BURLINGTON — The city’s Development Review Board has denied an appeal filed by a citizen group claiming a pair of permits approved for Burton Snowboards was issued outside the authority of city zoning staff.
The permits have become a flashpoint in the community as the snowboard gear giant plans to develop its Queen City Park Road location to include a music venue, restaurants and shopping.
But South End neighbors have organized against the expansion, concerned about a plan to relocate the popular music venue Higher Ground to the area and accusing Burton of skirting zoning laws.
Citizens for Responsible Zoning argued that Burlington Principal Planner Scott Gustin overstepped his authority in issuing a pair of permits to Burton Snowboards. Gustin and city staff are allowed to approve small plans — classified as “Level 1” or “Level 2” appropriateness — without the board approval, per Burlington code. The group wanted the board to have a public hearing about the permits.
The two permits, issued in November, are for parking lot upgrades, adding lighting, landscaping and stormwater upgrades required under Vermont’s Act 64. While board members emphasized during the hearing Wednesday that the permits are limited in scope, neighbors say that they’re part of the broader expansion.
DRB Member Brad Rabinowitz prefaced the nearly three-hour meeting by saying that the board has no information at the time about Higher Ground moving to Burton — no applications have been submitted that would suggest such. He said discussions about Higher Ground would be “out of the scope of tonight’s discussion.”
Attorney Franklin Kochman, representing the group of residents near the Queen City Park and Red Rocks neighborhoods, argued that the permits already given to Burton are “the first step to compartmentalize and fragment what is really going to be a significant change in use that will have a profound effect” on residents of the neighborhood.
Kochman argued that Burton is intentionally breaking up their development applications in an effort to avoid Development Review Board scrutiny and stifle public comment.
Kochman also argued that Gustin overstepped his authority by approving the permits because of the total square footage of work being done. A project of more than 500 square feet mandates the application come before the board for review and a public hearing.
Gustin, however, said the 500 square feet net determination is “consistent practice” in Burlington.
Attorney Brian Dunkiel, who represents Burton, argued that Gustin did the right thing because the net amount of square footage being changed for the approved plans is within the limit. Dunkiel also reiterated many times that they are only for parking and stormwater improvements.
According to Dunkiel, the approved plans actually call for a net reduction in square footage of the spaces. A Burton official said they have removed some small bump outs from the buildings, reducing the total number of square feet used by the buildings on their respective lots.
Before the meeting, the City of South Burlington had withdrawn an appeal requesting a traffic study to better understand a “newly proposed curb cut.” Dunkiel said Burton and South Burlington “resolved” their concerns. Though Burton’s property abuts the cities’ borders, all work will be confined to the jurisdiction of Burlington.
Rabinowitz reiterated many times that even though “rumors” have been circulating regarding Higher Ground’s move, he stressed the board cannot anticipate applications that may be coming — they can only deal with what is before them.
In June, Burlington City Council voted 11-1 to approve zoning changes which appeared to pave the way for Higher Ground to move from their Williston Road location in South Burlington, to a space at Burton’s Queen City Park Road headquarters. Councilor Joan Shannon, D-South District, cast the single opposing vote.
Higher Ground’s potential space would be part of a larger repurposing of an 85,000 square foot space at Burton’s campus. Burton hopes to bring not only music to the area, but restaurants, shopping and the Talent Skatepark, which recently reopened as a nonprofit, in an effort to bring more life and community to the South End of Burlington.
When Burton moved to Burlington in 2007, they had planned to use all the space, but the 2008 financial crisis and a change in industry trends nixed those plans.
Residents in the South End have raised concerns about increased traffic, noise, inebriated concert-goers, increased police presence, restricted access for emergency vehicles and difficulty navigating the one lane bridge which leads Queen City Park Road out to Route 7, the Other Paper reported in October.
But during public comment, resident Richard White urged the board to express great caution when moving forward with any potential concert venue application “because there is a lot of disagreement in this community about where this is going.”
Almy Landauer, who lives nearby, protested Rabinowitz’s reiterations about the board not considering a Higher Ground move in their scope of discussion.
“I also think it’s a bit disingenuous for you to say that you’ve only heard rumors and you don’t know what else is going on,” Landauer said. “Because we all know that this permit is only the first step.”
“Everybody may be thinking about it, but we have an obligation to deal with the facts and what’s in front of us right now,” Rabinowitz said, interrupting Landauer. “But we can’t sit here and anticipate what might be coming even if it’s rumored to be coming.”
Citizens for Responsible Zoning member and resident Sharon O’Neil said she is not “anti-Burton” or “anti-Higher Ground” but said the entirety of the project will impact hundreds of homes in the vicinity. She believes that Burton breaking up the project applications is reducing transparency in the decision making.
“We just want our voices to be heard so that maybe some of the impact will be mitigated,” she said.
Department of Permitting and Inspections staff recommended upholding the permits going into Wednesday night’s meeting. The board deliberated well after the meeting was adjourned and board members voted 4-1 to deny the appeal.
Board member Zoraya Hightower voted against the denial.
“It was a complicated issue,” Hightower told VTDigger after deliberations. “I thought we should uphold the appeal because it did feel like there was enough public forum that was interested in the issue that it should be appealed and there should be a discussion around this issue.”
