Vermont is one of the oldest states in the country, and the shortage of memory care statewide has been well-documented.
But a proposed senior housing facility in Castleton illustrates just how difficult it can be to add more.
Sand Hill Road
Castleton Town Manager Mike Jones stands on the Sand Hill Road property where developers want to build a 99-unit residential care facility. It's about a mile from Castleton鈥檚 village center, with a smattering of nearby houses and a farm off in the distance.
鈥淪o it鈥檚 18 acres, a little over, mostly wooded," Jones says. "We鈥檙e walking through a field right now that鈥檚 been cleared by the town to make it more marketable.鈥�
The property sweeps uphill from the road.
"If we kept walking up and over the ridgeline, we'd come to Castleton University, which is on the other side," Jones says.
In fact in 2009, the to the town, with the caveat that it be used to generate economic development, jobs, educational opportunities and public good.
Zak Hale, CFO of Bennington based Hale Resources, thinks senior housing would be a good fit. He wants to build independent living, assisted living and memory care apartments on the site.
Besides providing needed housing options, he said could get practical experience in geriatric care.
鈥淲e could have clinicals here, and kids could be learning,鈥� Hale says. 鈥淎nd it's in a residential neighborhood, so it can only be residential, because of the zoning. And, like, it has to have some educational opportunity to it. So it's, like, what else could be built here?鈥�
liked the idea and believed it would help alleviate a critical housing shortage. They signed a purchase and sale agreement with Hale in 2020. Records from planning commission meetings show local zoning rules were changed to accommodate the size of the proposal.
Members of the select board, regional business organizations and former Castleton University President all expressed support for the plan as did Jones, the town manager.
鈥淚鈥檓 hopeful that this does go through," Jones says. "In the long run, I think it's overwhelmingly a good project for this community.鈥�
"It doesn't fit"
But property owners on Sand Hill Road, like Katy Culpo, who lives next door to the proposed building site, disagree.
鈥淚'm not opposed to senior living or a senior facility on that property鈥� But it鈥檚 too big,鈥� Culpo says.
"You can say NIMBY, or whatever you like," Emilio Rosario says. "But I don't believe that, because we bought our houses on this road because we love this road, and they are a huge investment."
He said the four-story building Hale is proposing doesn't fit here.
"I used to work as a corrections officer, and it looks like a jail," Rosario says. "It's gigantic."
Laura Desjardins and Brenda Fleming also own property on the road and are upset by the proposal.
鈥淚t's a very city-looking box that belongs next to a strip mall of similar boxes,鈥� Fleming says.
She owns property that abuts the building site, and says a potential buyer who had given a lowball offer pulled out after hearing about the senior housing.
鈥淭hey said, 鈥楯ust kidding, changed my mind. We heard there's going to be a 99-unit facility right next door to you, and we don't want to live there.鈥� And so yeah," Fleming says, "there is a little bit of NIMBY, because it's real, you know, if your property values go down by 50%, that's real. And that's disappointing.鈥�
But developer Zak Hale says to make the plan affordable, it needs to be big. And rather than reinvent the wheel, they鈥檙e going to model the facility on one that already exists in Berlin, called Chestnut Place. Dousevicz, Inc., the Essex-based company that created Chestnut Place, will construct and operate the proposed Sand Hill facility.
The complex would be well-landscaped, Hale says, and if approved, would provide much-needed independent living, assisted living and memory care apartments.
Zoning and bylaws
But that approval has been stymied by the local development review board, that the proposed complex could not include the memory care units.
鈥淚t came down to our zoning and town bylaws,鈥� explains Dan Forcier, vice chair of Castleton鈥檚 five-member development review board.
Forcier says town officials changed local zoning rules to allow larger projects like Hale鈥檚. But for a residential Planned Unit Development, or PUD permit, the apartments all need to have kitchens, according to the DRB's October ruling.
鈥淥ne thing they [town officials] didn't consider was nursing home, memory care... how that language comes together with a PUD. And with our bylaws and zoning, you can't have both in the same building," Forcier says. "Basically all the powers that be, they're trying to push this project in a way and push that PUD section way ahead, like we're going to pass this, so we can get our project. And we're going to put all the pressure on the DRB and lean on them to try and push this through, and insinuate that it should happen. But they missed this language."
That鈥檚 why the board only approved the independent living and assisted living units, but not those assigned to memory care, Forcier says.
But Hale says that defeats the facility's purpose.
鈥淚f you鈥檙e going from independent living and now assisted living and then all of a sudden... you鈥檙e starting to not be able to think for yourself. We鈥檙e not going to send people鈥� like, 'Oh hey, you have to find someplace else to go, 'cause we鈥檙e not going to take care of you,'" Hale says. "We鈥檙e not trying to create a business model like that. It doesn鈥檛 achieve our mission.鈥�
Conflict of interest?
Hale says their project isn鈥檛 feasible without memory care, and he believes the Development Review Board knew that.
He says three of the five members live on Sand Hill Road, including Forcier, who voted against the proposal.
鈥淵ou know, the conflict of interest policy for Castleton is really on them, whether they think they can be objective or not,鈥� Hale says.
More from 开云体育: Castleton Grapples With What College Merger Might Mean For Community
But Daniel Forcier bristles at the allegation of bias. He says during their lengthy hearings, no one came forward with an official complaint. He says he鈥檚 served on the board for three years, adding, 鈥淵ou know, the select board knew who they were appointing, when they knew this project was鈥� the ball was already rolling on it鈥� In fact, several of us on the board said, 'If you can鈥檛 present factual evidence, then stop bringing it up, 鈥榗ause it鈥檚 disruptive to the meetings.鈥�
Forcier says he voted against the residential care facility because of local bylaws, and because he felt it did not preserve the town鈥檚 rural character.
Older residents say they need options
But at the Castleton Community Center, Cheri Raymond and others who were meeting for lunch on a recent Wednesday say there鈥檚 more at stake.
Raymond says older Vermonters like her need more options when it comes to housing, and rural communities need to step up.
鈥淚 mean, we're losing people from Castleton that have to go to Rutland, and it's wrong," she says.
Jo Ann Riley, the Community Center鈥檚 executive director, says at least four local families, who had been active at the center, have moved to assisted living in Rutland, leaving friends behind.
Riley鈥檚 80, and she says her husband recently broke his hip.
鈥淭his has been an eye-opener, seeing my husband and thinking to myself, OK, if that were to happen to me, I couldn't live in my house anymore. Where would I go? What would I do?鈥� she says.
Those questions may take a while to answer.
Attorney Chris Roy, who is representing the developers, says they have appealed the development review board鈥檚 ruling to Vermont Superior Court鈥檚 Environmental Division. Roy says that process could take six to nine months.
But even if the court approves it, the senior housing proposal will still need to go through Act 250,
Have questions, comments or tips? or get in touch with reporter Nina Keck:
