Photo by Robert Coleburn
Meetings at Town Hall are back; last week’s ZBA/PC joint session was a hybrid meeting, with some participants Zooming in and some gathered at Town Hall.
Health center plans moving forward
Chea Waters Evans
A glossary of zoning terms saved the day last Thursday, as the Planning Commission and Zoning Board of Adjustment nudged the Charlotte Family Health Center construction project a little closer to approval. After the definition of “floor area” sealed the deal regarding a ZBA permitting issue, the PC tackled the site plan review, and the health center is creeping a little closer to construction.
Floor area and square footage
The first issue at last week’s meeting was how to interpret the Charlotte land use regulations. The hearing was originally supposed to consider whether or not the health center’s proposed West Village building qualified for a conditional use permit as a commercial health clinic—the original April 12 application was for a 4,275-square-foot commercial health care facility that included exam rooms, office space, and a patient waiting room. The ZBA and PC deliberated at a May 11 meeting and decided that the health center didn’t actually fit the official definition of a health care facility because it wasn’t open to the public—the CFHC is a private medical office.
Attorney Michael Russell from Pease Mountain Law represents the health center. When the ZBA portion of the meeting started, he said he thought the plan to consider the building as a health care facility should be scrapped altogether. In fact, he said, it shouldn’t be considered for conditional use at all. He said that because the office portion of the building was 1,053 square feet and the remaining 3,222-square-foot space was for the health center, both of those uses individually came in under the allowed 3,500 square feet, and that the project should fall under permitted use.
After that, the ZBA’s discussion all came down to square footage. Planning Commission Chair Peter Joslin acknowledged, “There’s some ambiguity in the land use regulations that we need to address in the future.” Permitted uses in a Village Commercial District include a health clinic with a maximum of 3,500 square feet. (Note: there’s a difference in the LURs between a health clinic and a health care facility.) Office space is also allowed, as long as it also doesn’t exceed 3,500 square feet. An asterisk after each of these permitted uses leads to a note: “Square footage limitations in this district apply to the total floor area.”
The ensuing debate was exactly how square footage of a multi-use building should be counted. ZBA member JD Herlihy wasn’t sure the square footage was aggregate. He said that if the regulations were taken “to the extreme,” it would be possible to have a building with multiple 3,500-square-foot uses, resulting in a really large building. “I don’t think that’s in line with the way they’re written,” Herlihy said. Joslin pointed out that there’s no maximum building square footage designated in the LURs.
Other ZBA members thought the square footage was intended to be considered on a per-use basis, and Ronda Moore, Karina Warshaw, and Lane Morrison all thought the health-center building plans were within permitted use. ZBA member Charles Russell recused himself from the discussion because Michael Russell is his brother. From the Planning Commission, Joslin, Kyra Wegman, and Bill Stuono all agreed with the ZBA members.
Planning Commission member Charlie Pughe noted that in the LURs, the official definition of “floor area” indicated to him that the CFHC plans were legitimate. The definition includes, “If applied to a use within a mixed use building, it shall include the total of such floor area allocated to that use as measured to the outside surface of exterior (outside) walls, and from the centerline of partition walls separating uses.” That sentence, he said, cleared up the issue for him.
The ZBA voted three ayes and one abstention to approve the plans as permitted use; despite the fact that he said the definition was swaying him toward a “yes” vote, Herlihy abstained.
Wetlands and other considerations
After the ZBA adjourned their portion of the hearing, the PC settled into site plan review. Three topics came up for discussion: the nearby wetlands, the neighbors, and the building’s appearance. The wetlands and groundwater issues were by far the most discussed.
Professional Engineer Jacques Larose from Civil Engineering Associates, Inc., who is working on the health center project, presented the site plan. PC member Stuono said he and other PC members “had some deliberations and hashed around some of this,” and said he would like them to remove parking on the south side of the building and move the dumpsters there, away from the neighbor’s property, to improve their view and keep asphalt out of the wetland buffer where the parking lot is currently located.
Russell responded, “I think in terms of your authority to regulate parking, we’ve met the minimums to the extent our parking affects another item that you’re entitled to regulate, which is lot coverage. We’re well below the maximum, so I guess I’d ask you to identify what area of the land use regs give you the authority to ask us to make a change to that when we’re meeting both pertinent criteria.” Paul Reiss, who is the representative from CFHC, said he hopes that the “minimum doesn’t become the maximum,” and that more parking would enable them to accommodate the projected needs for the health center. He also pointed out that there is very little food garbage in the recycling, trash, and dumpster, so smell is not a factor, and that the enclosed trash area would have little impact on the neighbors. Larose added that the current proposed location gives the best access to the garbage truck.
