Williston Observer

By Greg Elias
Observer staff

The daunting task of revising hundreds of pages of zoning rules will be divided into more manageable pieces, the Williston Planning Commission decided last week.

At its Aug. 7 session, the commission elected to break the work into three parts and discussed which sections would come first, said Chairman David Yandell. Separate public hearings will be held on each group of revisions by both the commission and the Selectboard, which has the final say on the new rules.

The town passed a new Comprehensive Plan, which sets broad policy goals, early in 2006. But the zoning ordinances are still needed to provide legally enforceable rules that carry out the plan’s goals. So there is some urgency to finish the revision, which will make ordinances consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.

“This is a major change, a major update to the zoning ordinance that is long overdue,” Yandell said. “But we’re not rushing anything on this. We’re trying to get it right.”

The first round of revisions will likely include administrative procedures and growth management rules, Yandell said. Others getting priority will be ordinances already in effect on an interim basis or sections of the code where a revision is nearly complete.

The last round of revisions will involve ordinances that depend of the rest of the rules or are particularly complex, Yandell said.

The ordinances will collectively be called the unified development bylaw. When completed, the rules will run more than 200 pages and contain about 40 chapters, Town Planner Lee Nellis said earlier this month.

With much of the rewrite still in progress, it is difficult to determine exactly which rules will change. But among the proposed alternations are regulations governing signs and parking as well as permitting for new development and guidelines for home additions.

Specific dates for public hearings had not been finalized as of last week. Yandell said the commission will likely discuss the zoning ordinances at its next two meetings and hold a public hearing in mid-September.

[Read more...]

Board rejects zoning appeals

By Greg Elias
Observer staff

The Development Review Board last week rebuffed residents who wanted to keep their front-yard turnaround and operate a small business out of their historic district home.

Forrest and Erika White appealed a ruling that accused them and their neighbors of violating an ordinance that forbids alterations to the “greenbelt,” the strip between U.S. 2 and homes in the historic district.

“It doesn’t seem quite fair,” said Erika White, noting that the existing turnaround, in place for more than a decade, had only been altered slightly yet still triggered the town’s enforcement action.

The board rejected the Whites’ appeal and also refused to override a decision by zoning administrator D.K. Johnston to deny a permit for a landscaping business the couple runs from their home at 7582 Williston Rd.

The board heard nearly an hour of testimony on the pair of appeals during its July 24 session, according to a recording of the meeting. Both Forrest and Erika White spoke, as did Johnston. A few neighboring residents and one nearby businessman also testified in support of the Whites.

On the turnaround issue, the Whites noted that under legal precedent zoning violations cannot be enforced after 15 years have passed. The turnaround was never permitted, but apparently existed without drawing the town’s attention since 1990, long before the Whites bought the home.

But Johnston argued that the alternations to the turnaround – he has said it is actually big enough to be called a parking lot – negated that de facto statute of limitations.
The Whites argued that the original turnaround was only enlarged slightly – 14 inches in one direction and 18 inches in the other – and so did not amount to a significant change and should keep its exempt status.

On the business issue, Johnston told the board he refused to issue a home occupation permit because it was not the “typical” type of business that would qualify for it.

The business is called Plant & Stone Landscaping. Forrest White told the board that he does stone masonry, which he said in fact is a type of craft that would qualify as a home occupation business under the ordinance.

Johnston warned that that overturning his ruling would set a bad precedent. He said there are other businesses that are in more blatant violation of the ordinance. He said three cases in Williston are “headed to court.”

Johnston suggested the Whites apply for a home business permit. That type of permit allows more intense use in residential areas. But it also involves a more stringent review process.

To qualify, the Whites would have to comply with conditions set by the board, which could include constructing a parking area behind their home, a costly proposition.

The board’s rationale for denying the appeals remains opaque. As it has in recent years, it cleared the room and met behind closed doors before making a decision.

The rulings regarding the Whites’ property came a month after the board denied a similar appeal regarding the turnaround – Johnston has said it is actually a parking lot – by their next-door neighbors, Scott and Miranda Roth.

The couples were ordered to restore a grass strip between their driveways and remove the turnaround within seven days or face $100-a-day fines.

The Whites’ said they have yet to decide whether to appeal the Development Review Board’s decision. They could demand a hearing by the state Environmental Court.

The couple seemed torn on what to do next. Forrest White said operating a business out of his home allows him to spend more time with his wife and their young child. But he said complying with elaborate permit conditions could cost him a bundle.

“Now I feel backed into a corner,” he said. “I could be forced to do this or move on.”

[Read more...]

Erosion created canyon along Sucker Brook

By Greg Elias
Observer staff

The town of Williston has restored a stream whose banks eroded so dramatically that it was called “ Vermont’s Grand Canyon.”

The long-running effort along Sucker Brook, which meanders through the southern third of Williston, was finished earlier this month. All that remains is to plant vegetation to stabilize the project.

The work will keep Sucker Brook a clean and smooth-flowing stream, preventing pollution and fostering aquatic life, said Carrie Deegan, the town’s environmental planner. The hope is that the restoration project will also keep the stream from becoming clogged in the future.

