Development Review Board – Aug 4, 2026

Burlington Development Review Board

Department of Permitting & Inspections 645 Pine Street Burlington, VT 05401 www.burlingtonvt.gov/DPI/DRB Telephone: (802) 865-7188 Fax: (802) 863-0466

Caitlin Halpert Evan Gould Geoff Hand Sean McKenzie Miles Waite Chase Taylor Marina Campbell, (Alternate)

BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD

Tuesday, August 4, 2026, 5:00 PM

MINUTES

Hybrid & In Person (at 645 Pine Street) Meeting

Board Members Present: Caitlin Halpert, Evan Gould (5:10 PM), Geoff Hand, Sean McKenzie, Miles Waite, and Chase Taylor

Board Members Absent: Marina Campbell

Staff Members Present: William Ward, Kirk Dressing, Nicolas Bradford, and Joseph Cava

Staff Members Absent: Scott Gustin, Mary O'Neil, and Matthew Clark

I. Agenda II. Communications III. Minutes IV. Consent

1. ZP-26-252; 865 South Prospect Street (RL, Ward 6) Stephanie Seguino Proposed commercial kitchen home occupation. (Project Manager, Kirk Dressing) Stephanie Seguino, owner, present

Caitlin Halpert: This item is recommended for consent approval. Is there anyone on the Board that would have an issue treating this item as consent?

Caitlin Halpert: Hearing none, is the applicant present?

Stephanie Seguino: Yes.

Caitlin Halpert: Have you reviewed the staff report and have any questions or comments?

Stephanie Seguino: Yes, and no questions or comments.

Caitlin Halpert: Are there any questions or comments from members of the Board? Hearing none, are there any questions or comments from members of the public in attendance in person or online? Hearing none, would someone like to make a motion?

Geoff Hand: Motioned to approve and adopt staff findings and recommendations, Chase Taylor 2nd. Vote 6-0. Motion carried.

V. Public Hearing

1. ZP-26-293; 227 North Champlain St (RM, Ward 2) Tyler Bolles

Proposed replacement of an existing garage with a two-story accessory dwelling unit. (Project Manager, Mary O'Neil) Tyler Bolles, owner, present

Caitlin Halpert: Can you tell us about this project?

Tyler Bolles: Raising a young family, we would like to expand the existing living space. This garage is not part of the original historic structure. A fire damaged the previous garage structure. The new habitable areas would include an adult hang out space and an additional space to accommodate visitors. At the Design Advisory Board (DAB) meeting, we expanded on the design choices including raising the height from what currently exists. For additional prospective the proposed structure would sit back from the house and street.

Caitlin Halpert: Are there any questions or comments from members of the Board? Hearing none, are there any questions or comments from members of the public in attendance in person or online?

William Ward: If you would like to speak, please raise your hand.

Caitlin Halpert: Hearing none, we will close the hearing on this item and deliberate on it later on.

VI. Certificate of Appropriateness

1. ZP-26-28; 45 Howard Street (RM, Ward 5) Sarah Schiesser / Thomas Wironen / Robert Hale

Proposed construction of an addition to the west side of existing single-family home. Original historic home will be repainted and repaired in kind. (Project Manager, Mary O'Neil) Gabriel Stadecker: Sworn in.

Caitlin Halpert: This item was recommended consent approval. Is there anyone on the Board that would have an issue treating this item as consent? Hearing none is the applicant present, and have you had a chance to review the staff report?

Gabriel Stadecker: Yes.

Caitlin Halpert: Did you have any questions or comments?

Gabriel Stadecker: No questions or comments.

Caitlin Halpert: Are there any questions or comments from members of the Board?

Sean McKenzie: I see something on the design.

Miles Waite: This is Mary O'Neil's project.

Sean McKenzie: Can you expand on the design of the gable end of the existing structure, which is a John Roberts' house?

Gabriel Stadecker: There is no intent to remove features that characterize this as a John Roberts' designed house. The kitchen section in the middle has been scaled back to connect with the existing historic house without removing the scalloped shingles.

Sean McKenzie: I am talking about the original house.

Gabriel Stadecker: The intent is to preserve the existing house.

