This article by John Lippman was published by the Valley News on Oct. 19.
When the Two Rivers-Ottauquechee Regional Commission released a draft of its new land use plan covering the 30 towns within its jurisdiction, Hartford responded with a not-so-subtle rebuke.
“We appreciate all the work that the Two Rivers staff and Commission have done in the past year on the update of the regional plan,” Hartford deferentially began its 10-page letter to Two Rivers, issued in June.
Then Hartford delivered a rap on the knuckles as it detailed numerous objections to the draft 38-page regional land use plan, slamming what it said was Two Rivers’ misguided employment of inflexible “absolutes” when applying state law to guide regional planning.
The town said that Two Rivers’ repeated use of phrases such as “must” and “shall,” “along with prescriptive land uses … goes beyond what is required” under the regional planning commission’s statutory mandate.
“We especially encourage you to read Chapter 117 and make your own independent judgment on what the statute allows,” Hartford chided, citing the statute that outlines what it described as “a balance of authority” between regional commissions and local municipal bodies.
And just to be helpful, Hartford included a web link for Two Rivers to consult the relevant statute.
Hartford’s comments are only the latest sparks to fly between the town and regional planning commission, where tensions over the approach to development have flared before, most memorably over plans for a retail center known as Quechee Highlands. In 2016, the Vermont Supreme Court ruled that the 168-acre mixed-use development on old farmland near Interstate 89’s Exit 1 proposed by Pomfret resident Scott Milne did not conform with the Two Rivers regional plan, which was designed to limit retail sprawl — a setback for Hartford, which had originally approved Milne’s plan.
The high court’s decision was widely viewed as clarifying the power that regional planning commissions have over local planning.
In another area, the draft regional plan could even — in theory — make it easier to build affordable housing in Norwich, whose failure to meet a goal for affordable and multifamily housing was in part blamed for Two Rivers commissioners’ voting down Norwich’s town plan last year.
The plan for regional planning
Vermont is divided among 11 regional planning commissions, which span in size from the 55 Northeast Kingdom communities in the Northeastern Vermont Development Association to the 10 towns under the Southern Windsor County Regional Planning Commission.
In a state that lacks much county government structure, the regional planning commissions are legislatively created bodies that pivot between the state and towns to assist local municipalities in such areas as community development, transportation planning, natural resources, energy and emergency management while working to ensure those plans comport with state Legislature and agency mandates.
But the role created for regional planning commissions sometimes pits them against town planning boards and departments that view the commissions as micromanaging local zoning issues.
Two Rivers began working on its new land-use plan — known as an “update” — almost immediately after the previous plan was released in 2017. Although land use comprises only one of 15 chapters in the 347-page regional plan, the topic is typically of paramount concern for local communities.
Among the chief revisions Two Rivers made in the 2019 regional plan was to create two new land use designations that previously did not exist: “industrial areas” and “mixed use areas.”
Industrial areas, according to the draft regional plan, have easy access to transportation and “are a way to encourage economic growth and high-wage businesses to locate in the region without adversely affecting neighboring land uses.”
Mixed-use areas were created to include not only light industrial and commercial development but also encourage higher-density housing to address the region’s chronic shortage of affordable housing.
Peter Gregory, executive director of Woodstock-based Two Rivers, said the new designations were created in recognition of both “local planning and existing development” among towns in the region. “These are areas that were generally more restrictive (under the prior land-use plan) and (the update) is acknowledging that these are areas where we want more development.”
But both new designations would prohibit new “principal retail” development within those areas, according to the draft plan. “Secondary retail” — such as a veterinarian’s clinic selling pet food — would be permitted.
Gap in opinion
One part of Hartford that would be hit particularly hard is Quechee Gorge, a longtime tourist destination with a host of retail shops. It’s currently designated “rural” by Two Rivers and as “Gateway Commercial” by Hartford, but under the proposed regional plan it would be reclassified as “mixed use.”
From Hartford’s point of view, the new mixed-use designation runs contrary to existing zoning, and any ban on retail — if the project were large enough to trigger Act 250 review — would harm the economic viability of the area, which the town says sees 100,000 visitors a year.
“Why would principal retail not be allowed there?” said Lori Hirshfield, director of planning and development for Hartford. “Our perspective is that retail is there because it’s a destination for tourism.”
