[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6132496,"mediaKeyId","5720582-e25e1a57d01214ff77a7957eb802c63f","parentId",5720582,"title","Montpelier Development Review Board re-elects Rob Goodwin as chair; Catherine Burgess chosen vice chair","audioSeconds",485,"startMs",437000,"endMs",922000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5720582-e25e1a57d01214ff77a7957eb802c63f&start=437&end=922","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5720582-e25e1a57d01214ff77a7957eb802c63f/thumbnail_437000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6132496/Montpelier-City/Washington-County/Vermont/Montpelier-Development-Review-Board-re-elects-Rob-Goodwin-as-chair-Catherine-Burgess-chosen-vice-chair","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6132496-ed47dac161fe998ed8aff74b0bbfe801/orig.mp4?Expires=1773742191&Signature=M~LxGorzeRVfgDL~9RCPgBh5v7R87B83czBOuK2~kfwoBOSlHYO0KBXKlpvEMcIYaq0Bf9YGpsjj0e8v0459elDPU1UOn27tWLI0kMVG-3FmlErVjZ~rdeINvlp2KT5DJnUKNFZvS83gltfa9nRhA2QcqHVfa9KCtsTHAav-ye7dYD0I~Y3MiYdoZi3R4ElGPE9mBh8~4ooGrJjxP5JS83vyh9DIHYl91wvR963Mz~zH3aZ-6RW6lN72vL~A5HWDIP~p4q8mfsRqZtseR5KsRKaTwVMFwi2xNpnccifL7FpL3Xj20oty9XmHZwmW0B-De08syyBRh7VfcpeFQzA47g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Montpelier, VT","date","2025-09-02T00:00:00Z","article","The Montpelier Development Review Board unanimously elected Catherine Burgess vice chair and re-elected Rob Goodwin chair during its Sept. 2 meeting.

The results: Catherine Burgess was nominated and accepted the position of vice chair; the board voted \"aye\" unanimously. Burgess told the board she appreciated the nomination and noted recent changes in her work schedule and family travel that have made attendance more difficult. \"I appreciate the nomination, but my attendance has been spottier than usual over the last couple months,\" Burgess said, asking colleagues to be understanding about scheduling. The board discussed the existing procedure for naming an acting chair when both chair and vice chair are unavailable.

Rob Goodwin was nominated for chair by the newly seated vice chair and the board then voted to re-elect him unanimously. Goodwin said he was \"happy to do it for another year\" and expressed a desire to bring new members onto the board over time.

Quorum and vacancies: Board members confirmed that six members were present at the Sept. 2 meeting and that three seats on the board remain open (one regular seat and two alternate seats). The board noted that four members constitute a quorum when the board has six seated members, and members urged those with scheduling conflicts to provide notice in advance so the board can plan for alternates.

Procedural note: Board members reiterated that the board's rules allow the election of an acting chair for a specific hearing if both the chair and vice chair are absent or recused; that acting chair remains the presiding officer for the application being heard.

Ending: The board concluded the elections and moved on to a staff presentation about zoning regulation amendments. The minutes for Aug. 18 were also approved later in the meeting by motion with a second and a unanimous vote.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Montpelier Development Review Board Meetings - Sep 2, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","At its Sept. 2 meeting the six-member Development Review Board unanimously elected Catherine Burgess vice chair and re-elected Rob Goodwin chair for the coming year; members discussed attendance, alternates and acting-chair procedures.","taxTitle","Montpelier City, Washington County, Vermont","taxId",68799,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6132500,"Montpelier planners outline July 2025 interim zoning changes aimed at speeding small housing projects",2504,962000,3466000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5720582-e25e1a57d01214ff77a7957eb802c63f&start=962&end=3466","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5720582-e25e1a57d01214ff77a7957eb802c63f/thumbnail_962000.jpg","/articles/6132500/Montpelier-City/Washington-County/Vermont/Montpelier-planners-outline-July-2025-interim-zoning-changes-aimed-at-speeding-small-housing-projects","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6132500-17693d8a75d0d0cd9888a4a2970fffe3/orig.mp4?Expires=1773742191&Signature=egVRuDgutx43Th1oK~QKI7EpOUcFYuFlJyT~UKazwKXBz6d5qkj8ZdKDmdgU075wfMPm1gdj0mR7Cvk0y6ItSSG6SNslZq2SDUpdIX3Kw82CH42MS~rrpL34gJkI9bqCYtuTUZ4IGquJPfnM1tH9eNfaKLMzV5p55~VKv3vDuLjO5lzJVAr6LbHFf9~wWUkxJfBWcInH3Nyx7XzmwR1bH19emWss3AZmjzLn3~QHPa7GAoVMyhxapGtuDYZEb5yzV6~qjCAAaR9i3FK3nUeCCbZFWwbvKgLWeFao3MSvtDtktwR0T6uCT7SHQZplEFr768WyS6aSS9BtHmm~09wFBQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Montpelier planning staff told the Development Review Board on Sept. 2 that interim zoning amendments adopted July 25, 2025, change how the city treats steep slopes, site-plan triggers and small subdivisions in an effort to streamline permitting for smaller housing projects. Meredith Crandall, planning staff, led the presentation and the board discussed likely effects and next steps.

