Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Conservation Subdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pownal planners table conservation-subdivision density revisions amid frontage disagreement
Summary
Planning Board members reviewed a draft lot-density checklist for the town’s Conservation Subdivision Ordinance but paused further action after debate over how to count road frontage and unbuildable areas; staff and consultants will be asked for clarifications before the board resumes work.
Planning board members on July 16 reviewed a draft lot-density checklist intended to streamline applications under the town’s Conservation Subdivision Ordinance, but they agreed to pause formal changes pending staff and consultant follow-up.
The matter drew extensive questions about how to calculate maximum lots on a parcel. Planning board member Brian Stornelli said the board has historically used a 600-foot frontage rule but argued the correct minimum should be 660 feet "because the road needs a 60 foot right of way," noting that rights-of-way, easements, wetlands and steep slopes should be subtracted when computing buildable area.
The checklist under review would let applicants and planners compute a density cap by subtracting unbuildable land from the parcel’s gross area and dividing the remainder by 90,000 square feet. "That’s your density," Stornelli said, describing it as a two-step exercise with an initial maximum-cap calculation followed by dimensional‑standard checks.
Board members disputed how frontage should be counted in some scenarios — for corner lots, flag lots and parcels that might use a private road to provide frontage — and whether driveways should be permitted off the public road or required to access private roads under conservation-subdivision rules. Mercedes Pour-Previti circulated edited checklists and a chart intended to clarify how the ordinance language is scattered across sections; members noted references appearing in multiple places (RB, C5, and an argued correct location at 504D).
Secretary Marcia Bowen said the group should not rush changes and requested that members compile specific questions for staff and for Tim (staff/consultant) to review. CEO Bill Schmidt and board members agreed staff would map the ordinance references and return with clarifications; the board voted to table final action on the checklist pending that follow-up.
The board also discussed practical concerns such as how easements and rights-of-way affect the ability to create a backlot, and the intended policy goal of reducing curb cuts onto public roads by encouraging private-road access for subdivisions.
The board did not adopt ordinance language at the meeting; members asked staff to compile the outstanding questions and for the board to consider the item again after staff and consultant review.
