Montpelier DRB reviews sketch plan to split Gold Hill Road parcel into two lots

Montpelier Development Review Board members on June 2 reviewed a sketch-plan application to divide an undeveloped parcel along Gold Hill Road at the Montpelier–East Montpelier line into two lots, including a 2.5‑acre building lot and a roughly 9‑acre remainder. The board took no formal action at sketch plan but outlined issues the applicants must address before final plat submission.

The sketch-plan briefing matters because the board’s findings at final review must show each new lot is developable under local and state rules. Board staff and the applicant focused discussion on access through mapped wetlands, on‑site wastewater and well locations, and the effect of a prior conveyance of land across the stream to the City of Montpelier.

Meredith Crandall, planning staff, opened the item by reminding the board that “this is a sketch plan subdivision application for a 2 parcel subdivision” and that no final decisions are made at sketch plan; the purpose is to flag issues that must be resolved for a complete final application. George McCain of McCain Consulting, representing the applicants Amanda Reed and John Kim, said the original parcel had a prior wastewater permit for a single‑family home and is currently undeveloped. McCain described the proposal as creating “Lot B2 of 2 and a half acres” on the south side and a larger Lot B1 of about nine acres to the north, and said the proposal locates an on‑site mound leach field and a drilled well site for the smaller lot.

Board members and staff focused on three technical areas:

- Wetlands and access: McCain said the proposed driveway follows an existing logging road and will cross a mapped Class 3 wetland. He told the board that federal Army Corps of Engineers rules allow up to 5,000 square feet of disturbance in such wetlands without a state wetland permit, and said the team would “minimize that to the maximum extent feasible well below that 5,000 square feet number.” The board noted state-level wetland triggers and said the final application must document any required state or federal permits.

- Wastewater permitting and prior approvals: The parcel contains a previously permitted wastewater site for a house on the east side of the stream; McCain said that permit “has not been acted upon yet.” He also told the board that wastewater permits “do not expire from a water wastewater standpoint. So once your permit is in place, those are good in perpetuity.” Staff warned that because a portion of the parcel had been conveyed to the city, the applicants must confirm the reduced acreage still supports the previously permitted wastewater system or show other regulatory exemptions apply.

- Steep slopes and site constraints: Board members asked for slope analyses showing developable areas on the larger remainder (Lot B1) similar to the erosion‑control and slope detail already provided for Lot B2. McCain said the previously permitted house site and associated wastewater location on the north parcel lie in a relatively gentle area, though a culvert crossing will be needed for the access off Gold Hill Road.

Crandall summarized what the final application must include: clear final lot lines, any necessary easements, confirmation that the prior wastewater permit remains valid for the revised lot configuration or documentation of the appropriate state exemptions, and more detailed slope and erosion control plans where development is proposed. No formal vote or written decision was issued at the meeting; Crandall told the applicants the staff report is the best guide to complete the final submittal and that meeting minutes would be posted later in the week.

For neighbors and the public, the board emphasized that sketch plan does not authorize construction: a final plat and subsequent zoning or building permits will be required before any work occurs. The applicants were told to coordinate with state wastewater authorities and to document any Army Corps approvals for wetland disturbances in the final packet.