Council asks regional planners to seek Act 250 Tier 1B status for South Burlington growth areas

The South Burlington City Council on May 5 unanimously voted to ask the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission (CCRPC) to include the city’s eligible downtown, village and planned‑growth areas in the regional future land‑use map and to request Act 250 Tier 1B status for those areas.

Councilors heard a detailed staff briefing on the new state process under Act 181 and Act 47. Planning staff and CCRPC representatives said the state now requires regional future‑land‑use maps using a standard 11‑category legend; areas mapped as downtowns, village centers and planned growth areas become eligible for Act 250 Tier 1B treatment when the region submits the map to the state Land Use Review Board.

Paul (city planning staff) told council the map proposed by the regional planning commission aligns closely with South Burlington’s city plan and the city’s sewer service area. Paul identified the city center and three proposed village centers — including a Shelburne Road center around Fayette Road and an area near Kendall, Kennedy and Kimball avenues — as eligible for Tier 1B under the draft map.

"Tier 1B would allow new projects that are less than 10 acres and 50 homes or fewer to avoid the Act 250 process in those designated growth areas," Paul said. He and CCRPC staff said the interim exemptions that have applied statewide would effectively continue in mapped centers if the region and state board approve the map.

Charlie Baker, executive director of the CCRPC, and Taylor Newton, CCRPC planning program manager, briefed the council on the regional methodology and the statewide housing targets that flow from the state housing needs analysis. Baker said the region’s recommended allocation directs a larger share of new housing to the four most urban municipalities (Burlington, South Burlington, Winooski and Essex Junction); staff recommended a 60 percent share of the regional housing target for those four cities combined to concentrate growth where infrastructure and transit exist.

Councilors pressed staff on several points. Councilor Laurie Simanski said she supports regional coordination but asked that the city thoroughly model the local impacts before adopting targets. "It feels to me like we're short‑circuiting it and not understanding exactly what it means for our city and our residents," she said, urging scenario analyses on school capacity, traffic and water and sewer needs before committing to firm numbers.

Paul noted a correction to the presentation’s slides: South Burlington’s historical growth rate was reported as 142 units per year on the draft map, but staff said the city has been averaging roughly 175 units per year in recent years. Staff emphasized the housing targets are goals rather than punitive quotas; the targets are intended to guide where state and regional investments should be focused.

Councilor Mike asked about resources and the fiscal picture for expanded growth; CCRPC and airport staff earlier in the meeting had described federal funding flows for capital projects and staff said the housing‑target work was intended to focus limited public investment in places most able to absorb growth.

After discussion the council unanimously approved a resolution requesting that the CCRPC submit the draft regional future‑land‑use map with South Burlington’s eligible centers and planned growth areas for Tier 1B consideration by the state Land Use Review Board. CCRPC staff said it plans to pursue regional submission and seek state approval in the summer of 2026, and councilors and staff agreed to continue local work refining zoning, rare species and cultural‑resource protections, and other standards that would be required if the city later seeks Tier 1A status.

The Tier 1B step preserves for mapped centers an exemption from full Act 250 review for smaller development projects (thresholds established in state law are typically projects under 10 acres and 50 or fewer homes). The council and staff framed the decision as a way to protect municipal control over local permitting while positioning the city to receive state and regional investment support for infrastructure and housing.