Monday, April 19, 2010

Act 250 Rule Interpretation Case to Watch

SP Land Co. Act 250 Land Use Permit Amendment
Docket No. 257-11-08 Vtec
April 12, 2010
Judge Durkin

In this case concerning land at the Killington ski resort, the Environmental Court has requested the Natural Resources Board to provide a memorandum discussing Environmental Board precedent on whether "the lack of an Act 250 permit preclude[s] the issuance of an administrative amendment to the master plan, pursuant to Rule 34(D), even though an applicant is nonetheless encumbered by Master Plan Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law."

Currently at issue in the case is an administrative amendment, approved by both the District 1 Environmental Commission Coordinator and the Environmental Court, which allows the Coapplicants to realign the boundary lines within the proposed Killington Resort Village to create fifteen lots. Mountainside Properties, Inc. moved to alter the Court's decision, arguing that the boundary line realignment is unsuitable for an administrative amendment under Act 250 Rule 34(D) because the rule allows for only permits to be amended. Because the Applicants have a Master Plan, not an Act 250 permit for the proposed development, Mountainside argues that the Applicants are not entitled to an administrative amendment allowing this subdivision.

The Court has delayed ruling on Mountainside's motion to alter until it receives the NRB's memorandum (due May 3, 2010), and any responsive filings to that memorandum from the parties (due ten business days after the NRB memorandum).

Full court order available at: