An $8 million lakefront proposal for a hotel with a fitness center, restaurant and event space currently under town review has some Colchester residents concerned.
Named The H at Malletts Bay, the development would be out of scale for the area and could exacerbate traffic and environmental issues on West Lakeshore Drive, residents said at a packed Development Review Board public hearing June 11 that ran almost four hours.
“Any development on the water’s edge will cause more damage to the bay. It’s just common sense. Any development like this will increase traffic problems on West Lake Shore Drive. Any development like this will negatively affect our visual access to the bay,” said resident Jeff Spengler at the meeting.
Nothing like it exists anywhere on the bay, resident Kelly Mancini Becker wrote in an email to VTDigger this week. She is particularly concerned about the project’s potential impact on the water quality of Malletts Bay and fears it would change the look and feel of that scenic stretch.
Others told VTDigger they were not aware of or didn’t grasp the scale of the development planned at the site until recently.
“I only learned of this proposed development by chance. Very few people know what’s going on, even now,” said resident Jeanne Welch, adding that the amount of information filed so far is “daunting.”
The 105-page site plan submitted by Hazelett Strip-Casting Corp. outlines five “cottage-style” buildings for “a 20-room inn” (plus a manager’s room), a standalone rental building, a 48-seat restaurant and a 60-person event space at 166 and 180 West Lakeshore Drive.
The project plan includes a 1,536-square-foot maintenance building and a 67-space parking lot at 135 West Lakeshore Drive across the street. It also has space for a future building that could sleep six to be approved in a separate process.
Built on a slope, the buildings would appear as two stories from the road and three stories from the bay side. The main building would include a restaurant on the lower level, an event space on the ground floor and a fitness spa on the top level, according to consultants that represented the plan for the developer at the meeting.
The town board is reviewing the application for the proposed plan — which is about the mid-stage of the review process. The developer “updated the submission extensively” since April 9, said Zachary Maia, development manager for the town, by adding a new building, a fire hydrant and adjusting shoreland encroachment, among other changes.
Because the developer added “critical review items” late on the day of the meeting, town officials had not had the time to review it, he said at the meeting.
Benjamin Avery, principal at Greenfield Growth Consulting LLC (and formerly a developer with Black Rock), who represented the developer with a team of four other consultants, gave a brief overview of the changes.
He said they addressed some of the town’s concerns from the last hearing such as reducing some encroachment items, realigning the “cottages” and adding the fifth building “just so the project you’re reviewing is in its totality.”
“Where the alignment of the original five buildings has moved around, those buildings have not changed from an elevation standpoint,” Avery said.
Growing concerns
About 45 residents packed the continued public hearing on June 11 and questioned consultants about the height, density, stormwater and wastewater capacity and took issue with a filed winter day traffic study that does not account for summer vehicular traffic nor bicycle or pedestrian traffic.
“Why wasn’t a study done in the summer?” resident Julie Collins said. “As it is now, it’s hard to get home in the summer with all the campers and the boaters and the swimmers.”
Jennifer Conley, director of transportation in Vermont for VHB, an engineer and planning firm, said they added new counts from April, in addition to the ones submitted from January. They “followed the typical steps of a traffic study,” considered peak times and provided a conservative analysis, she said.
Tom Berry said he would like to know more about the new easement set aside for the bike path.
“I think it’s the most significantly needed piece of infrastructure in Colchester right now and what’s, you know, probably the most dangerous piece of road for a bicyclist between Colchester village and downtown Burlington.”
While the plan may meet regulations for the amount of stormwater that must be treated for the size of the project, it would still allow untreated water to flow directly into the bay, according to Becker.
“I’m also concerned about wastewater,” she wrote. “They are accounting for the minimal amount of numbers in their projection.”
She said she believes the new building has been counted as one unit when it is a two-bedroom addition that could easily house six or more.
“That is a big discrepancy as far as the amount of waste water that could be created from just that space alone,” she wrote in the email.
Consultants at the meeting said they have provided accounts of the wastewater capacity for the project which meet the town’s limits for the parcel. Board members said it amounts to a little over 4,000 gallons per day.
Several residents have submitted letters to the review board since the meeting, outlining their growing concerns regarding the proposed development.
“In no way does the proposed development of five large buildings along the lake in the small area preserve or enhance views of the bay,” Faith Brown wrote to the Development Review Board, referring to language in the 2019 Town Plan that serves as a guiding document for land use. “Driving by people will see the buildings and be bothered by the foot traffic across the road to those buildings, not enjoying the magnificent views of the bay.”
The developer is looking to merge two lots. Several residents at the meeting expressed concerns that that would allow more intense development on the merged parcel.
“For instance, sidewalk setbacks would go away. They’d be able to build a building right on top of the property line,” said John Louchheim. “So my question for the development review board is, in light of the 2019 town plan, why would you approve that merger of the parcels that’s going to increase development?”
The property owned by the developer currently has a marina and recreational space for Hazelett employees that would remain after the proposed buildout. Residents wondered if it would expand in use as a commercial marina once the development is approved, and whether moorings would be used by guests or available to the public.
Resident Jeanette Berry asked in an email to the board whether the use of the marina, which has historically operated as a small private facility for Hazelett employees and become “essentially a commercial marina,” would be reviewed for compliance in light of the project.
Some residents criticized language used by the developer to describe what they said looks like a resort-style hotel that belongs in a city rather than an “inn” with “cottages” in a bedroom community. They wondered how much access the public would have.
Consultants at the meeting said the marina would remain as it is, the restaurant would be open to the public, the rooms and meeting space would be up for rent and the spa would be available for guests only. They offered no details about marina use nor cost estimates of what bookings could cost.
Residents have also expressed concern the proposed development could circumvent local regulations.
“It would behoove the town to close these loopholes that are being exploited,” Welch wrote in an email to the Development Review Board.
“It’s already a David and Goliath situation: developers with the will, unlimited financial resources, time and manpower deluging a very capable yet understaffed small town planning and zoning with 100+ page applications,” Welch wrote. “Just tell them if it’s not in the regs they can’t do it!”
Some residents said they are worried the details are murky.
The developer’s filing estimated 47 sleeping spaces in the rooms, 48 seats in the restaurant, 69 in the spa and meeting space for an estimated total of at least 164 people at capacity plus six more in future for the sixth building planned.
“By blending modern hospitality offerings with a deep respect for the natural landscape, ‘The H’ is poised to bring fresh energy, innovation, and year-round activity to this iconic waterfront location,” the filing reads.
The public hearing will continue on July 23 at 7 p.m. If approved by the town, the project would also have to pass the Act 250 process that governs statewide development review.
Correction: A previous version of this article misidentified one of the residents.
