticing things such as gas stations no longer doing service work, a decline in car washes or long-empty big box stores on Putney Road.
– Francis, on the latest approach: “This recognizes what’s there, and balances it with where you’d like to be. Existing uses can stay, but the community is charting a direction, saying when possible we’d like to see a change.”
– If a current use for a property goes dormant for more than a year, the new zoning rules will apply to the property. If the property’s use continues before 12 months are up, it can retain the former use. It doesn’t matter who owns it.
Attached below is the full color chart that shows all the glorious details of what is and isn’t permitted in each new zoning district. At the moment. This is all subject to revision and change before adoption.
For the second portion of the presentation, Saxton addressed questions and issues put to her about how Brattleboro’s new regulations stack up to other communities.
She gave an overview of the history of zoning, tracing it from euclidian zones, through performance standards and market-based approaches, to what we have proposed today.
Saxton said the main issue at development review hearings is “what will this look like?” and only in the last decade have zoning ordinances begun to address this question. She said these form-based codes cover the physical design of buildings, but also that very few places do “pure form-based code.”
“It’s the Vermont way. People want to have a voice. 100% form based will be unlikely in Vermont,” she told the board.
Saxton gave examples of other Vermont communities that have recently adopted new zoning rules.
BCTV briefly cut away to show the BUHS graduation. Students, in caps and gowns, marching proudly across the green…
… and we’re back.
Saxton said that many of Brattleboro’s new rules come from state or national models. Stormwater rules are influenced to a large degree by state regulations. Lighting rules are adapted from suggestions from the Dark Skies initiative.
Saxton said that dimensional standards in Brattleboro’s proposed new rules are intended to help with line and character, and helps to establish a regular building pattern.
She said maximum heights were set by the limits of our fire trucks, and minimum heights were meant to help define street character. Sustainability, economics, and aesthetics were also on her list of new inclusions in Brattleboro’s plan. Good landscaping, she pointed out, can improve values of properties, and increase the time people want to stay in a location, which can be good for retail.
Bob Stevens spoke on behalf of an informal group of local architects and planners that had reviewed the proposed rules and had come up with some wonky tweaks they’d like the planning folks to consider. Stevens said most were small issues, and would be discussed with the Planning Commission at their next meeting.
The bigger issues were proposed changes to Planned Unit Developments and building on slopes. Stevens said he worried that in an effort to make things more simple, giving up the current PUD process could also cause us to give up flexibility. By his rough calculations, a 20 acre parcel could have 10 developments now, but under the proposed rules it might be just five.
As for slopes, he said it was common to build on slopes greater than 25%, as the new rules would stipulate.
He said the group was impressed with the work so far and was hoping to help by providing another set of eyes to look it over, and also to test out some known projects against it to see how it works. He admitted they were a bit behind, but were going to get all their concerns, including some suggested changes to the new zoning maps, to the proper people as soon as possible.
Rod Francis explained that owners of current PUDs could continue with them, or switch to the new system, depending on what works best for them. Sue Fillion pointed out, too, that the latest draft has the slope requirement at 30%.
Francis also made note that the new regulations were intentionally detailed, as short zoning documents get challenged in court, with decisions often made by out of town judges.
Next steps before adoption include more review by the Planning Commission, a pair of Planning Commission public hearings, then a pair of Selectboard public hearings. The plan is to have this passed in September.
Public comment continues to be encouraged and welcome.
Reminder
The attachment contains a table for all proposed changes in use. Take a look…