“This work will prevent major input of sediment and pollutants,” she said.

The project fixed a problem that began 23 years ago. In 1984, a huge rainstorm caused Sucker Brook to jump its banks and flow into an abandoned gravel pit. The pit filled and its walls eventually collapsed.

That set off a cycle of erosion, which over the years scoured out a canyon along a roughly 800-foot-long stretch of the stream that parallels Vermont 2A. The canyon – as much as 70 feet wide and 50 feet deep – came to be referred to as Vermont’s Grand Canyon, Deegan said.

Though visually remarkable, such erosion has an ill affect on the stream’s aquatic life as well as the region’s ecosystem. An estimated 300,000 tons of sediment have moved downstream over the past two decades.

Sediment clouds streams and rivers, covering plants that feed fish and smaller invertebrates, said Colleen Hickey, education and outreach coordinator for the Lake Champlain Basin Program. Clinging to the sediment are pollutants such as phosphorus, which is a major cause of algae growth.

The water from Sucker Brook, like other area streams, ends up in Lake Champlain. So even though it is not a major waterway, keeping the stream and others like it sediment-free benefits everyone in the region, Hickey said.

“The lake is a drinking water source for nearly 200,000 people who live in the Lake Champlain basin,” she said. “We need to reduce pollution wherever we can.”

Sucker Brook originates near the Williston-Hinesburg border, not far from Lake Iroquois. It runs along Route 2A before emptying into Muddy Brook, which in turns flows into the Winooski River and eventually the lake.

YEAR OF WORK

The effort to restore Sucker Brook dates back more than a decade. For years, the town worked to secure grants, negotiate with landowners and plan the project.

The town eventually obtained about a dozen grants totaling nearly a half-million dollars. They came from several sources, including the Chittenden Solid Waste District, the Lake Champlain Basin Program, the state Department of Environmental Conservation and the federal government.

The grants paid for virtually all the restoration work, Deegan said, noting that only $22,000 in Williston tax dollars were spent.

About five years ago, junk cars were removed from the stream area and measures were taken to limit further erosion. The following year, stone weirs – small dams – were placed in the steam.

The town then hired the Williston-based engineering firm Dubois & King to design a project that would permanently stabilize the stream banks and prevent erosion. The work was divided into two phases, with the upstream half completed in 2005, Deegan said.

The effort suffered a setback in February 2006 when a storm damaged part of the previously completed work. The damage was repaired last summer, and this summer the project’s final phase was finished.

The flood- and erosion-control measures include a stone-lined step pool and a channel. Stream banks were graded to create a floodplain. Several weirs slow the downhill flow of water.

Though the stream’s problems started with a natural event, Deegan said development in Williston likely accelerated the subsequent erosion.

Over the past few decades the increasing amount of paved surface in town has led to more stormwater runoff. After it rains or snows, water rapidly rushes into streams and rivers, quickly swelling them and creating a condition where banks can collapse.

Volunteers gathered this spring to plant alders and willows designed to stabilize Sucker Brook’s new floodplain and attract wildlife. Further plantings are planned for next spring, providing one last human intervention for the stream.

Vegetation would have eventually grown by itself, “but it would have taken a really long time,” Deegan said. “We’re going to help it along.”

[Read more...]

Giant job may be divided into pieces

By Greg Elias
Observer staff

A slow-moving rewrite of the town’s zoning rules may gather momentum next week when the Planning Commission considers whether to approve the new code piecemeal.

It’s been 1-1/2 years since an updated Comprehensive Plan was approved. But the town is still working with out-of-date zoning and subdivision regulations that don’t always mesh with the plan’s broad goals.

Town Planner Lee Nellis said he and the rest of Williston’s planning staff has juggled the update of hundreds of pages of rules while dealing with a steady stream of proposals for new development. The rewrite is now about two-thirds complete.

Rather than waiting for it to be finished, he will ask the Planning Commission on Tuesday to consider approving the code in pieces. Nellis said the work could be divided into two or three chunks, with each run separately through an approval process that includes public hearings and votes by the Planning Commission and the Selectboard.

That method would move the huge job forward, giving attention to problem areas like the sign ordinance while allowing the public to consider the new rules in digestible portions.

“It probably makes it easier for the public to comment on it in the sense that it is a very bulky document,” he said. “People will not have to absorb a huge quantity of information all at once.”

The rewritten rules will be called unified development bylaws. They will govern things as large as a new subdivision and as small as home addition.

The Comprehensive Plan outlines general policy goals for the town. The bylaws codify those guidelines with legally enforceable rules.

With some of the code yet to be written and other parts still in draft form, it is unclear exactly what will change. Nellis said most of the current rules will stay the same, albeit organized in a different format. But some changes are beginning to come into focus.

Perhaps the biggest change concerns the permitting process. Depending on the project, the town uses one of seven types of reviews. The new regulations narrow that down to two review processes, Nellis said.

The sign ordinance, an ongoing enforcement problem, will also be altered, Nellis said. The new rules will allow the town to issue tickets for violations rather than the current cumbersome process, which requires notices of violation and hearings before the Development Review Board.