Miles Waite: I am confused on the rendering as well.

Gabriel Stadecker: The open porch will be enclosed creating a hipped roof, which is a common characteristic of John Roberts' houses.

Miles Waite: Thank you for the clarification. Can you speak further on the design?

Gabriel Stadecker: The proposed addition is disproportionate compared to the original house.

Caitlin Halpert: Are there any additional questions or comments from members of the public in attendance? Hearing none, we will close the hearing on this item and deliberate on it later on.

2. ZP-26-216; 124-126 North Avenue (RC, Ward 2) Katie Chaucer / Michael Chaucer

Proposed demolition of existing duplex to construct a new four-story 16 unit residential building. (Project Manager, Mary O'Neil) Michael Chaucer, owner, present, Patrick Burnham, Daniel Castrigano, Austin Allen, Nick Roen, Anonymous Cambrian Rise Resident, Alexander Melville, Scott Newman, Julia DiPietro, Vernon Nelson, Johanne Fradette, Ann Sicurello, Katy Davis, Philip Kiefer, Dot Commo, Jak Tiano, Missa Aloisi, and Erica Spiegel: Sworn in.

Caitlin Halpert: Can you tell us about this project?

Patrick Burnham: We are one of the builders in the Residential Corridor (RC) where this project is located. The existing property is in neglect and we seek to demolish it to construct a new building in keeping with the Neighborhood Code regulations. We are excited with this goal for high performance and geothermal technology. There is also a transportation plan with public transportation and a CarShare program to develop this to align with the City's adopted regulations.

Caitlin Halpert: Are there any questions or comments from members of the Board?

Geoff Hand: Can you expand on the questions outlined in the staff report?

Michael Chaucer: We have been having discussions with the Department of Public Works (DPW) along with a local coffee shop to understand the impacts to existing traffic that this project will create.

Sean McKenzie: Without a driveway, how will you manage people moving in furniture?

Michael Chaucer: This will be coordinated with our property manager. We have also had in depth conversations with the fire department nearby about traffic patterns. We have not signed contracts with anyone yet.

Evan Gould: Would you agree to conditions from DPW?

Michael Chaucer: Yes, we are in active discussions.

Evan Gould: The DAB raised the topic of wood chips versus grass for the dog park.

Michael Chaucer: I am not an architect, but we are exploring design components.

Caitlin Halpert: Are there any additional questions from the Board?

Evan Gould: Can you expand on bike parking?

Michael Chaucer: There will be bike racks on the building's interior.

Miles Waite: Can you expand on site infrastructure?

Michael Chaucer: There will be pole-mounted transformers.

Sean McKenzie: Can you expand on the rooftop space?

Michael Chaucer: There will be a small rooftop deck that cannot be observed from the ground level.

Sean McKenzie: Will there be lighting?

Michael Chaucer: Yes, penthouse and elevator lighting.

Geoff Hand: Will there be other programs?

Caitlin Halpert: Rooftop will be available to all residents for use.

Geoff Hand: Can you expand on the mural?

Michael Chaucer: I am excited about the mural. The same artist did the hummingbird mural on American Flatbread's building on St. Paul Street in downtown Burlington.

Sean McKenzie: Can you expand on the offset?

Michael Chaucer: A few notches have been taken out of the side of the building to meet the required offset.

Patrick Burnham: There was a recommendation from the DAB about keeping the roof flat.

Geoff Hand: How do you show this in the plan?

Michael Chaucer: This is shown in the notching. There is a sketch that was uploaded with the permit documents showing what this would look like.

Caitlin Halpert: Are there any questions or comments from members of the public in attendance in person or online? We have read everything that was submitted, so it would be helpful if any new information were kept brief and concise.

Daniel Castrigano: I would like to voice my support for this infill of housing.

Austin Allen: My partner lives on North Avenue and these units seems pretty spacious. I understand that people are freaking out about parking. There is ample on street parking for resident vehicles. There are many bigger, taller, buildings in this area and the project seems proportional for the area. I am in support of this project, and am more nervous about things being stagnant.

Nick Roen: I have lived in other urban areas, and this proposal seems spectacular for this area.

