DRB approves conditional use to add emergency shelter at 15 Green Mountain Drive, with parking condition

The Montpelier Development Review Board voted April 7 to approve a conditional use amendment and associated minor site plan for the State of Vermont building at 15 Green Mountain Drive to permit an emergency shelter use, as described in application Z-20250017, with the condition that parcel uses meet the city’s minimum off‑street parking requirements.

State Buildings and General Services representatives described the proposal as a flexible, state‑owned use of an existing office building previously occupied by state agencies. Representatives said no interior or exterior renovation work is planned at present; the Vermont State Fire Marshal reviewed the space and limited occupancy under the building’s current condition to 10 people for fire‑safety reasons. Applicants said if the state later elects to increase occupancy the building would require upgrades such as fire alarms or sprinklers and corresponding code approvals.

The DRB deliberated on whether to grant a time‑limited or multi‑use approval and whether the site should be authorized for office uses in addition to emergency shelter. Staff advised that state‑owned facilities used for emergency shelter are subject to limited zoning review focused on location, lot coverage, building bulk, setbacks, off‑street parking and similar site factors, and that the board should avoid conditions that would interfere with the intended emergency function. Board members agreed to permit the emergency shelter use and also left the decision open to multiuse scenarios (office use versus shelter) so long as on‑site parking meets minimum requirements.

Public commenters urged better amenities for people in shelter — notably showers and green space — and cautioned against relying on a small, temporary facility as a substitute for a broader, coordinated plan for unhoused residents. One commenter said the project as proposed lacks a shower facility and described that omission as inhumane; applicant representatives replied that the project team had previously scoped a shower but that the state did not proceed with that work, and that any modality that increased occupancy would require building upgrades and approvals. The board did not add a condition requiring a shower.

The motion as amended directs that the approval applies as presented and that uses on the parcel must meet minimum parking standards; the board voted unanimously in favor. The DRB staff will prepare a written decision for signatures; the appeal period begins when that signed decision is issued.