Their vision: Preserve 12 of the acres closest to the lake as a public park and erect 570 units of housing on the rest. Farrell also plans to develop 200 additional units on property currently owned by the college, including the former orphanage building, which he’s signed an agreement to purchase from the college.
When Burlington College, under financial duress, sold the property to Farrell, people worried that one of the city’s largest swaths of open space would become a housing development. A group called Save Open Space-Burlington formed. In response to the public outcry, Farrell agreed to collaborate with the city, the land trust and CHT and hold a public process to hash out the property’s future.
At an earlier meeting, preservation advocates clashed with the organizers. The Tuesday event got off to a more genial start — in the basement of the St. Joseph’s School in the Old North End, artists and activists mingled while eating pizza. Roughly 40 people showed up to see the conceptual plans.
Farrell is proposing to build a mix of rental units, condos and townhouses in buildings that range from three to five stories. Champlain Housing Trust, an affordable housing developer, would build 160 of the units, 80 of which would be for seniors. Reiterating the high demand for affordable housing, chief financial officer Michael Monte said the proposed project is “probably from an income basis one of the most integrated neighborhoods you would find anywhere in Burlington.”
Three quarters of the parking would be below ground — terraced into the downward sloping land.
At a cost of $2 million, the city plans to purchase 12 acres, including Texaco Beach. Burlington has a Conservation Fund that’s accumulated roughly $1 million over the years, which Parks and Recreation Director Jesse Bridges suggested could be used. Current community gardens would be expanded, and a building known as the Stone House could potentially be converted to a community center.
During the question-and-answer session at the end of the meeting, people focused on specific aspects of the plan rather than protesting the notion of any development occurring on the site.
Among the other questions asked: How will the new project impact traffic on North Avenue? How will a large development a stone’s throw from Lake Champlain minimize stormwater runoff? Bridges said these concerns would be addressed as the project moves forward.
As currently envisioned, the plan also requires zoning changes, in part to allow for taller buildings. Requesting those changes will delay the development review process, but Farrell said he hopes to have permits in hand by next summer. The developer let the other project partners do the talking, but during an interview afterwards, he summarized his perspective: “We need housing as much as we need open space.” With this proposal, he said, “I think we’ve got a real nice balance.”
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
So, of 770 units, 21% will be “affordable.” Color me shocked that the Mayor’s push to address the “affordable housing crisis” is disingenuous at best. Instead, we’re looking at another monstrosity of expensive condos and townhomes that only those seeking second / vacation homes can afford. Way to look out for your own.
And, once again — as with the Burlington Town Center — there’s a proposal to change zoning ordinances to allow for taller buildings …
So grateful the plan includes public open space and access to the lake! That path from North Ave to Texaco Beach is a great community resource.
couldn’t agree more Jane.
nestled between two predominately SINGLE family homes ….what the heck happened to all the new single family homes! Burlington has seen a TON of new larger housing complexes but what we haven’t seen is any development address the need for NEW. SMALL. AFFORDABLE. SINGLE FAMILY. I’d even take some duplexes here, or what about a new innovative approach to senior housing.
I clicked on the like button and dislike was counted also. please check and be sure your like and dislike counter program is working properly.
thank you
I agree with Jane and Hinge and Sean.
The amount of buildings in the new plan has many of us wondering is the one 45 plot community garden enough for 700 units? Has there been ANY study on how much City services and public infrastructure from this proposed MASSIVE project would be effected. WIll the expected new tax payers cover these costs? Will the Lake survive the soil disruption and run-off? Is there to be energy production via solar panels? Will the project be phased in such a way as to allow time to build conservation grant support to buy back the land and conserve?
Let’s look regionally for housing and improved public transit rather than giving up the public green space we are used to and rely on.
How many people would leave Manhattan if Central Park were condo-ized?
Imagine if the projects at Oakledge and the Waterfront materialized – back in the day. A good thing these parks are here, that enough people stood up and put a stop to it.
I believe in Urban densification done by consensus rather than big money.
There are an additional 40 homeownership units that will be affordable, so the number is actually 25%. The income mix of the neighborhood would be pretty integrated. Building heights need to change because the current zoning actually allows taller buildings closer to the shoreline, and lower buildings closer to North Avenue. It allows for a greater opportunity to create the park. And the expansion of the community garden spaces are just the public spaces; other garden spaces for residents will be created as site plans are designed.
770 new housing units? 770? even with the conservative # of 2 humans in each unit, that is over 1500 residents. and 4 residents =3080. The small neighborhood would be larger than nearly 200 Vermont towns!! The neighborhood would nearly require their own representative, as the number is currently 4,100 residents per rep. 351 North Ave currently has a Walk Score of 23 which means “Car-Dependent- Almost all errands require a car.”
Farrell’s Folly does have a nice ring to it though. Will Clarence come and save the day? One cn only hope.
I sure hope the complex buildings look a lot better than many of the newer buildings in Burlington. It is
remarkable how ugly new buildings around the city are. For instance the Thayer complex, and all the newer
buildings that look like the cheap metal-clad buildings we used to use for temporary school classrooms e.g.
the corner of North and Elmwood, N. Winooski Ave etc. Our beautiful city is beginning to look full of cheap,
bargain-basement buildings that don’t go well at all with the classical beauty of the rest of its surroundings.
Zoning, for this project, will need to change, due to the fact that the outrageous number of units proposed, is not currently allowed in the RL zone. I question the legality, of changes to zoning, to accommodate a single project. As have some members of the city council.
And, speaking of “affordable housing”……………There is a new ordinance, already passed through the planning commission, and soon to go before the city council. Which will allow developers to bypass the inclusionary zoning (read: affordable units), requirements, for off campus student housing.