Rebecca Fay Chalifoux

The Land Use Review Board meeting involved several procedural discussions and agenda amendments. Key topics included expanding the discussion on legislative changes beyond Act 181, and adding a segment regarding CCRPC questions on their application pre-application, with the possibility of an executive session related to Act 181 language. The board formally approved the agenda amendments. The consent agenda review included making revisions to the February 9th and February 10th meeting minutes, specifically regarding the description of one member's involvement in revising an annual report and clarifying location details (North Hyde Park instead of a generic 'Hyde Park') for the 1B status application in Loyal County. The board then discussed the Chittenden County issue concerning 11 questions from CCRPC regarding future land use mapping, and decided to invite CCRPC to the March 2nd agenda to present their questions. A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to discussing Tier Three rules (draft 3.3), specifically focusing on the challenge of applying Act 250 jurisdiction when a development straddles the Tier Three boundary, and questioning the wisdom of including headwaters as a critical resource if the road rule already addresses remote, steep slope areas.

The meeting served as a pre-application review for the draft regional plan for Addison County, which underwent a complete revision, adding new sections on forest blocks, habitat, flood resiliency, and equity. Key discussion points included the county's demographic trends, noting a significant increase in households versus population growth, and rising housing costs outpacing income increases. The presentation detailed the plan's organization, which includes summaries with policy statements and implementation priorities for each chapter. The process emphasized extensive collaboration with various committees, community organizations, and significant public outreach to engage priority populations, concluding with an analysis suggesting that Act 181 must benefit small and rural communities equitably. The board also reviewed the methodology for future land use areas, which integrated statewide categories while being heavily influenced by local input.

The meeting centered on the review of a draft plan pre-application. The process involved site visits in Stow, Hyde Park, and Morristown earlier in the day. Key discussion points included the unique geography, demographics, and infrastructure limitations of Lamoille County, such as high conservation land percentages, limited wastewater capacity, and lack of zoning in half of the communities. The presenters detailed how the proposed land use maps, particularly regarding Tier 1B designations, were built upon local municipal plans and aimed to address flood risks by identifying transition and infill areas for growth, especially along the Lamoille River using comprehensive hydraulic modeling. Discussion also covered the allocation of housing targets based strictly on population and the specific boundary refinement for Stowe's Tier 1B areas, noting that some planned growth areas were deferred for future consideration pending town plan updates.

The meeting commenced with introductions and confirmation that there were no agenda updates or non-agenda public comments. Key discussions centered on the Consent Agenda, specifically the approval of minutes from January 5th and January 12th, following proposed amendments related to budgeting language and the exclusion of attendees present only for an executive session. The board subsequently voted to appoint Brooke as the designated member to shepherd the pre-application review for the Loyal County Regional Planning Commission. Discussions followed regarding necessary GIS data (Tier 1B and flood hazard layer) required from the Commission for the application to be deemed complete. The board and guests also conferred extensively on the preferred timing for site visits and the public meeting relative to the comment deadline, generally favoring scheduling these activities early in February to allow adequate time for comment submission. Additionally, legislative updates were provided regarding testimony before the Senate Economic Committee on Act 250 and testimony before the House Agriculture Committee concerning the extension of Act 248A projects, which deal with telecommunication projects.

The meeting addressed several key operational and legislative matters. A baseline spending report responding to Environmental Justice (EJ) obligations, detailing the use of discretionary funds, was finalized for posting and submission. The Board discussed correspondence received concerning future agricultural lands, soil protection, and concerns raised by Pittsford regarding planned growth areas and rural conservation mapping. The Board resolved to schedule a future discussion for these correspondence items. A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to reviewing draft recommendations for Accessory On-Farm Businesses (AOFBs) as part of the larger Tier 2 report. Discussions focused on assessing the existing statute and rules following changes made by Act 181, specifically regarding the definition of 'principally produced' and the 50% sales/volume threshold, with a goal to address administrative burdens and potential rule changes to better support farms.