Anonymous Cambrian Rise Resident: I moved here from Boston, and we did not have any car parking. This proposal seems to fit very well with the area. It is a great location for access to the City and the bike path. There is also clear bus routes and bike lanes through this area of the City. The indoor bike parking is also a necessity for hard Vermont winters that rust out the frames. I have no other concerns regarding this project.

Alexander Melville: I am in support of this project. There are many concerns from neighboring residents about development that extends beyond the construction of single-family homes.

Scott Newman: I am opposed to this project. Professionally, I submitted my qualifications that the existing building is eligible for listing to the historical registry. There is no evidence supporting a burden of proof that warrants the demolition of this historically eligible building, whose integrity meets the standards of this area being eligible for a National Register district nomination. There has also been no evidence submitted that the existing building is structurally unsound. The City of Burlington supports the retention of historically listed and eligible structures. The size and scale of the proposed building is also out of place for the character of the neighborhood. The existing zoning regulations promotes adaptive reuse of historically eligible buildings. Therefore, the existing building should be retained.

Geoff Hand: It does seem like a historically eligible structure for listing.

Kirk Dressing: That is not something I would be able to answer now.

Scott Newman: Burlington recognizes listed and eligible for listing structures. I hope the entire district gets registered.

Geoff Hand: There are provisions in the ordinance like the listing of historical carriage houses. I appreciate your historic expertise, but you should present how the retention of existing historic structure contributes to the need for housing.

Scott Newman: My experience is in adaptive reuse. This area should have been surveyed, but I cannot answer your question when hundreds of other housing units are being constructed to meet this need for housing.

Julia DiPietro: We live behind this site and we are opposed to this being constructed in our backyard. This development will tower over properties along Drew Street. The scope of the proposal should consider the negative consequences of demolishing historic structures to accommodate new regulations. If I am understanding it correctly, it will block sunlight and remove privacy barriers like the existing tree. We are concerned by the lack of communication concerning this project about asbestos and lead paint exposure created by the demolition of the existing structure to the surrounding neighborhood.

Vernon Nelson: We took pictures and submitted comments concerning this project. We feel there are considerations that need to be taken to preserve the privacy of existing neighbors and preserve the character of this neighborhood. The no parking and privacy issues are sufficient. Everyone in this neighborhood works harmoniously together. People have to walk at least two blocks to access their properties in this area. There is also privacy issues concerning noise and light pollution. This project is totally out of scale for the neighborhood. Other projects in the neighborhood have been scaled back to meet the character of the neighborhood. This would be the first four-story building in this neighborhood. This would also block the sunsets we enjoy. We are also concerned with the lack of communication.

Johanne Fradette: I have lived in my home for over 32 years. My house is one of few in the neighborhood that is still a single-family home and this development would destroy the value I have put into my property. We do not want to take away from the community feeling that our neighbors create. Rental properties has increased from 2.3% to 3.3%. This area is already a viable corridor to the New North End, and I am bitterly opposed to this project. Shame on you and your lack of communication. Shame on you.

Ann Sicurello: I have lived in this neighborhood since the 1990s. As a retired working-class person, I support housing. Yes, we need to grow, change, adapt, but there are limits. This is Burlington, Vermont, not Boston, Massachusetts. We need to grow in accordance to our topography, culture, ecology. I am concerned our infrastructure cannot support projects of this scale. Traffic on North Avenue has increased considerably with Cambrian Rise development. This area is a historically dense, underserved, stressed neighborhood. I have weathered difficult times over the years. Told in past, by City officials, this neighborhood needs people like you. We are not saying not in our neighborhood. We ask consideration with scope and scale, for a multigenerational neighborhood with people from all walks of life. These are uncharted times that you are tasked with. I appreciate the challenge of putting the new zoning codes into practice. Though we have reached a state of urgency, in my humble opinion we need to move forward slowly and deliberately to ensure a livable Burlington for generations to come. Once again, thank you for your service.

Katy Davis: I submitted concerns about parking and think it is naïve to think people will operate successfully without vehicles. I walked about Town, and this proposal is out of scale for this awesome neighborhood. If it could be ratcheted down a couple stories, this would be more in keeping with the neighborhood.

