Summary
The Vermont Supreme Court affirmed a ruling that buildings used to saw, dry, and plane timber harvested on a farm were farm structures exempt from local zoning regulation under 24 V.S.A. § 4413(d)(1). The court held that processing lumber for use in maintaining farm buildings and producing fuel and livestock bedding constituted practices associated with farming. The court declined to decide whether growing trees for lumber qualifies as growing a fiber crop under Vermont’s farming statute because that issue was not necessary to the judgment.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether buildings used to saw, dry, plane, and store byproducts from timber harvested on the farm were farm structures exempt from local zoning regulation under 24 V.S.A. § 4413(d)(1).
- Whether the court needed to decide whether growing trees for lumber constituted growing a fiber crop and therefore farming under 10 V.S.A. § 6001(22)(A).
Holdings
- Buildings used to process timber harvested on the farm into lumber for farm-related construction, maintenance, and repair, and to use processing byproducts for farm fuel and livestock bedding, qualify as farm structures used for practices associated with farming and are exempt from local zoning regulation under 24 V.S.A. § 4413(d)(1).
- The court did not need to decide whether growing trees for lumber constitutes growing a fiber crop under 10 V.S.A. § 6001(22)(A), because that issue was not essential to the conclusion that the buildings were used for practices associated with farming.
Key quotations
“The argument ignores the operative language of the statute, however, which exempts buildings used for carrying out “practices associated with” farming.” (¶ 12)
“It is sufficient to hold that the evidence supported the trial court’s finding that the buildings here were used for “practices associated with” farming under 24 V.S.A. § 4413(d)(1), and we discern no inconsistency between this conclusion and other laws governing the management and marketing of forest products.” (¶ 13)
Factual background
The appellees operated a multigenerational Vermont farm involving cropland, pasture, a sugarbush, and forest land. On a ten-acre parcel, they used a sawmill to process timber harvested from the farm, a kiln to dry the lumber, and planned to use a building housing a planer to finish lumber and store wood shavings. The processed lumber was used to construct, maintain, and repair farm buildings, while byproducts were used for fuel and livestock bedding. The Environmental Division found these activities customary, economically necessary, and associated with the farming operation.
Procedural history
In 2009, the appellants appealed zoning-board decisions granting a construction permit for a Newman planer building and denying their request to enforce alleged zoning violations involving a sawmill and lumber-drying kiln. The Environmental Division initially concluded that factual issues remained regarding whether the buildings were farm structures exempt from local zoning regulation, then held an evidentiary hearing and ruled that the buildings qualified for the statutory exemption. The Vermont Supreme Court affirmed.