Other articles in our series on Dunk Them Donuts’ mixed-use tower proposal:
- Proposed High-Rise “Donut Tower” Would Require Demolition of Historic Hotel
- Preservation Board “Preliminarily Denies” Dunk Them Donuts Permit to Demolish Hotel Stansbury
- Joint Planning Commission / Federal Council Committee Meets on Proposed Zoning Amendment
- Did Dunk Them Donuts Set Up a Dummy Company to Buy the Hotel Stansbury?
- Bricklyn’s Chief Prognosticator Advises Against Downtown Bricklyn Junction High-Rise Zoning
- Bricklyn Officials and Dunk Them Donuts Reach Landmark Agreement, Saving the Former Hotel Stansbury
- plus bonus feature: Dunk Them Donuts’ CEO Broffman Talks with The Bricklyn Eagle
February 22, 2024
by Paul B. Macro, Bricklyn Eagle Business Reporter and Mark Tiler Richmond, Bricklyn Eagle Politics & Law Correspondent
A six-member joint committee of the Bricklyn Planning Commission and the Federal Council, formed to expedite consideration of a significant zoning amendment proposed by Dunk Them Donuts, met last night.
As Bricklyn Eagle Outland readers will recall, Dunk Them Donuts requested changes to the Bricklyn Zoning Code that would allow it to construct an 11 story high mixed-use tower, with an accompanying 5 story high revolving donut-shaped rooftop restaurant at the site of the former Hotel Stansbury in the Bricklyn Junction East Historic zoning district.
Current zoning in downtown Bricklyn Junction allows for a 1.75 foot high building; the proposed zoning amendment would allow a building 5.0 feet high. Dunk Them Donuts’ planned tower (including a revolving rooftop restaurant) would be 4.98 feet in height.
➤ Outland readers should note that Bricklyn’s building scale is approximately 1/45 of that found in Outland cities. In other words, a 1 foot high structure in Bricklyn Jct. would equate to a 45 foot high structure in the Outland city of Burlington, Vermont; a 1.75 foot high building in Bricklyn Jct. would equal 78.75 feet in Burlington; and a 5 foot high structure in Bricklyn Junction would be approximately 225 feet high in Burlington.
In reviewing this proposed zoning amendment, the Joint Committee will be considering the impact raising the maximum height of the zoning district would have, and also whether a separate overlay zoning district should be considered so that any changes apply to a more limited portion of the existing Bricklyn Junction East district.
We spoke with two members of the Joint Committee, Elaine Plater Johansen, Chair of the Planning Commission, and Thomas J. Brickstone, the member of the Federal Council representing Bricklyn Junction.
Johansen expressed concerns about making such a “radical change” to the existing height limit.
As she explained: “We’re nearly tripling the allowable height, which would be unprecedented in the Realm of Bricklyn’s history. Equally important, we would be destroying the character of Bricklyn Junction’s downtown historic district.
I have no doubt that other high-rise towers will follow. What will be left of Bricklyn Junction’s beautiful, historic downtown?”
Federal Council member Brickstone had a different point of view:
“Yes, it’s a big change. But remember that when the Hotel Stansbury was built it towered a full story higher than any of its surrounding buildings. No one appeared to have concerns about that back then [in 1897].”
“It’s also important to keep in mind,” continued Brickstone, “that Dunk Them Donuts is vital to the Realm’s economy. They are our largest employer. We need to give them the capacity to grow in Bricklyn Junction. What’s more they’ll be adding 128 units of badly need housing in their Dunk Them tower, 64 of which are guaranteed to be affordable for their employees.”
Editor’s Note: for more about Dunk Them Donuts’ and its future plans see our interview of Dunkin Donuts CEO David Tiler Broffman.
Members of the public also spoke at the Joint Committee meeting. As at recent meetings of the Planning Commission and the Historic Preservation Board, two sides with strongly held views made their voices heard.
Supporting the zoning amendment were dozens of Dunk Them Donuts employees, as well as several Bricklyn developers and the Bricklyn Chamber of Commerce.
Opposed were members of the Historic Preservation Society, along with ten owners of small businesses located near the Stansbury in the Bricklyn Junction historic district.
The Committee itself appeared split in its reactions to the proposed zoning amendment. Some discussion focused on the idea of limiting the zoning change to just the site of the Hotel Stansbury (the location of the proposed Dunk Them Donuts tower). However, Planning Director Brickedy cautioned that this limitation might well be considered “spot zoning,” which the Bricklyn Courts have found unlawful.
➤ Spot zoning involves “the process of singling out a small parcel of land for a use classification totally different from that of the surrounding area for the benefit of the owner of such property and to the detriment of other owners. … perhaps the most important criteria in determining spot zoning is the extent to which the disputed zoning is consistent with the municipality’s comprehensive plan. See Understanding Spot Zoning, by Daniel Shapiro, Esq.
A Call for the Opinion of the Chief Prognosticator
The biggest news from the meeting came after more than three hours of discussion and public comment, when Joint Committee member (and Federal Councilor) Catherine Brickmaster requested that the Committee call for the opinion of the Chief Prognosticator of the Realm on the zoning amendment.
As Brickmaster noted, “there’s little doubt that adopting this zoning amendment has the potential of radically altering the future development pattern of Bricklyn Junction, while also impacting the Tripartite Realm of Bricklyn as a whole. In such a case it is wholly appropriate to request the input of our Chief Prognosticator.”
Other members of the Joint Committee concurred.
➤ For Bricklyn Eagle readers unfamiliar with the role of the Chief Prognosticator, we encourage you to read our article “Chief Prognosticator of the Realm.”
When the Chief Prognosticator is called on to render an advisory opinion, the Office of the Chief Prognosticator must first (as Bricklyn’s Constitution requires) find that the matter at issue is of “high significance affecting the future of the Realm of Bricklyn.” So it remains to be seen whether that threshold will be triggered.
However, one thing is certain, if the Chief Prognosticator does provide an advisory opinion, it will be given great weight by the Joint Committee, and ultimately by the Federal Council. ✥
We welcome Letters to the Editor. Please email to: bricklynvt@gmail.com