Philip Kiefer: I used to live on Drew Street and this fits a pattern that already exists. We are in urgent need of housing and I support the transportation goals presented as part of this project. It will come at a cost to the tenants who could live here if this project is not constructed. This project is very exciting.

Dot Commo: Many of my neighbors have already presented my concerns. I am still her, in my forever home, aging in place. One of our biggest challenges has been absentee landlords. I support property management to keep this proposal under control so it does not disrupt our quality of life. Maybe I am used to having more space, but these units do not seem to accommodate more than a household of two or three individuals. We rely on a bus schedule that is not that terrific.

Jak Tiano: I was one of many residents in the City that supported the changes in regulations to expand housing. Infilling the corridor is essential, but I was blown away by the scale of the proposed development. This is part of the democratic process for bravery and ingenuity to create such a good plan on paper. This meets so many other goals, and it is important to review the other ways forward. There is a lot of stuff coming through the pipeline to infill the housing gap to expand housing by 33%. This is exciting for the goal of housing and outweighs the importance of living style. I know of at least 16 households that support this project that do not require on-site parking.

Missa Aloisi: I have been before this Board for other projects. Where I stand right now is in opposition of this project.

Evan Gould: We have read your notes.

Missa Aloisi: The design and provision of the ordinance is important. I wish this dialog was a pre-requisite of the permitting process. Why I came to the Board is often my own designs need to be revised to meet the standards. This missing middle discusses the square footage of needed housing. What this proposal does not address is smaller families and acceptable standards for Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) individuals who need a shorter distance than two blocks to connect with reliable transportation. A mediation process for larger housing is important and creates opportunities for responsible designs. If there is going to be a dog park proposed behind the structure, this would be a nightmare for my little dog and me without landscaping for privacy. There are hiccups that need to be ironed out, and it is a tough balance. If you come to the table with something that the neighborhood supports instead of opposes it is important.

Erica Spiegel: I can see the tree proposed for removal and it should be replaced by something else. People have mentioned the appropriateness and scale, and zoning should take this into account. No offence to the architect, but the proposed building looks like a giant rubix cube. The rooftop gathering place for tenants makes this a five-story building, not a four-story building. Keep in mind that there is no room for standing or stopping along this area of North Avenue. If you have ever been here during rush hour, it is a nightmare for taxis, Amazon delivery trucks, and trash collection vehicles. This creates concerns for emergency vehicles that get caught in this jam of vehicles. The ambient noise level is concerning given the number of proposed rooftop compressors.

Evan Gould: You were mentioning the trash trucks, can you expand on what they currently do?

Erica Spiegel: I worked in the recycling and trash industry for 25 years, and larger developments like this require a designated trash area. I am also concerned by the lack of transitioning for the size and scale of the building and how it will block sunlight and sky from neighboring residents. My understanding of the missing middle is for homes for families. Where will these families live for the new high school, which can accommodate up to 1,000 students? Truly, the missing middle is family oriented housing units. I am not sure if the fire department has reviewed or approved any portion of this.

William Ward: I do not see any additional hands raised on ZOOM.

Caitlin Halpert: Can the applicant provide additional details regarding other designs?

Michael Chaucer: The original design including a loading dock type design, which would have blocked an existing bike lane. I would like to include this, which was previously cut.

Missa Aloisi: For existing curb cuts, it would need to be parallel parking.

Chase Taylor: Would you need to move a utility pole?

Michael Chaucer: No, the fire department is on board with the design.

Caitlin Halpert: Can you describe the distance between the tree and the driveway?

Michael Chaucer: The intention would be to retain the tree, but we have had to do a lot of trimming to keep the tree manageable.

Geoff Hand: I am worried about the bike lane and the impact of the recycling/trash enclosure on it with local area trash haulers.

Michael Chaucer: We have talked with local area trash haulers and I would love more protected bike lanes. I do not think DPW would be on board with changes to the bike lane. A huge part of my training is in design and I have seen projects that decimate neighborhoods to construct out of place housing and highways. I am excited for what this project means under the Neighborhood Code regulations.

