By Tom Ayres , Senior Staff Writer
The future of the proposed siting of The Farmer and the Bell eatery in a new building now under construction at 67 Pleasant Street in the East End of Woodstock Village is in the hands of the Woodstock Village Development Review Board (VDRB), which recessed a public hearing on change-of-use and conditional-use permits for the project without a decision on Wednesday, May 8.
Deliberations on the permit requests submitted by developer Eva Douzinas on behalf of her prospective tenants, vaunted donut makers April and Ben Pauly, could last as long as 45 days before Woodstock Planning and Zoning Director Steven Bauer is authorized to issue or deny the sought-after permits. The Paulys’ proposal to open a breakfast and lunch café at the one-time location of a former service station that was demolished in the fall of 2022 has drawn solid support from town officials, several of whom spoke at the May 8 hearing.
April and Ben Pauly hope to open the Farmer and the Bell Cafe at 67 Pleasant Street in the East End of Woodstock Village. Artist’s Rendering Provided.
The proposed restaurant has, however, drawn strong opposition from R.L. Vallee, Inc., the owner of the Maplefields chain, which operates 44 gas stations and convenience stores across Vermont, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire, including the store located directly across the street from the proposed The Farmer and the Bell operation. Through company attorney Alexander LaRosa, Maplefields has voiced its opposition to the planned restaurant on two fronts, one not the purview of the VDRB and Woodstock planning authorities and the other the issues under discussion in the town permitting process.
In a letter to Douzinas and the Paulys dated May 7, attorney LaRosa raised a “serious concern” about the proposed development at 67 Pleasant Street, contending that the permit application “appears to violate a covenant recorded in the land records limiting the use of this property.” The R.L. Vallee attorney holds that the Maplefields organization conveyed the Pleasant Street lot to Maitland Burke, the former gas station and repair shop operator, with a deed containing a covenant stating that as long as Vallee operates its Woodstock facility across the street, the 67 Pleasant Street site cannot be used for a “convenience store.”
Citing the permit application that Douzinas and the Paulys filed with the VDRB — the subject of the May 8 VDRB hearing — LaRosa argued that while the application uses the term “restaurant…the primary product will be the sale of take-away, to-go items, and ready-made food. It is unclear exactly what this means or entails but as phrased strongly suggests that this is a convenience store use. That is self-service coffee bars, self-service coolers, shelving, walk-in coolers, and walk-up point-of-sale registers. Thus your application appears to be nothing more than a repackaged convenience store … Vallee believes that therefore you are intending to build and operate a ‘convenience store’ in violation of the Vallee Covenant.” The LaRosa letter concludes that the convenience store chain’s owner “places you on notice that the continued development of such convenience store use will violate [the] covenant and that Vallee demands such cease. Should you continue to pursue a permit for a convenience store use, Vallee will commence civil action to enforce the covenant.”
The Paulys reacted to the covenant kerfuffle, which is subject to a possible civil action and is not under the purview of the VDRB, in a follow-up discussion with the Standard last weekend, contending that the Vallee covenant expressly allows for the operation of a restaurant at the 67 Pleasant Street location. The Paulys’ proposal for The Farmer and the Bell calls for interior seating of 68 seats — 16 downstairs and 52 upstairs — with the possibility of adding an additional 28 seats outside seasonally. The couple argues that their proposed operation is by no means a “convenience store” and that Vallee’s attempt to enforce the deed covenant is simply a matter of “misunderstanding.”
“When we got that letter, you could have knocked us over with a feather,” April Pauly, the principal donut, pastry maker, and chef for The Farmer and the Bell, said Sunday. “We were really surprised. We were coming at this from the perspective of adding a whole lot of energy to the East End and Eva’s beautiful building. And we actually thought it would lead to a great relationship with Maplefields. Because from our past experience with a pop-up shop, we had a lot of people coming to us from out of town — and inevitably those people might need gas from Maplefields,” she added. Both April and Ben Pauly said they have had no further communication with attorney LaRosa or R.L. Vallee, Inc. since the May 7 letter.
