Montpelier DRB conditionally approves steep‑slopes permit for Parkside Drive home

The Montpelier Development Review Board on March 17 granted conditional approval for a single‑family house and garage at 0 Parkside Drive (application Z20250009, Parcel 118‑008001), subject to two written conditions: Department of Public Works approval of an erosion prevention and sediment control plan before any zoning permit is issued, and submission of engineered foundation plans and an engineer’s letter demonstrating compliance before issuance of the building permit for the primary structure. The board recorded the approval by roll call with members who answered “yes” including Rob Goodwin, Kevin O’Connell, Brian (surname not specified in the record) and Alex Nalas.

The decision matters to nearby residents because the parcel sits above Bailey Avenue and Hubbard Park on steep slopes where neighbors say past disturbances have contributed to localized runoff problems. The board’s action allows applicants to start non‑structural, time‑sensitive site work under a zoning permit once the Department of Public Works (DPW) approves the amended erosion control plan; construction of the house itself cannot begin until the structural foundation documents are submitted and accepted.

Applicants Alyssa “Ali” Butchiever and Ben Danowitz told the board they were seeking the phased approval to keep contractors on schedule. “What we’re here to do today is to ask for a variance on our progress, just given the greater circumstances that we’re in in the current market,” Danowitz said, describing the request as a means “to keep our construction program on schedule.” Zoning Administrator Meredith Crandall told the board and the public that the city’s stormwater rules set a clear trigger for a full stormwater management plan: “A development has to result in 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surfaces on the subject parcel to trigger a stormwater management plan,” she said, noting that the threshold limits when DPW requires a separate stormwater permit.

Neighbor Mark Billian of 37 Veil Avenue spoke in support of the project overall but urged the board to consider downstream effects. “The issue that always drives me is stormwater management,” Billian said, noting repeated driveway and yard work on Bailey Avenue after major rain events and asking how downhill impacts would be accounted for if actual runoff differed from the applicant’s model.

Technical responses in the record came from a named consultant, Chris, who described erosion controls proposed for the site, the use and placement of silt fence and J‑hooks where required, and the expectation of shallow soils and exposed ledge that will likely require blasting and then engineered foundation details. Chris clarified the expected sequencing: a foundation design and an engineer’s letter are required prior to building‑permit issuance, but the foundation design may rely on blasting and probe results to determine any structural fill or compaction specifications.

The board’s written motion (recorded in the minutes) grants the request to construct a single‑family home with a second‑floor garage apartment and associated infrastructure on steep slopes at 0 Parkside Drive under file Z20250009, with these key conditions: (1) prior to issuance of any zoning permit the applicant must obtain and provide to the zoning administrator written approval of the erosion prevention and sediment control (EPSC) plan from DPW; (2) prior to issuance of municipal building permits for the primary structure the applicant must provide engineered foundation plans and an engineer’s letter demonstrating compliance with the relevant zoning sections and DPW requirements; and (3) prior to issuance of the zoning permit the applicant must supply correspondence (estimate or contract) showing a structural engineer is lined up to produce the foundation plans. The board discussed that the zoning permit would allow non‑structural site work to begin but that the building permit for the house will not be issued until those engineered documents are accepted and DPW signs off.

Meredith Crandall said the formal written decision will be prepared and posted; the appeal period begins on publication of that signed decision. She instructed the applicants to provide DPW correspondence and the engineer estimate/contract by email and to copy her so staff can finish the written decision while applicants pursue those items. The board and staff also advised neighbors concerned about broader neighborhood runoff that city‑level stormwater work and the Office of Resilience could be avenues for policy or neighborhood‑scale approaches, but those changes fall outside the board’s review on this application.

Votes at a glance: the board approved the project by roll call (yes recorded for Rob Goodwin, Kevin O’Connell, Brian [surname not specified], and Alex Nalas). The written, signed decision will set the official date the appeal period begins.

The applicants were told they may begin elements of site work that do not require a building permit once they supply DPW’s EPSC approval and the engineer correspondence; the primary structure’s building permit remains contingent on the engineered foundation plans and letter.