The argument so far hasn’t moved Two Rivers, which in reply to Hartford’s long list of concerns about the regional plan downplayed the impact of the new land-use designation for Quechee Gorge, noting the high bar — 10 acres or more — required to trigger Act 250 review.
Moreover, the new designations align with longtime statewide and regionwide goals to combat sprawl, according to Gregory.
“The proliferation of principal retail outside of villages and downtowns is a big contributor to the decline of downtowns,” Gregory said. “That’s the state’s policy and Two Rivers’ policy.”
Two Rivers wants a regional plan that directs retail to the town and village centers, aiming to help preserve Vermont’s rural character.
But stores targeting the tourists visiting the gorge are not hampering businesses in the village of Quechee a few miles away, according to Hirshfield.
“Historically we have not seen any connection between what is happening at the gorge and development in the village,” she said.
Exception to the rule
The issue of where principal retail could be allowed was also of concern in Bradford, Vt., although the town ultimately won a partial victory after it requested Two Rivers take into account the town’s longtime desire for more businesses in the area known as the Lower Plain.
The Lower Plain, south of downtown Bradford, stretches from approximately where the Family Dollar store is located on Route 5 on the north end to Lake Morey Road below the intersection with Route 25. More than a decade ago, the town sought to push through a retail development on a six-acre parcel below Route 25 that was given the name Bradford Square, which received Act 250 approval but was opposed by Two Rivers.
Even though the town prevailed in a court fight, the delay and recession caused the developer to back out of the project. “Bradford Square” remains a hayfield on the east side of Route 5 today. The chain Tractor Supply recently expressed interest in building one of its stores at the site.
But when the draft regional plan came out, it still prohibited principal retail in the area below Route 25, even though Bradford had recently invested heavily in extending a sewer and water line to the north terminus of Bradford Square, which is about a tenth of a mile south of Route 25.
Marcey Carver, chair of the Bradford Planning Board, said the town appealed to Two Rivers to change the designation for Bradford Square so it would be classified as a Town Center, which would permit principal retail at the location. Two Rivers agreed and extended Bradford’s Town Center 500 feet south of Route 25 to encompass the parcel.
“We’ve wanted this change for as long as I can remember,” Carver said. “There are not a million businesses that want to come to Bradford.”
But the victory was only partial because Two Rivers extended the “town center” designation only on the east side of Route 5, even though the sewer line goes under the road and has a connection on the west side as well.
Carver chalks up the discrepancy to Two Rivers being unaware that sewer and water was available on the west side of Route 5. But once the amendment has been warned, it cannot be changed without another warning and further delay.
“They gave us a little bit,” Carver said.
Coming to an understanding
Norwich, whose unapproved town plan means its access to state grants is limited, didn’t raise significant objections to Two Rivers’ regional plan other than asking for clarification about some of the plan’s elements.
“They worked with us in a collaborative sense,” said Herb Durfee, Norwich town manager.
Under the new plan, Two Rivers eliminated the “interchange” designation around Exit 13 on Interstate 91 in Norwich and added the new “mixed use” designation that runs on the east side of Route 5 south to the Hartford town line.
The mixed-use designation “would encourage a much higher density of housing,” Gregory noted, although whether Norwich takes advantage of that is up to the town.
Under mixed use, “multi-family housing at several units per acre or greater is appropriate in this area,” according to the draft plan. Under the prior interchange designation, residential housing was permitted, but housing was mentioned only in passing.
Durfee, Norwich town manager, said the Norwich Planning Commission has begun working on a new master plan, although the process could take “a couple years.”
Gregory acknowledged there are instances where towns’ hopes for land use bump up against what Two Rivers is mandated to do by the Legislature, but said the majority of land use designations do not provoke opposition from municipalities.
“Towns need to recognize our role by law, and Hartford has had some struggles in that,” he said. “We probably made land use changes in 16 or 17 different towns that further match their desires.
“There are conflicts in a few, but we’ve got over a dozen communities that are really interested in getting these changes made.”
Two Rivers will hold its third public hearing on comments submitted to the draft plan at 6:30 p.m. Oct. 30 at Thompson senior center in Woodstock. During that hearing, the board may vote to schedule the final adoption.
Read the story on VTDigger here: Planning commissions’ regulations butt up against towns’ hopes for expansion.
