Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Commercial Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning Commission discusses Diamond Run Mall redevelopment, attorney-led permitting expected to take years

Rutland Town Planning Commission · October 3, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Commissioners heard an update on plans for the Diamond Run Mall redevelopment, including an attorney handling permitting, an estimated two-year permitting timeline plus a third year for construction, and the prospect of a Walmart supercenter as anchor.

The Rutland Town Planning Commission discussed preliminary plans for the Diamond Run Mall redevelopment at its Oct. 3 meeting, including permitting timelines and how state land-use review may apply.

The chair said a Vermont attorney handling the permitting process could present to the commission at a later date; the attorney estimates permitting will take about two years and that construction would likely add a third year. Commissioners and attendees discussed the likely anchor: several participants referenced a proposed Walmart supercenter. The chair noted that the developer had designated a lawyer as the town contact for the permitting process.

Commissioners debated whether parts of the existing mall (references included the Spartan Arena and a Kmart building) might be retained in a remodel or removed as new construction — a distinction that could affect how permitting is treated. Several members recommended waiting until the permitting attorney has more substantive information before scheduling a presentation: "My preference would be to wait until we have more concrete information rather than have him come...on speculation," one commissioner said.

Commissioners also raised Act 250 implications and the possibility that a major amendment or an Act 250 review could be required depending on the footprint and project scope. No formal vote or action was taken; commissioners asked to be informed as permitting advances.