Municipalities weigh options for 3-acre residential sites without HOAs; Shelburne may raise fees

Municipal representatives at the Sept. 3 MS4 Subcommittee meeting described differing local approaches to managing 3-acre residential sites that lack homeowners associations and therefore complicate co-permittee responsibilities.

"Shelburne has 10 residential 3-acre sites that Shelburne would be co-permittees with, 2 of which never had HOAs," Shayne Geiger said, explaining Shelburne's challenge. Annie Costandi said Essex pulled many 3-acre sites into its MS4 permit but still has two remaining; she noted one site has very good permeability and could be eligible for p-credits, while the other may warrant outreach regarding a 3-acre permit.

Ryan Lambert described Winooski's experience: HOAs there typically do not hold separate stormwater permits, and the city has at times taken over rights of way and responsibilities rather than relying on smaller neighborhood governance. Marisa Rorabaugh said South Burlington pulls sites into its MS4 when they meet criteria in its stormwater feasibility ordinance, and that neighborhoods without HOAs face difficulty because the city requires an HOA or that the neighborhood complete the project on its own; there is no mechanism to simply pay into the MS4 if neither condition is met.

Discussion also flagged that some 3-acre sites stem from expired state stormwater permits that developers did not renew, leaving municipalities as co-permittees. The Shelburne selectboard is considering a townwide stormwater fee increase to address these costs; Milton is exploring creation of a stormwater utility and requested shared materials and processes from other towns to inform its effort.

Committee members noted that municipalities must balance administrative capacity, legal authority, and fairness to residents when deciding whether to require HOAs, accept co-permittee responsibilities, or pursue alternative funding mechanisms.