Downstreet apartment project hits roadblock at review board
October 19, 2023 | By Lisa Scagliotti Downstreet Housing and Community Development’s plans to build a three-story apartment project at 51 South Main Street hit a roadblock on Wednesday at the Waterbury Development Review Board.
The proposed apartments (right) at 51 S. Main Street, Waterbury. Drawing by gbArchitecture
With just six of seven members present at the evening hearing, the board reached a 3-3 tie vote on Downstreet’s application for a conditional use permit for the 26-unit development. Four votes are needed for approval.
“It was a 3-3 tie. That doesn’t technically pass,” said Zoning Administrator Mike Bishop.
Board Chair David Frothingham was out of town attending a work conference and was unable to attend the meeting. Vice Chair Tom Kinley ran the meeting.
“We are shocked,” said Nicola Anderson, Downstreet’s project manager who has been working on the proposal for more than a year. “This is a first.”
The nonprofit housing agency based in Barre develops, owns and manages affordable housing throughout Central Vermont including three existing properties in Waterbury. Anderson said her organization has not ever had a permit request fail.
When told of the review board’s vote, P. Howard “Skip” Flanders, chair of the Edward Farrar Utility District, said, “That’s unfortunate. There was such community support for selling it, too.”
Nearly 300 EFUD voters turned out on Oct. 25, 2022 to vote on selling 51 S. Main Street to Downstreet Housing & Community Development. They supported the move by a 3-to-1 margin. Photo by Gordon Miller
It was nearly a year ago on Oct. 25, 2022 when district voters held a special meeting on whether to sell the property to Downstreet for $138,000 to add affordable housing to the downtown. The district owns the parcel formerly the site of the Waterbury village and town offices until Tropical Storm Irene in August 2011. The flood-damaged building was deemed not reparable and was torn down several years ago and the lot has since been used for public parking.
Utility district voters turned out for the district’s largest election since it was formed in 2018 and overwhelmingly supported Downstreet’s purchase request, voting 208-69 in favor. The sale has not taken place yet, Anderson said, noting that would occur when the project was further along in the development process.
Wednesday’s hearing was the third for the project before the review board after previous sessions were held in September and two weeks ago. In each case, board members and neighbors of the .8-acre site asked questions and raised concerns.
Project representatives from Downstreet and its design team in September held a separate informal meeting with abutting landowners to go over details about the project such as landscaping, screening, drainage and the building’s exterior appearance.
“We truly have thoughtfully tried to address every single one of their concerns,” Anderson said.
That attention resulted in revisions between the first and second hearings. Review board members praised the effort at the Oct. 4 meeting, noting that most of the issues had been resolved.
Final request divides the board
The project team was asked to address three remaining points ahead of this week’s meeting. The board asked for confirmation from the town public works director regarding site details pertaining to stormwater and drainage. It also asked that Downstreet representatives communicate with all of the utilities that have equipment boxes on the site regarding moving them. Downstreet answered both of those points in a memo to the board.
The third item proved to be the key sticking point. At the Oct. 4 hearing, board member Alex Tolstoi expressed reservations about the building’s height and appearance from Main Street. Given that the lot is in the Design Review District, the board may consider its aesthetic appearance and ask applicants to make changes.
The board asked Downstreet if it could revise the design of the building’s top floor so its outer edge was 8 feet back from the front face of the building’s lower two floors. Anderson and the project’s architect said that would be difficult to do without eliminating a unit.
Anderson on Thursday noted that Downstreet currently is not involved with developing any new construction with fewer than 30 units except in Waterbury. The proposed 26 units are a compromise given community concerns about the building’s overall size for the site, she said.
Project designers throughout the process have pointed out that Waterbury zoning regulations allow for a four-story building to be built at 51 S. Main Street. In addition to keeping the design to three floors, architects also incorporated a covered front porch to blend in with other Main Street homes – another feature that cut into potential living space, Anderson noted.
Overall, Anderson said, the project plans aim to balance the need for more workforce housing with the values of the community. “We think [the plans] demonstrate our commitment to deliver an affordable housing project that meets the community’s needs,” she said.
For Wednesday’s meeting, the project team presented a revised upper floor that rearranged the layout of the front two units and deleted a hallway. The result was that a portion of the third floor was pushed back from the facade by 13 feet, 8 inches.
“It was determined to be unfeasible to reduce the number of apartments or to change a 1-bedroom apartment to a studio, but we have made the changes we can to pull as much of the 3rd floor back from the street as possible,” the project team explained in a memo to the review board.
The changes, however, were not sufficient for the project proposal to win the support of a majority at the hearing. Three members – Tolstoi, David Rogers and Harry Shepard – voted against approving the permit request. Kinley along with Bud Wilson and Joseph Wurtzbacher voted in favor.
The resulting tie came as a surprise to many in the room.
The former site of the Waterbury town and village offices, 51 S. Main St. has been a vacant lot for several years and used for public parking lot. File photo by Lisa Scagliotti
Next steps need review
“This is an unusual thing,” said Zoning Administrator Bishop. “It’s almost stunning. It’s been a long process with lots of due diligence. It looked like we were at the end of the line.”
Reached on Thursday by phone in Maine, Frothingham said he believes the board’s work on the matter is complete. It has 45 days to issue a written decision and the applicant may appeal the ruling to the state Environmental Court. He said he couldn’t comment further on the decision as he was not present at Wednesday’s hearing and he needed to confer with town staff.
Anderson noted that prior to the board’s vote on Wednesday, she read from a section of Act 47, the new state law passed by the Legislature earlier this year that modifies municipal development regulations to ease the process for developing new housing given the statewide housing crunch.
Section 10 of the new law in part says: “A decision rendered by the appropriate municipal panel for a housing development or the housing portion of a mixed-use development shall not … limit the building size to less than that allowed in the municipal bylaws, including reducing the building footprint or height.”
Asked what the next step might be for Downstreet, Anderson replied that it was not yet clear. “Some sort of appeal. I think everyone has been pretty taken aback,” she said.
Municipal Manager Tom Leitz said Thursday that he was reviewing the matter with the town attorney. The town government is bound to represent decisions of the review board should there be an appeal, Leitz noted. When asked whether the town review board’s action was complete, Leitz replied, “We may not be at the end of the process.”
Utility district Chair Flanders said he hoped to learn more in the coming days as well. “It just goes to show that you never know what’s going to happen,” Flanders said.
Waterbury Roundabout has reached out to the three members of the review board who voted against the project request. This story will be updated if they share comments.
Meeting agendas, minutes and packet information on applications can be found on the Development Review Board website.