In East Randolph

It’s Housing Vs. Farmland

A proposed housing development in East Randolph must be redesigned in order to leave more of the 20-acre property available for farming, the Act 250 Environmental Commission has ruled.

Richard Dybvig of Tunbridge has proposed a "planned unit development" in a field adjoining the Second Branch just south of East Randolph off Route 14. He hopes to have the single-family homes, at about 1500 square feet each, available for a retail price of about $150,000, which would make them unusually affordable new homes.

Commissioner John Hall of the state Department of Housing and Community Affairs made an appearance at the Aug. 6 Act 250 hearing to testify on the need for affordable housing.

"It’s the first time we’ve ever done that," Hall said yesterday.

"Housing is an important value, too, on a parity with the environmental values. This is the kind of development we (the Douglas administration) have been talking about—a wise use of land, good location, positive impact.

"We’ve got to start making this pitch."

However, the three-member commission focused not on housing but on Act 250’s Criterion 9B, which requires that a development minimize the impact on prime agricultural soils. The requirement holds whether or not the land in question is actually being farmed—which the East Randolph property is not.

The Commission’s decision pointed out that though "the proposal for lower cost housing is laudable," it does not factor into the Commission’s decision.

New Layout

"With respect to criterion 9B, the applicant must redesign the layout to achieve better clustering on-site, and enter into a mitigation agreement with the Department of Agriculture for any residual off-site mitigation," the decision read.

"Off-site mitigation" generally involves paying a sum of money to a land trust so that it can purchase development rights to agricultural land elsewhere to make up for the ag land lost in this development.

Warren Foster, Act 250 coordinator for District 8, who was filling in this District 3 hearing, clarified that Dybvig’s plan for a sort of Main Street neighborhood in the development, with houses on either side of the road, is deficient. Any site plan which "bisects" the property doesn’t leave enough room for farming purposes, he said.

Reached this week in Tunbridge, Dybvig said he was unpleasantly surprised by the ruling. He said that based on testimony from the Agriculture Department’s expert on prime ag soil preservation, Louise Waterman, he hoped that off-site "mitigation" itself would be sufficient. Waterman told The Herald yesterday, however, that she agreed with the Commission’s finding.

Dybvig pointed out that if the project is re-designed, he must go back before the Randolph Development Review Board for another site plan review. He is working on a redesign, however.

(Dybvig is already appealing the DRB’s site plan permit because it requires him to bury all utility lines, which he said would raise the price of each home by at least $12,000.)

District 3 Commission Chair Bushrod Powers of South Royalton could not be reached for comment. The other two commissioners sitting on the hearing were recent appointees Marvin Harvey of Rochester and Paul Kendall of Braintree.

In addition to redesigning the site plan, the Commission ruled that Dybvig must provide information regarding five other points, including the "archaelolgical sensitivity of the site" and a statement of conformance of the regional plan.

Dybvig said this week that an archeological survey had been completed for an earlier application 17 years ago and that he had received oral assurances about the regional plan conformance.

The Act 250 hearing will be reconvened after the new information is provided, but no date has been set.