Board supports changing threshold for Act 250 review

State troopers check in, board green-lights vehicle purchases

Nov. 20, 2021  |  By Lisa Scagliotti 

The Waterbury Select Board decided on Monday to change the process for how small-scale commercial development projects are reviewed and permitted. 

With a 3-1 vote, the board decided to repeal the town ordinance that calls for Act 250 review of projects on one or more acres and to change the threshold to 10 acres for the state land-use review to apply. 

Board Vice Chair Chris Viens cast the single no vote. Members Mike Bard, Dani Kehlmann and Katie Martin voted in favor; board Chair Mark Frier was absent. 

The repeal takes two months to go into effect and will be posted as a public notice allowing a 45-day period during which a petition could be filed to request the matter be put to a townwide vote. If no petition is filed, the new provision would go into effect in 60 days, explained Planning and Zoning Director Steve Lotspeich. 

The board took this action after hearing a request from the Children’s Literacy Foundation, known as CLiF. The nonprofit organization has been run out of the Loomis Hill home of its founder and director Duncan McDougall for 24 years and now is looking to build a 3,300-square-foot one-story office on Route 100 in Waterbury Center. 

CLiF has applied to the Development Review Board for site plan and conditional use review for its project proposed for 1.4 acres at 3579 Waterbury-Stowe Road. The property is owned by Grace Investment Properties. 

Under the town’s current regulations, the project would be subject to review under the state land-use law, Act 250, because it will affect over an acre of land. McDougall asked for town officials to consider changing that ordinance to instead allow local review to be sufficient for commercial projects up to 10 acres. 

Lotspeich explained that in Vermont, communities can decide which threshold to use and that the 10-acre threshold is common where local subdivision regulations are in place. If local officials are comfortable having local zoning regulations be the main standards to apply to smaller-scale commercial projects, they can establish an ordinance triggering state review under Act 250 for larger projects, starting at 10 acres. 

McDougall noted that the state review adds extra time and cost into the process for applicants which could be significant for small businesses. “It’s going to be financially challenging for us to go through Act 250,” he said in raising the issue during an August select board meeting.

Prior to the board voting in favor of the change, the board discussion focused on whether current zoning measures the Development Review Board relies on are adequate to assess impacts of development proposals without the additional Act 250 review. Several speakers including resident Kathryn Grace and Conservation Commission member Billy Vigdor suggested the board hold off on the change saying local regulations were insufficient to rely on.

“I think the [CLiF] project is a good project,” Grace said. “I don’t think they will have a problem getting the [Act 250] permit.”

She expressed concern for other future projects that may present concerns that the DRB process is not equipped to address. Vigdor noted that the Conservation Commission is involved in the ongoing process to update zoning regulations to strengthen local aspects of environmental review. 

Lotspeich noted that Act 250 is designed as an environmental protection law and that “Act 250 is more robust” than local regulations. McDougall agreed, but suggested that the question is whether that level of review is essential for projects on less than 10 acres such as the CLiF proposal.. 

The Planning Commission, which is working on updating town zoning regulations, did not make a recommendation to the select board regarding the ordinance change. Commission members have “a wide range of views” on the matter, Lotspeich told the board. 

Planning Commission member Steven Karcher attended the Nov. 1 Select Board meeting and said the commission was not prepared to weigh in with a recommendation because it has not had the time “to dive into this to understand all the implications.” 

He confirmed that commissioners so far were divided on the question. “Some desire to use Act 250 to enhance the ability of Waterbury to make sure things have gone through appropriate levels of review,” he said. Others, he continued, including himself, favor shifting to the 10-acre threshold. He noted there are few commercial parcels of the size that would fall into this category. “And we have a pretty effective DRB,” Karcher said. 

State troopers pay a visit

Screenhshot.

The Act 250 discussion followed a visit with the board from Lt. David White of the Vermont State Police and troopers from the Middlesex barracks who are assigned to cover Waterbury.

The town is now in its second three-year with the state to contract for police services after it disbanded the village police department. The contract provides two full-time troopers to Waterbury with coverage provided by officers with the Middlesex barracks for the remaining hours of the week. 

White said state police have handled just over 1,000 calls for service in Waterbury in the past year resulting in 119 arrests. Of those, he said approximately half were traffic stops, half of those resulting in citations and the rest warnings. 

