Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Urban Horticulture topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Community Health Center greenhouse proposed for Main & Grand wins board support; requires zoning exceptions
Summary
Community Health Center proposed a 2,400 sq ft urban horticulture greenhouse at 645 Main Street using clear insulated glazing, galvanized steel framing and hydroponic and soil‑based systems; the design review board endorsed the concept while noting zoning exceptions for use, height and setback must be considered by planning and zoning.
Rich Corella, attorney for the Community Health Center (CHC), and Sarah Greenleaf of Grossman Greenhouses described a proposed 2,400‑square‑foot Venlo‑style greenhouse to be located on the corner of Main and Grand Street (645 Main). Corella said the greenhouse would be glass and steel on a granite base and would not be open to retail; CHC intends the structure for internal program uses (propagation, hydroponics and educational displays) and not for commercial sales.
Sarah Greenleaf described the structure and systems: triple‑galvanized steel main framing with aluminum roof framing, clear insulated glazing (4 mm roofing glazing, 16 mm wall panels), passive ventilation through operable roof sections and a natural‑gas heater inside the structure. The design includes a 2½‑foot granite base and clear street‑facing glazing so passersby can see plant displays; CHC plans three street trees and other plantings along the fence line.
CHC's attorney explained the proposal requires zoning rule changes or exceptions because current Main Street regulations limit uses (favoring restaurants and retail) and set a minimum Main Street building height of 35 feet. The greenhouse would be roughly 21–22 feet high and thus requires an exception to the minimum height and to allow horticulture as an acceptable Main Street use. The board's review was aesthetic in nature; Corella noted planning and zoning would address bulk requirements and formal exceptions.
A board member moved to approve the greenhouse concept as compatible with the downtown aesthetic, contingent on keeping mechanical and operational equipment minimal or out of public view; the motion was seconded and approved by voice vote. The board emphasized that no signage is proposed for the greenhouse and that planning/zoning must still address setbacks and height exceptions.
Next steps: the board recorded conceptual support and asked the applicant to supply additional technical information (cut sheets for heaters/units and final street‑level details) for the record and for planning/zoning to process the necessary exceptions.