On the local permitting front, LaRosa, again representing R.J. Vallee, Inc., sent a five-page letter to the VDRB that was admitted into testimony at the May 8 hearing before the five-member quasi-judicial body. While acknowledging that the deed covenant issue is of no concern to the VDRB, LaRosa did argue that the Maplefields operator, as an abutting property owner, has serious concerns about traffic, parking, and public safety issues at the busy corner where Pleasant Street veers almost 90 degrees left to continue as State Route 12 toward Quechee. As a consequence of these concerns — and especially because the parking waiver sought by Douzinas and the Paulys would allow for only 19 spaces on the 67 Pleasant Street site, roughly 30 percent of the parking required by zoning regulations — the Vallee organization called for the denial of permits for the project.
The Vallee letter further called into question the restaurant’s proposed use of public spaces and the park-and-ride facilities at East End Park for overflow parking for The Farmer and the Bell. “This park-and-ride is for commuters — hence the name, park and then ride (emphasis included). It is not for take-out restaurant users and diners,” LaRosa stated. “Allowing a park-and-ride to serve as private parking defeats the purposes of the park-and-ride. Simply, it is not the same as a municipal lot.”
The question of the parking variance, the change-of-use request from a retail operation to a restaurant at the Pleasant Street site, and the possibility of mandating a traffic study to assess Maplefields’ concerns about congestion, pedestrian, and vehicular safety at the busy locale are all a part of the VDRB’s ongoing deliberations about The Farmer and the Bell permit requests. All this said, Woodstock public officials present at the May 8 VDRB hearing all expressed strong support for the Douzinas/Pauly restaurant plans.
“This is such a gorgeous welcome to the Village,” commented Woodstock Town Selectboard member Keri Cole, who also serves on the VDRB. “It’s completely in line with our Town Plan and the goals we have for the East End. I am grateful to Eva, Ben, and April for working so hard on something that will really benefit all of us.”
Cole’s fellow Town Selectboard member, Laura Powell, also spoke on behalf of The Farmer and the Bell. “I live in the Village and I want to say I fully support this application. I’ve been a patron of April’s and Ben’s donut business since they were [a pop-up] at Angkor Wat. It’s no secret that there is a shortage of eateries and restaurants in Woodstock — and this is such a perfect match, not only because it is a business born in Woodstock, but also because it will serve as an anchor for the eastern part of the Village, for which our town has yearned for development for a very long time. Residents like me are really excited to walk to this location — it’s close to my kids’ favorite park, which is East End. I just want to say that I think we should be doing anything we reasonably can to encourage local businesses to come here and stay here.
“I will add that I would really love to see the parking requirement waived,” Powell continued. “I served on the Planning Commission for a long time and I can tell you that the trends in the United States are for communities to minimize and eliminate parking requirements not just for residences, but also for businesses, to prioritize pedestrians, reduce carbon emissions, and lower the development costs for projects like this.”
Seton McIlroy, the chair of the Woodstock Village Trustees, followed up on the comments by Cole and Powell. “I appreciate all the time you guys are taking with this,” McIlroy told the VDRB. “I just want to make sure that everybody saw that the Trustees have submitted a letter to the board for review, specifically about the parking. The East End Park parking lot is a multi-use lot. It is meant to be used for all different reasons. We want people to park there if they want to go shopping, eating, hiking, and running. There are lots of folks that go there with their dogs or their kids to go for a run or walk — and a lot of times, after they do these things, they like to finish with food and coffee. They want to grab a donut and coffee and sit down and enjoy the park.
“One of the things we are looking at as Trustees is how to bring people to other parts of the Village, not just the center,” McIlroy continued. “I think anything we can do to bring visitors and residents to the East End is going to benefit everybody — so that parking is something that was meant to be a place for visitors and residents to use for multiple purposes.
“As a private citizen, I’m just thrilled to have another option [for dining] — and to have it be locally done by people who live here and whose families are part of our community,” McIlroy said. “And I think it’s really important that we support small businesses, especially these ground-up businesses that are being brought into town. This is how Woodstock thrives and survives,” she concluded.