A neighbor is vowing to fight the Burlington Development Review Board’s preliminary approval of three triplexes at the end of Ethan Allen Parkway.
The board granted the OK Monday with the condition that the developer hire a third party to determine how much of the seven-acre parcel situated on a steep ravine is suitable for buildings.
Jon Anderson, the Burlington lawyer representing property owners Tim Alles and Bill Ellis, said they would comply with the condition.
Meanwhile, neighbor Maura Brennan said Thursday that she and other opponents who live near the New North End site will appeal to the Vermont Environmental Court. “There’s a bunch of neighbors concerned about this,” Brennan said.
The parcel, at 451 Ethan Allen Parkway, is not suitable for development, and what’s proposed is out of scale, she said. The land is important green space, Brennan added. “There’s lady slippers there, there’s pileated woodpeckers. For this neighborhood, it’s a forest.”
Fill would be brought in to build on the land, which sits at the end of the road, with Ethan Allen Park to the west and Vermont 127 to the east. A total of 9 units would be constructed, with one being designated as “affordable” under a city ordinance.
Anderson said the property owners, who live out of state and formerly were employed at IBM in Vermont, have worked hard to put together a good project that meets city requirements. “I think the issue is that if you comply with the ordinance you get your permits, if you don’t, you don’t get your permits,” Anderson said. This project, he said, complies.
He said the opposition essentially boils down to: “I don’t like development in my backyard.”
Once the DRB grants preliminary approval, the board generally grants final approval too, so long as any conditions are met. Opponents have 30 days to appeal the preliminary decision.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Funny how this development, like many others here in VT, are 9 houses (since Act 250’s threshold is 10 houses).
Real estate lawyer Jon Anderson has it exactly opposite. His clients are the NIMBY’s. They not only do not live next to this property but actually both live out-of-state! They have zero investment or interest in Burlington, the neighborhood, or community other than solely the dollar bills they hope to gain. I do not see them proposing this project adjacent to their current homes. The big losers will be the buyers of these units, who get row homes built on fill that may erode over time and cause foundation & even possible safety issues.
As JamesMason09 states, the 9-house Act 250 loophole is heavily abused. Not to mention the PUD law – Planned Unit Development – which gives developers more density for ostensibly setting up condo/homeowner association communities. . . Check with condo owners in VT & you will learn that some PUD developers underfund their homeowner associations and ignore the rules about homeowner representatives to the condo. board during the development period, etc. They either don’t understand the state-wide PUD law they take advantage of or purposely ignore important aspects of it as soon as they receive DRB approval for their project, given they know there is little follow-up or enforcement. Jon Anderson certainly is a highly capable real estate and environmental lawyer who is not insensitive to the needs of protecting the environment. I am a little surprised he has accepted these clients. . .