College Stikes a Chord with Act 250 Part Three in a Three-Part Series on Vermont's 30-Year-Old Land Use Law

Author: Kelsey Rinehart

Walking around campus these days, students, faculty, staff and visitors are surrounded by monstrous dirt heaps and noisy bulldozers. Arching cranes and iron skeletons of buildings loom around us, posing as permanent fixtures of the Green Mountain skyline. We can't help but notice the many construction projects, but we seldom wonder why the College has the right to build another library here and parking lot there. Act 250, Vermont's 30-year-old land use law, plays a part in the College's continual development of its facilities because it is the ultimate authority on what can and can't be built.
A common perception is that facilities planners, because of their ever-present construction projects, have butted heads with Act 250 many times. Tom McGinn, project manager of facilities management for the College, assures that this is not the case, and says that he fully supports Act 250 and everything it has done for Vermont. "I think Act 250 has been a really good thing for Vermont," he remarked in an interview with The Middlebury Campus. "When you look at the statistics, they turn down five or six percent of the projects. In the end I think it's very fair. To the best of my knowledge, we were never denied a permit by Act 250." McGinn noted that the projects that the College plans rarely receive the kind of scathing opposition that many business owners looking to expand face. "We're not a developer that's coming in. We're not building Wal-Marts or subdivisions," he pointed out.
Act 250 has come into play many times in the College's recent projects. McGinn said that the College received Act 250 permits for the Ross Commons expansion, the recycling center, the library project, parking lots and the Atwater Commons additions. He stressed, however, that where problems arise - and are solved - is before Act 250. McGinn said, "Where the biggest impact seems to be is on the town, by the nature of where the buildings have gone lately, because they're on the edge of the campus. The town has a lot of concerns about the traffic [and] noise or the impact of construction on the town services and roads. But once we get through the town approval, there isn't really an issue with Act 250, per say."
Some of the frustration behind Act 250 and part of the reason people are calling for reform may have to do with the actual hearing itself, which McGinn said was complex and all-inclusive. "I've heard several complaints from people outside the College who have to go for an Act 250 permit," he said, noting that at the Act 250 hearing, "They want you to bring all these prepared plans and specifications, and everything has to be done. Then there's a chance that [the project] will get turned down. That person would have wasted all that money on designing things and getting things ready." The College's extensive experience with development and construction projects means that facilities planners know how to handle Act 250. "We come prepared, and go there willing to sit and answer whatever questions people have," McGinn said. "We see what issues the neighbors and the abutters have, and we try to be good neighbors and modify the project to accommodate the people's concerns." Unfortunately for facilities planners, McGinn pointed out, "Sometimes all it comes down to is the 'not in my backyard' thing, no matter what it is."
When library construction was being discussed, several Middlebury residents came to the final hearing, by the District Nine Environmental Commission, to voice their concerns. The Middlebury Planning Commission had already approved the project, but the issue of relocating houses on South, Weybridge, Shannon, and South Main streets became a point of contention. At this point, McGinn noted, "Act 250 said, 'We're going to take a recess here, and we would like the College and the neighbors and historic preservation to work out a solution that everybody can get on board with, and then we'll reconvene the hearing.'" The College then made concessions to the residents, among them, South St. resident Alya Baker, whose home bordered two proposed lots. McGinn said, "I think Act 250 does a good job of mediating what the disputes are."
The College has been consistent in its desire to ameliorate tensions between angry neighbors and facilities planners. In the summer of 2001, in demolishing the 85,000-square-foot science center on Storrs Ave., the College used remote control devices to dismantle the building from the inside out, hoping to lessen the noise and dust, inevitabilities on a construction site, that would bother nearby residents.
Another component of the Act 250 process that McGinn says is specific to the College its relationship with the division of historic preservation. "That has come into play, especially on the library, with the impact on Old Stone Row, and moving those historic houses." McGinn points out that, without Act 250, the picture could be very different. "The College could have decided, 'Well let's just move these houses. We don't need Act 250 approval to do that. You can do whatever you want, despite the fact that it's a historic structure.' But because it's part of our Act 250 application, historic preservation has a right to step in and be consulted on," he said.
As far as reforms to Act 250, McGinn said, "I don't think it's really going to make a difference. We seem to encounter and then resolve most of our issues on the local level, before we get to Act 250."
In one instance, the College took a wrong turn with its construction. During beginning preliminary construction of a new parking lot in the Ridgeline development on the south side of Rt. 125, the College accidentally filled in a fragile Class Three Wetland. McGinn remarked, "That was a disaster. The College made a mistake. Inadvertently, the College deposited some fill material in a wetland. We were at Act 250 - we had already been approved by the town - and we found out about it. So we pulled our Act 250 permit applications, and then had to go back to the Agency of Natural Resources and work out a plan to mitigate what we did and restore what we had filled in. It delayed things by about a year." McGinn said that the College deeply regretted its error, but remarked, "But again, we recognized that we made a mistake and corrected it at our expense. We weren't about to say, 'Oh well, what's a little wetland. Let's go ahead. This project's important to us. We'll just ram our way through here.' That's not how the College operates."
On the College's Web site, the Project Review Committee's introduction to its Guiding Principles states, "The concepts of environmental design and sustainability are being applied similarly to buildings, landscapes, manufacturing processes, communities and academia. By carrying forward the traditions of the past and drawing upon the best from the present, we can design buildings and landscapes that will better serve the needs of those who live, learn and work within them." The subsequent principles serve to elucidate the ideals behind the cranes and bulldozers. One states, "Whereas the College recognizes its potential for the academy to be a leader, it understands the importance of embodying these concepts into all its buildings and landscapes."