Trooper Ryan Riegler is the dayshift trooper currently assigned to the town, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday. Trooper Tyler Rancourt works nights, 5 p.m. to 2 a.m. Tuesday through Saturday. Both said they aim to be visible when on duty by traveling roads throughout the town and spending time parked on Main Street and other points near entrances to Waterbury to observe traffic. 

Preparing for property transfers

The board voted unanimously to have the same law firm represent the town as is representing the Edward Farrar Utility District in a property transaction involving both the municipal government and the utility district. 

The district which runs the water and wastewater departments  inherited some property owned by the former village government but which has no role in the utility operations today. 

EFUD trustees and the select board have agreed to transfer the properties into town ownership. The properties are: a small parcel where the “Welcome to Waterbury” sign sits along North Main Street near the roundabout; the public parking lot on Elm Street; Rusty Parker Memorial Park; the former town dump property on River Road that now contains the Ice Center, dog park, recreational trail access, and town public works materials storage sites are located.

Lawyer Joe McLean from the law firm Stitzel, Page and Fletcher is working on this transaction for the utility district. Town Manager Bill Shepeluk recommended McLean also handle the town’s end of the process. 

Vehicle purchases 

Delays in delivery for a new loader prompted the board to decide to switch two capital equipment purchases planned for 2021 and 2022. Shepeluk said a new loader the town expected to purchase this year for $116,000 has been delayed multiple times and will not be available until January at the earliest, putting that purchase in next year’s budget.

Meanwhile the town planned to purchase an excavator next year and one is available for purchase now for just under $88,000. The swap will mean a lower expense this year and the loader purchase can be built into next year’s budget, Shepeluk said.

The board agreed to make the switch. 

Recreation Director Nick Nadeau presented the board with another vehicle purchase decision Monday - a second van for recreation programs. The town this year purchased a used 15-passenger van used for youth recreation and Nadeau said $10,000 in grant funding available through the end of the year would help with a second van purchase. 

Revenue from recreation programs this year has exceeded the projected budget by $115,000, Nadeau said, so spending $30,000 of that for the van in addition to the grant would not impact the budget. The board agreed to the request and voted unanimously in favor. 

Nadeau recognized for achievements

Shepeluk offered congratulations to Recreation Director Nick Nadeau for recently completing his studies to receive a doctorate degree from Liberty University. Shepeluk read off the title of Nadeau’s capstone project which drew from his work experience: “Recommendations for Improving Staff Responses to Disruptive Behavior In Summer Recreation Programs at the Town of Waterbury, Vermont.” 

In addition Nadeau has recently received awards including the 2021 Spirit of ADA award from the state Division of Vocational Rehabilitation. 

Shepeluk noted that the recognition represents progress the town staff has made in addressing accommodating people with disabilities both as program participants and staff members. In 2019, the Vermont Human Rights Commission sued the town of Waterbury claiming it did not do enough to accommodate a child with an emotional disability who was enrolled in the town’s summer camp program. The case was dismissed in court due to a filing error by the state commission. The issue, however, prompted the town to scrutinize its practices, something Nadeau was involved with when he started in his position. 

“We were not happy that we were subject to that suit,” Shepeluk reflected, calling the recognition from the state now “a huge step.”

Other business

• The board heard from one individual during public comment. Jeff Atwood introduced himself as “a staunch advocate of affordable housing” an a relative to Vice Chair Viens. He urged the select board to take steps to encourage the creation of  more affordable housing in Waterbury.  Otherwise, he said, “I don’t see a future for the younger generation here.” 

• The board appointed Margaret Moreland to fill a vacancy on the Library Commission through March 1, 2022. The seat will be on the March Town Meeting Day ballot for voters to fill for the remaining two years on that term, explained Town Clerk Carla Lawrence. Moreland was recommended by the Library Commission and the Select Board's vote was unanimous. 

• The board also voted unanimously to change the penalty for property owners who are late in filing their Homestead Declaration tax form. The penalty has been 8% and Town Manager Bill Shepeluk explained that the administrative costs of dealing with a late filing do not warrant that high a penalty. The board unanimously approved his recommendation to lower it to 2% retroactively for this year’s taxes and to reimburse any taxpayers who had been charged the higher penalty.