Gov. Phil Scott has proposed rolling back some state wetland-protections to spur housing development — a move critics say would be bad for the environment and impede efforts to make Vermont more flood resilient. The changes would be the most significant overhaul of wetland regulations in decad es. They stem from Scott’s September executive order aimed at what he called “well-intentioned, but now counterproductive” environmental-protection measures. He’s proposed two major changes: First, he wants to reduce the size of the required buffer zone between a housing development and a protected wetland from 50 to 25 feet. John James Second, he’d allow housing to be built on unmapped wetlands in specified growth areas and on land exempt from the Act 250 development review law. The “unmapped” part is key: This change would allow residential development on significant wetlands that have been identified by field studies — but haven’t yet been protected by inclusion on the state’s official maps, known as the Vermont Significant Wetlands Inventory. Developers often order the field surveys as part of the pre-permitting work for major projects. As those rules now stand, any significant wetland found in such a field survey is protected from being drained or filled even if it is not yet included on the state inventory maps. Those maps, originally drawn from high-altitude photography, are constantly being updated. “Having the [wetlands] determination based solely on how well the maps were drawn based on aerial survey is a very large change,” said Laura Lapierre, the state’s wetlands program manager at the Department of Environmental Conservation. Scott’s proposed rule changes are being fast-tracked by the Agency of Natural Resources and have been endorsed enthusiastically by developers, who say they would make the permitting process speedier and more predictable. Environmentalists and wetland scientists have criticized the changes. They say wetlands benefit both humans and the ecosystem, including for drought resilience and flood prevention. A proposed housing development in Barre, where the governor grew up, offers a real-world example of what could happen on the ground with the weaker wetland rules. Under the administration’s proposal, wetlands that are now protected in Barre could be drained and filled for house sites. As the name implies, Prospect Heights is planned for a hilly, undeveloped 34-acre parcel that sits high above downtown Barre. The site includes three wetland areas. One that stretches across the length of the property has been “field delineated” — meaning the project’s environmental consultants have documented it through field visits. But it’s not yet on the map of the state’s significant wetlands inventory. John James Indeed, 66 percent of the known wetlands on Prospect Heights aren’t on the state’s map, Lapierre said. If the rules took effect, a developer could build on them. Barre Mayor Thom Lauzon, a major booster of the project, said the changes proposed by the governor mean more housing for the city. “We were around 90 units under the old rules. That could be expanded to around 110 units with the new rules,” Lauzon said. “This project would clearly benefit from the implementation of these [new] rules. No doubt about it.” Lauzon is a longtime ally of Gov. Scott, a friend from high school days, and has contributed to his campaigns. He said he did not speak to the governor about the wetlands issue affecting Prospect Heights before the proposed rules were released. But Lauzon said he did lobby in the legislature last year for a bill to reduce the buffer size. That bill didn’t pass. He said he’s also talked to Natural Resources Secretary Julie Moore about shrinking the required wetlands protection buffer zone to allow more housing on the property. “I spoke to the secretary about that, and she did not have an objection,”he said. “She said that she thought a 25-foot buffer is appropriate.” Moore said she does not recall that specific conversation, though she did talk to the mayor about the rule change in general. In Moore’s view, the governor’s wetlands proposal provides a needed rebalancing as the state seeks to build more housing in designated growth areas. “The current framework really puts wetlands first and everything else as a follow-on consideration,” she said. Concentrating housing in designated areas like Prospect Heights is good for the environment overall because it reduces sprawl, she said. And building more housing there would lower the per-unit cost and make the homes more affordable, she added. Prospect Heights is planned as a partnership between the City of Barre and a private developer who has not yet been selected. But city officials working with a nonprofit community development corporation have done the bulk of the prep work. They’ve won about $9 million in state and federal grants to buy the land and to pay for needed infrastructure such as sewer and water lines. The public funding requires about 40 percent of the units to be built as affordable housing. Lauzon is described on the project’s website as a mayor “with a history of making big things happen.” As a hustler and a visionary with a mission to reinvigorate Barre, Lauzon often lives up to that billing. Under his leadership — he served six terms as mayor from 2006 to 2018 and returned to office in 2024 — Barre has attracted new state offices downtown and planned a number of housing projects, including Prospect Heights. Lauzon owns and develops commercial property in Vermont and beyond. But he said he doesn’t focus on residential construction and won’t bid to develop the Prospect Heights project. “That is way out of our wheelhouse,” he said. He noted that he’s “lobbied tirelessly” for the project, adding: “I’ve got enough controversy in my life.” Of course, the changes in wetlands rules would affect projects statewide. Patrick O’Brien, vice president of S.D. Ireland, a