Stuono answered Russell, “You mentioned what authority we have, and this Planning Commission usually doesn’t allow any development at all in a wetland buffer, and so we’re just trying to minimize what’s absolutely necessary to put in the wetland buffer, so that’s where we’re headed with this.”
After discussing the building’s appearance, fences, and other site plan items, talk came back to the wetlands. Moore said she was concerned about stormwater runoff from Ferry Road and the parking lots, and said, “I want to know what you’re going to do to mitigate the chemicals, the antifreeze, the salt, gas, oil, that’s going to come off the cars that are parked in that lot so it doesn’t pollute a very important groundwater recharge area, which is what that area is behind the Town Hall, Post Office, and the [proposed health center] property.” She said she wanted Larose to “certify” that a proposed plan will work and in the future to “verify” that it is working.
The area behind the proposed health center is not a groundwater recharge area; much of the land is dense clay. A June 2010 Vermont Geological Survey study of Charlotte, which was done by the Department of Environmental Conservation, states that though the clay “may offer some protection to the underlying bedrock aquifer,” any land in that part of town would not be a significant recharge area. “Wetlands, typically places of groundwater discharge to the surface, do not generally serve to recharge the underlying rock aquifer.”
Larose said runoff would contain common pollutants and that the treatment plan for parking lot runoff was the installation of a stone diaphragm, which is approved by the Vermont Stormwater Management Manual. It will serve as a water treatment system for substances like gas and antifreeze. He said confining or concentrating the stormwater with a larger facility or treatment option would “create more problems and have a larger impact to the surrounding area. . . . We’ve proposed very adequate treatment systems that meet the state’s standards.”
Moore came back, “You’re not saying to me that, ‘We are going to be able to remove the gas, the oil, the antifreeze—whatever is used to treat those surfaces,’” Moore said. “It seems to me like you’re throwing up your hands and saying, ‘We can’t do that.’ Is that the case?”
Larose responded, “I guess I’d be interested in knowing what standards you’re seeking to meet. Not you in particular, but what standards the town is interested in meeting. At this point, we follow the state’s regulations. . . . This plan is right in line. . . . There are no unusual contaminants based on this particular use.”
“So, what you’re admitting to me is that you will not be able to eliminate those contaminants that I mentioned,” Moore said. “That it’s not necessary to eliminate those around a wetland or into a wetland. Is my understanding correct?”
Larose said she was “partially correct” in that they will not be eliminated, and reiterated that the plan meets state treatment requirements. Russell added that any runoff from Ferry Road would be the responsibility of the town, not of CFHC. He also pointed out that this wetland is “not valued for its aquifer recharge qualities” and that “heavy clay soils are not primarily or even marginally capable of providing aquifer recharge.”Moore countered that if it’s not an actual recharge area, it might be “the best there is” in the area between Pease Mountain and Lake Champlain.
Other concerns
Potential neighbors Brad Borden and Kayla Toher, who are hoping to buy the nearby 213 Ferry Road property, expressed concern about potential stormwater discharge into the swale on the south side of that property; Larose said studies showed there would be no increase in potential stormwater discharge.
Neighbor René Kazcka-Vallière, who frequently attends meetings regarding the health center, said that his family was curious about a fence height, which Russell clarified was not for patient-privacy’s sake, but to protect the neighbors from headlights in their windows. Kazcka-Vallière said he is supportive of the health center construction. “We actually, quite frankly, welcome it,” he said. “It would be great to see some life over there, really, because it’s the opposite of that right now.”
Site plan approval wasn’t quite granted at the end of the meeting, though the plan is to put it on the July 1 Planning Commission agenda with the understanding that Larose would prepare a detailed stormwater plan, that nothing else unusual would happen with the application, and that approval would be likely and swift.
Editor’s Note: Lane Morrison is a founding advisor to The Charlotte Bridge. Kyra Wegman is the spouse of Bridge founder and board member Jesse Wegman. JD Herlihy is the spouse of our copy editor and proofreader Damaris Herlihy. It’s a small town.
A quick note about the photographer: Robert Coleburn is a photographer and retired librarian. He lived in Charlotte for 25 years, and now lives with his wife part-time in Ferrisburgh and part-time on Thompson’s point. We are delighted to have him on board.