CHESTER, Vt. – The Chester Selectboard meeting on May 3 centered around the public hearing regarding proposed amendments to the town’s unified development bylaws, drafted and proposed by the Chester Planning Commission.
Lack of housing has been a topic of recent concern in Chester, as in many towns in Vermont, and the proposed updates to the bylaws were largely intended to create more opportunities for housing and development in the town. The first of these proposals to be addressed was the proposal to allow the development review board (DRB) to determine if a parcel of land is part of the town’s flood plain zone.
Zoning Administrator Preston Bristow explained to the selectboard that, while some parts of the town’s flood plain were mapped with “boots on the ground,” others, called “Zone A” were not. “Basically, back in the 1970s, there were some people in a basement in Texas who just kind of put magic markers over maps, so they’re very, very imprecise.” This means that areas such as “hummocks and hills,” which are not prone to flooding, are nonetheless included in the flood plain. The proposal would allow the DRB to exclude these areas from the flood plain zoning regulations, allowing for easier development. However, for the time being, this would only apply to “exempt structures” which would not otherwise require a permit, though Bristow noted that in other towns, bylaws similar to this one permit structures “like a two-stall garage.”
Following this, much conversation was focused on a provision which would ban living in “self contained travel trailers,” or campers, in Chester. Bristow noted that, despite the prohibition under state water quality rules, there are Chester residents who nonetheless live in campers. The state’s environmental enforcement officer for the area typically does not enforce the regulation, Bristow said, provided that the residents are adequately dealing with their waste.
Taking issue with this provision, Selectboard Member Arianna Knapp observed that, “At a time where…the biggest crisis we’re facing is affordable places for people to live, it feels tone deaf for this to be the moment where we add a regulation eliminating a current housing situation for current residents.”
Speaking in defense of the provision, Planning Commission Member Barry Pinske told the board, “We’re trying to get people to live at a certain standard of living.” “I think if we have a number of campers in public view,” Pinske continued, “people that are coming through…if they get the impression of our town that’s not what we want, that could have an effect on business.”
“Telling people how they need to live [is] not our job,” Knapp responded. Board Members Lee Gustafson and Peter Hudkins concurred with Knapp that the provision was, at this point in time, not in line with the larger goal of increasing housing in the town, and gave the impression of being out of touch with the difficulty many residents already face in finding housing.
Another proposed amendment which generated significant debate would allow two principal buildings on a single lot. Gustafson expressed concern that, while the intention may be to allow individual residents to build extra housing on their own property which they could then rent out, there was nothing to stop large companies from buying lots to turn them into short-term rentals or for-profit housing. “My concern is that the law of unintended consequences may come to bear here,” Gustafson said. “We want affordable housing in town, but if it gets bought up by some corporation and turned into…something we don’t want, how do we deal with that?”
“If this was not in the bylaws,” inquired Knapp, “is the DRB and the zoning unable to accommodate [more than one primary structure on a lot]?” Ultimately, Bristow conceded, there is a “planned unit development” (PUD) process in place which allows for more than one structure on a lot. However, “The PUD process is a higher barrier for entry,” remarked Planning Commission Chair Hugh Quinn. “We were trying to make things easier,” he continued, “that doesn’t make things easier.”
The selectboard is unable to make major changes to the proposed bylaws without returning them to the planning commission. As such, the board instructed the commission to review the amendments previously discussed, as well as several others, and return to them with a revised version in the future.
The Chester Selectboard meets twice a month, on the first and third Wednesday. Their next meeting is scheduled for May 17 at 6:30 p.m.