Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Village Residential Commercial topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Richmond planners update village-residential commercial rules, weigh stormwater and outreach as town plan work continues
Summary
The commission reviewed Village Residential Commercial updates to align with Acts 47 and 181 — including a required minimum lot size of 0.2 acres, maintained residential density allowances (8 units/acre in draft), a possible frontage change to 55 feet, and a statutory allowance for an extra floor for affordable projects — and debated stormwater mitigation and steering-committee outreach for the town plan.
Commissioners reviewed changes to the Village Residential Commercial (VRC) district aimed at complying with Vermont’s Acts 47 and 181 and discussed parallel town-plan work and stormwater mitigation.
Virginia said the VRC had already been reworked earlier to anticipate the state requirements: the district now explicitly permits duplexes and 3–4 unit buildings and sets a base residential density the commission described as more permissive than the statutory minimum. Virginia noted a required minimum lot size of 0.2 acres in any district served by water and sewer and said the draft currently targets 8 units per acre in the VRC, which exceeds the state floor.
The commission also discussed dimensional edits that are not mandated by the statutes but would improve administrative compatibility: lowering minimum lot frontage from 75 feet to 55 feet to match newer village neighborhoods and adding a residential-density bonus mechanism the select board may consider on Aug. 4. Virginia said some frontage and density decisions are optional and asked members to consider whether VRC frontage should be 55 feet to match other new neighborhoods.
On building height, commissioners flagged a statutory provision that would allow one additional floor for developments that qualify as truly affordable under state law; Virginia said the code will need to reflect that exception if the select board approves the related enabling language.
Keith raised stormwater as a practical constraint: “we are not gonna release the permits unless you show us some sort of stormwater mitigation,” he said, noting the town has begun internal procedures and will likely seek regional or consultant assistance. Several commissioners criticized the regional planning body (CCRPC) for not providing proactive stormwater guidance tied to the legislative housing push; Keith said the town could buy consultant time or request regional help.
Separately, the commission reviewed town-plan process items: steering-committee members will draft sections over the next six weeks, the Housing Committee will supply its section, and commissioners discussed outreach options including public tables and scheduled workshops. Members agreed to consider a district-by-district matrix at the next meeting to match PUD subclasses to map locations.
No formal votes were taken on zoning text; commissioners asked staff to prepare draft language, maps and a matrix for further review and public engagement.
