This story, by Report for America corps member Carly Berlin, was produced through a partnership between VTDigger and Vermont Public.
A new report recommends sweeping changes to Act 250 that, its authors say, could both boost housing development and safeguard Vermont’s most sensitive habitats.
The highly anticipated document, requested by lawmakers, will likely help set the terms for debate over the state’s 53-year-old land-use law heading into the 2024 legislative session.
A17-person committee that included planners, engineers, attorneys and housing developers – convened by the Natural Resources Board and led by an independent facilitation team – spent months crafting the 36-page document, which was released Thursday.
The proposal calls for exempting areas of the state that already have strong local zoning regulations from Act 250 review, a move stakeholders hope will encourage denser housing development in existing downtowns and villages. The study also calls for strengthening Act 250’s reach to greater protect highly sensitive natural resource areas.
Lawmakers have commissioned multiple studies on the land-use law over the years. But committee members who drafted this latest report said it’s notable that those seeking stronger environmental protections, and others pushing for housing and economic development – oftentimes at loggerheads over the law – have come to some consensus over how to modernize it.
“It’s pretty monumental to say that we have broad agreement that there are designated growth areas where development will be exempt from Act 250,” said member Kathy Beyer, senior vice president of the nonprofit affordable housing developer Evernorth.
More from Brave Little State: Vermont is changing. Should Act 250 change with it?
Rep. Seth Bongartz, D-Manchester, said he’s already developing a bill based in part on the framework outlined in the study.
After hopes for more substantive Act 250 changes got dashed earlier this year, Bongartz said he thinks there’s momentum to take on the law heading into the new year.
“I think what we’re doing here is really modernizing Act 250, and bringing it into the 21st century,” he said.
Gov. Phil Scott “has not had the opportunity to review the full report yet,” his spokesperson, Jason Maulucci, said Friday. But, Maulucci continued, “The Governor has proposed common sense updates to Act 250 for years, and he hopes this year the Legislature will finally recognize the urgency of our housing crisis and act accordingly."
Currently, Act 250 review is triggered when a proposed development contains certain key characteristics: things like a certain number of housing units, or the size of a commercial or industrial project. Some critics argue that the limits placed on housing units, and the sometimes circuitous process of securing a permit, stymie development and contribute to Vermont’s acute housing shortage.
The framework outlined in the report recommends shifting to geographic-based triggers.
The report proposes dividing Vermont into three tiers. Tier 1 would include areas “with the capacity for growth,” where the state wants to encourage development: places with water and sewer infrastructure and robust local zoning. There, all residential, commercial, and industrial development would be exempt from Act 250.
About 23 municipalities could qualify for these exemptions, and would need to go through a rigorous application process to secure them, according to the report. Others with slightly less local capacity might fall into a “Tier 1B” category, where many existing rules would still apply, but regulations around housing development would be loosened “to promote density.”
Tier 2 would likely constitute “the majority of the state,” said Sabina Haskell, chair of the Natural Resources Board, which administers Act 250. There, rules would remain more or less “status quo,” she said. But a new “road rule” could mean Act 250 would kick in if a development results in 2,000 or more feet of new roads and driveways, a move aimed at stopping forest fragmentation, Haskell said.
Tier 3 would constitute “ecologically important natural resource areas” where Act 250 jurisdiction would become automatic.
Brian Shupe, executive director of the Vermont Natural Resources Council, said the added protection “acknowledges that there are certain areas that really, even minimal development can have a profound impact on natural resources.” To him, the tiered framework strikes “the right balance” between encouraging compact growth and protecting “rural natural areas, forestland and farmland.”
Just where and how to draw the boundaries of these three tiers remains an open question.
“It can’t take so long that we’re still fighting over mapping in 15 years and haven’t made any progress,” said Megan Sullivan, vice president of government affairs for the Vermont Chamber of Commerce, who served on the report committee.
Members of the report committee emphasized that the recommendations laid out in the report are a compromise, and should be considered as a whole package, not an a la carte menu.
“We can move forward with one piece if we know that those other pieces are also going to happen,” said Sullivan.
Along with the three-tier model, the study suggests changing other aspects of how Act 250 works. It proposes shifting the existing citizen-based Natural Resources Board to a professional board, where members have relevant experience in engineering, law, or land use planning.
Haskell likened the new structure to be more akin to the Public Utility Commission, and said the change could address common complaints about the unpredictable and inconsistent administration of Act 250.
A virtual public meeting for feedback on the report will be held on Thursday, Dec. 14, at 5:30 p.m.
Have questions, comments or tips? Send us a message.