Williston development and construction company, said the governor’s proposal would add predictability to the process and save developers both time and money. The most important changes concern the state’s wetland maps, he said. That’s because if Scott’s proposal goes forward, developers could simply rely on those maps — rather than conducting field surveys to identify any areas that haven’t been mapped. “That alone, just being able to have a mapping tool that the [Agency of Natural Resources] has already blessed, will be a huge help,” he said. S.D. Ireland is perhaps best known for its shamrock logo and company cement trucks festooned with Christmas lights during the holidays. It’s also a major home builder. O’Brien said the rule changes would mean his team could save valuable time by using the state map to sketch site plans. “If they’re not adopted, I would have to wait until around the middle of May to have the consultant delineate the wetlands, have the surveyor put those wetlands on the map, then commence my drawing and permitting process,” he said. O’Brien said the rule changes are an example of the kind of compromise society has made over the years as it weighs environmental protection versus the demand for new housing. This is a small step that doesn’t overstep Mother Nature’s needs.Patrick O’Brien “I think the world has been balancing the need for housing and the need for protection of resources for centuries,” he said. “I think this is a small step that doesn’t overstep Mother Nature’s needs.” But what O’Brien sees as a needed compromise, others call a rollback of important environmental protections. Dori Barton, a wetlands scientist with Arrowwood Environmental in Huntington, spoke at a December hearing on the rule changes. “I think we’re going to see increased flooding from fill, loss of flood storage capacity, loss of wildlife habitat for food, nesting and shelter,” she said. “We will have increased erosion. We will have decreased water quality from stormwater and sediment.” Barton has 30 years of experience in identifying wetlands. She also made the perhaps more obvious point that it’s simply not wise to build on wet ground. “Building in wetlands most often results in structural problems for landowners,” she said, including rot, mold and basement flooding. “I can’t tell you how many projects I’ve been pulled in on where I’ve seen the impacts of building on wetlands from years ago. And I thought we were kind of past that as a state,” she said. “It’s really disappointing to see that we are turning the clock back in terms of actually suggesting that building in wetlands is a good idea to address this housing crisis.” Barton and others said the proposed rules conflict with a law the legislature passed in 2024 after catastrophic flooding. That law calls for a net increase in wetlands statewide, citing their importance in flood prevention. Jon Groveman, policy and water program director at the Vermont Natural Resources Council, called the proposed wetlands rules a “shocking overreach” by the administration. “We just passed a law to have a net gain of wetlands because we’re getting all this flooding,” he said, noting the importance of wetlands in soaking up floodwaters. Groveman said the state lacks the legal authority to declare housing an “allowed use” in wetlands. He said the proposed rules — if they took effect — could be challenged in court. But he said VNRC would prefer to work with the Scott administration to find ways to build more housing without damaging valuable natural resources. We’re very sensitive to the need for housing, but building in wetlands is not where you want to build housing.Jon Groveman “We’re very sensitive to the need for housing, but building in wetlands is not where you want to build housing,” he said. “That will put development in harm’s way. And they don’t have the authority to do it.” Groveman said allowing development in known but unmapped wetlands would run counter to both the science and the law. “It’s a giant departure for how we protected wetlands for the last 30 years,” he said. “There’s not a systemic problem that calls for blowing a hole in the wetlands protection statute in the state of Vermont.” George Springston, a wetlands scientist and assistant professor at Norwich University, said the maps are incomplete. “Although they have been substantially improved in recent years, these maps … are completely inadequate substitutes for on-the-ground wetland delineations,” he said. Lapierre, the wetlands program manager, said officials are now sifting through numerous comments on the proposed changes. Many were critical and pointed out the disconnect between the 2024 law that says the state needs more wetlands and potential new regulations that could lead to wetland destruction. The proposed rules will have to be considered by a joint legislative committee before they are enacted. If the committee rejects the rules, environmentalists would have a stronger legal argument in a court challenge. Meanwhile, Lapierre’s office has delayed for now its work on rules that would implement the 2024 flood mitigation law and its mandate for a net gain in wetlands. “We received the executive order and had to pivot,” she said. “And that’s part of the job.” In Barre, Mayor Lauzon said the rule change would be welcome but isn’t a make-or-break issue for the new neighborhood above Prospect Street. “Regardless of what happens, Prospect Heights will move forward,” he said. “Whether it’s 90 or 110 [units], it’s going to make 90 or 110 couples and singles and families very happy. We need the housing.” The original print version of this article was headlined “All Wet? | Gov. Phil Scott wants to relax wetlands regs to spur housing construction. Critics say the change would endanger the environment — and homes.” The post Scott’s Proposal to Ease Wetlands Protections Hits a Muddy Patch appeared first on Seven Days. ...read more read less