Why it matters: The changes are intended to reduce procedural barriers for small-scale housing development while routing larger or more environmentally sensitive projects to public review. Planning commissioners will now begin a full, section-by-section review of the city's more-than-200-page zoning regulations that will reconsider the interim amendments and other broader changes.

What changed: Crandall said the July amendments revised Montpelier Zoning Regulations sections 3007 and 3008 and adopted a new steep-slopes map based on coarser-resolution Agency of Natural Resources elevation data. \"We basically stopped using this map in the planning department, and we went to the Agency of Natural Resources data,\" Crandall said, adding that the new map uses larger \"pixels\" so the mapping identifies genuinely large steep slopes rather than very small yard or ditch features that previously triggered engineering reviews. She said the amendments also set a de minimis area threshold so very small mapped steep areas (for example, about 50 square feet or less) that do not touch a building will not require board review or a professional engineered erosion-control plan.

Crandall summarized other major edits approved in July: expanding the scope of \"minor site plan\" review so that parcels with up to six dwelling units are handled administratively rather than as \"major site plan\" projects that require Development Review Board hearings; making sketch-plan review for subdivisions optional rather than mandatory; and authorizing administrative approval for noncontroversial subdivisions of three parcels or fewer that do not extend city infrastructure, require waivers or affect protected natural resources. \"So that's gonna cut down again on applications that are coming before the board,\" Crandall said, noting she had already approved one administrative subdivision under the new rules.

Board members asked about likely effects and safeguards. Board member Alex Hallas asked whether the regulations as written were inhibiting development; Crandall replied that the planning commission and council had heard developers say permitting was \"inhibiting\" and that the interim edits were intended to remove requirements such as full engineered plans or specialized landscaping reports for very small impacts. Rob Goodwin, chair, and other board members raised concerns that shifting many smaller projects to administrative review could increase appeals by neighbors who feel they were not heard earlier in the process; Hallas said, \"But the 6 units will be exempt from coming before?\" and Crandall acknowledged that projects could still come to the board on appeal.

Next steps and process: Crandall said the planning commission has begun a comprehensive review of the zoning regulations and will take multiple meetings to work through individual chapters and districts. Any further changes will require fully noticed public hearings at the planning commission and at least one at city council (city council typically holds two). Crandall urged board members to attend or submit comments to the planning commission during that process.

Transparency and administration: Crandall said the planning department is improving online permitting and public access: staff are working to publish automated weekly reports of permits issued and to make applications filed searchable online, rather than relying on the statutory clipboard in City Hall. She named Nick Gauthier, planning and zoning assistant, as working on an FAQ and on better online tools for applications and complaints.

Limits of authority and outstanding questions: Crandall and board members emphasized that the interim amendments are subject to reconsideration through the planning-commission review, and that additional conversation is expected with the public works department about when a professional erosion-control plan should be required. Crandall said the July changes \"were the simple things\" and that the commission will now decide whether to revisit any of those edits.

What the board asked for: Members requested clearer criteria for when staff should ask applicants to undertake an informal or preliminary review (what some called sketch-plan or preliminary site review) and suggested that the commission consider required preliminary review for particularly large or complex projects. Crandall said pre-application meetings remain required and that staff will continue to recommend informal review in many cases.

Context and history: Crandall said the interim changes grew from public input during the city-plan update process and from a 2018 steep-slopes map that produced many small, impractical mapped steep features. \"It's a super, super, super high resolution map so that things like ditches or somebody's porch you can just come look over my shoulder,\" she said of the old map, noting the July edits use coarser ANR data processed in-house to be more workable.

What comes next: The planning commission's multi-month review will evaluate district dimensional standards, driveway spacing and other processes that staff and the commission consider impediments to housing production. Crandall said staff will notify the board when individual sections are scheduled so members can provide comment. \"They would love to hear from you,\" she said. The board and staff agreed transparency and outreach to developers, small-scale builders and community stakeholders will be important as the review proceeds.

Ending: The board heard no formal motions on the zoning items during the Sept. 2 meeting; the presentation was informational and staff will return with specific proposals as the planning commission advances its work.","City planning staff summarized interim zoning amendments adopted July 25, 2025, that narrow steep-slope triggers, expand minor site-plan review to up to six dwelling units, make sketch-plan review optional for subdivisions and allow certain administrative subdivisions; the planning commission will now begin a full section-by-section review of the ","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Montpelier Development Review Board re-elects Rob Goodwin as chair; Catherine Burgess chosen vice chair

Montpelier planners outline July 2025 interim zoning changes aimed at speeding small housing projects