Of interest to homeowners will be consolidated rules governing home additions, swimming pools and sheds. Those rules are currently scattered throughout the zoning code.

The new bylaws will move “95 percent of everything homeowners need to know about changes to their property” to one chapter, Nellis said.

The overriding concern is to make the rules simpler and easier to understand and enforce, Nellis said.

“The old code is very difficult to administer because there are lots of internal contradictions and vague and unclear language,” he said. “The rewritten code solves all those problems.”

Nellis and other planning staffers have been working on the new bylaws since the town adopted the Comprehensive Plan in February 2006. Nellis said he and his staff’s work on the rewrite has been interrupted numerous times.
He ticked off several time-consuming projects, including the town’s application for state growth center status, review of the 356-unit Finney Crossing subdivision and a controversial rezoning case in the Hillside East business park.

Williston could have hired a consultant to do the rewrite. But Nellis said only large out-of-state firms would have had the expertise required to reorganize the code into unified bylaws. He estimated the work would have cost in the “low six figures.”

Town Manager Rick McGuire said he and other town staffers did discuss hiring a consultant. But they concluded that it would be more cost efficient – albeit slower – to instead use the expertise of Nellis and other planning staff members.

The staff “thought they could handle it,” McGuire said. Besides, he added, Williston’s planners would still have to be involved in the project even if a consultant was used.

Nellis said he hopes to complete the work and have the new land-use rules approved by the beginning of next year.

The Planning Commission is scheduled to consider how to proceed with the zoning rewrite at its Aug. 7 session. The meeting starts at 7: 15 p.m.

[Read more...]

By Kim Howard
Observer staff

Local school administrators are seeing paychecks roughly 3.5 percent higher in the new fiscal year that began July 1.

Virtually all Chittenden South Supervisory Union administrators received the same increase, according to Cindy Koenemann-Warren, CSSU human resources director.

CSSU includes Champlain Valley Union High School and schools in Charlotte, Hinesburg, Shelburne and Williston.

The only exceptions to the average, according to Koenemann-Warren, were for a couple of administrators who shifted the number of days they’re expected to work this year. Except in rare circumstances, school administrators work year round, including through the summer.

Salary increases for CSSU teachers have yet to be determined; contract negotiations are still underway for the current fiscal year.

Local administrator salaries appear to be in the range of last year’s New England averages, according to data from Educational Research Service provided by the American Association of School Administrators. The CSSU superintendent will be earning $133,238 this year; for the 2006-07 year the New England average salary for superintendents was $139,664.

New England principal salaries last fiscal year were just over $90,000 for elementary schools, just below $95,000 for middle schools, and nearly $111,000 for high schools. Williston’s elementary and middle school principal salaries for the new fiscal year are in the low-to-mid $90,000 range; the CVU High School principal earns just under $97,000.

“The people in these leadership positions have a tremendous amount they’re responsible for,” said Jeff Francis, executive director of the Vermont Superintendents Association. “It’s fair to say these are high stress jobs. In many instances the operations of a school system, with the number of employees and the size of the budget, they parallel large businesses.”

CSSU, for instance, serves 4,273 students and employs 1,184, including substitute teachers. CVU High School alone is home to one third of the union’s students and 23 percent of its employees.

The nature of school leadership jobs has changed, too, Francis said.

“Everything in education is getting more complicated,” he said. “There’s more regulation. There are more individual consumer demands….”

CSSU Superintendent Elaine Pinckney agrees.

In addition to teaching math or science or a host of other academic disciplines and in addition to teaching students to be good citizens, Pinckney said, “we’re making sure they’re safe when they go home, making sure they have food in their bellies, making sure they get their immunizations. … It makes the job a whole lot more complex.

Administrators in the union’s top positions typically work 60 hours each week, Pinckney said. Compared with comparable positions in the business world dealing with large numbers of employees and customers, Pinckney said she does not believe school administrator salaries are exorbitant.

“We know there’s not a never-ending supply of money out there,” Pinckney said. “At the same time we want to make sure we compensate our administrators well because we want to keep them.”

Francis acknowledges the employment market for top school administrator positions is not always in Vermont’s favor, and that the pools of candidates interested in superintendent positions in Vermont are diminishing.

“If they are competitive (superintendent) candidates, they can go in the employment market in other places and do better economically at least in terms of salary concerns,” Francis said.

Data he quoted from 2005-2006 indicated that the average superintendent salary in Connecticut that year was $145,850; the average salary in Massachusetts was $124,000; both New Hampshire and Vermont trailed behind at $98,000 and $94,700 respectively. (The current Vermont average, Francis said, is $96,703; Chittenden County positions tend to command salaries considerably higher than more rural areas.)

A Vermont average for principal salaries is not readily available. Robert Stevens, executive director of the Vermont Principals Association, said such an average would be meaningless given the wide range of school types in Vermont. Some schools have assistant principals that to share workloads, some schools do not, he said; where one school might have 58 students, others have hundreds or over a thousand. Vermont middle schools alone, he added, come in 20 different configurations.

Stevens could not provide Chittenden County principal salary averages prior to his departure last week for out-of-state travel.

[Read more...]