Patrick Burnham: I am also excited for this project.

Caitlin Halpert: Hearing no additional questions or comments, we will close the hearing on this item and deliberate on it later on.

VII. Other Business

1. 802 Homes Presentation

Discussion and consideration of potential bylaw change for administrative review. Jeff Dube, Sharon Bushor, and Sarah Morgan: Sworn in.

Jeff Dube: This is to make it more feasible to construct housing. Part of the challenge is cultural for communities to support housing projects. Phase one is for engagement and design to create more affordable housing. Part of this initiative drew inspiration from kit homes that fit the character of the neighborhood. This will create a roadmap for other communities. We are working with three communities in north, central, and southern Vermont. Early next year, we are hoping to work with developers to start implementing the various home types.

Caitlin Halpert: This seems more catered to constructing new buildings from scratch.

Jeff Dube: Correct, the various home types are to accommodate various site types.

Evan Gould: There are various footprints and I am curious on the context.

Jeff Dube: The context is for gaining flexibility for the design and the intent is to expand in a few years.

Geoff Hand: We see many smaller Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) styled dwellings.

Jeff Dube: Many smaller buildings could be utilized, which expands the flexibility of varying home types. Part of the universal design is based off of age-in-place opportunities to recognize staying in their communities. These design examples fit in a variety of communities. Feedback received has played a role in the furnish able capacity of the new units while adhering to code requirements. The most exciting component is how homes are built for a quick turnaround between project start and completion.

Evan Gould: Regarding regional collaboration, has this started yet?

Jeff Dube: Yes, we are looking outside the scale of Vermont, starting small and expanding opportunities over time. We understand the challenges of the New England climate, which is why we are looking at the benefits of off-site constructed homes. This will create development-ready resources between a projects conception and completion. What this is leading towards is creating a coordinated process that accelerates the scale. The pilot program works between developer and investor perspectives. This aligns infrastructure and capital. Regional collaboration in Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine will help lower prices across the board.

Sharon Bushor: I am listening to the presentation and I am a resident of Burlington and a political junkie. Many of our lots are lot smaller than in other communities. Residents residing in lower residential densities like in the Residential Low (RL) intensity district want a functional home when residents eventually downside in favor of embracing projects like this. This is a good step forward for the design process and can provide financial relief from residents excluded from such policies and procedures. Predictability takes away the anxiousness from neighbors. I am interested in this.

Evan Gould: There is a smaller cottage court near Ethan Allen Park represented by smaller units.

Geoff Hand: Are you looking at smaller zoning changes?

Jeff Dube: Think of it as a permit audit that creates predictability for the type of development based on lot size.

Sarah Morgan: There is a lot of excitement but there are issues concerning setbacks.

Jeff Dube: This creates change in the right direction to avoid friction.

Caitlin Halpert: Is there anything you need or want from this Board?

Jeff Dube: No, I appreciate your time.

Miles Waite: What are the partnerships?

Jeff Dube: We are working with framing shops.

Sean McKenzie: Have you seen the development near Airport Parkway?

Jeff Dube: This program is intended to create a village friendly environment.

Sarah Morgan: This also aligns with the pocket neighborhood regulations.

VIII. Adjournment

Hearing closed at 7:50 PM.

Caitlin Halpert, Chair of Development Review Board — Date: 8/18/26

Joseph H. Cava, Permitting & Inspections Permit Technician — Date: 8-18-26

Participation in the DRB proceeding is a prerequisite to the right to take any subsequent appeal. Please note that ANYTHING submitted to the Zoning office is considered public and cannot be kept confidential. This may not be the final order in which items will be heard. Please view final Agenda, at https://burlingtonvt.portal.civicclerk.com/ or the office notice board, one week before the hearing for the order in which items will be heard.

The City of Burlington will not tolerate unlawful harassment or discrimination on the basis of political or religious affiliation, race, color, national origin, place of birth, ancestry, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, veteran status, disability, HIV positive status, crime victim status or genetic information. The City is also committed to providing proper access to services, facilities, and employment opportunities. For accessibility information or alternative formats, please contact Human Resources Department at (802) 540-2505.