 Since we're on, I think a very tight time schedule this time, I'm going to call a meeting to order and ask for a motion on the approval of the agenda. I make a motion to approve the agenda, Eric. Second. Thank you. All in favor. That was unanimous. Do you really need an account? As far as the comments from the chair, I don't have much comments except I asked and we are under some time constraints tonight because the DRB is meeting at seven. So I really want to keep things moving along and get as much done. I'd like to get done with the garage at seven so we have something for the DRB. I'm sure the city manager is going to want to have an issue if we resolve before November 6th when we all vote. If you can, if you can't, we can find a way to do something. We'll figure it out, but I just, I understand from a personal point of view, I've looked at this enough now. I don't want to spend another meeting on it, but okay. Let's say I'm Eric Gilbertson and I'm the vice chair and I'm going to introduce yourselves. Meredith Crandall. Staff. What's up? Mitchell. Benjamin Cheney. 126 Main Street. Hello. Hello. Hi. I'm Teresa Beros and I'm with the Department of Liquor and Lottery Division of Liquor Control. All right. Okay. And we are looking to replace part of the sign on 126 Main Street, Yankee Wine and Spirits, and basically updating the logo and the name of the store from outlet to store. The descriptive things you want to talk about. So the lettering will remain the same, same type of lettering, which is, looks like this. Yeah. We'll make it match what's already there. We will repair any issues with the building when we change the letters, and we've discussed that with the landowner. And then everything will look the same with the exception of the 8.02 spirits logo. Are you going to add any lighting or anything? No. I don't have any questions. We've got a series. I don't know. You've got an extra one. That's yours. That's mine. That one. Yep. Yep. We have a checklist we have to do. Okay. We have a designer view, standards in A, the preservation or reconstruction of appropriate historic site. I'm going to say that's acceptable. It's just simply a redesign of the site and harmony of exterior design of other properties in the district. Acceptable. If anybody objects to what I'm saying, let me know before I write. Another approach to exterior materials, it's acceptable. Compatibility to pros and landscaping, there is no landscaping. No bushes in the sign, that's good. Prevention of the use of incompatible designs, buildings, color schemes, that's acceptable. Location appearance of all utilities, applicable. Recognition or respect of significant view corridors, I'm going to say that's not applicable. Conformance with city, state, placement and sign recommendations, that's acceptable. Shall not obscure significant architectural details, it's in the sign then, so that's acceptable. Consistency and uniformity of multiple signs, that's not applicable. Illumination, not applicable. Pants and banners are prohibited, not applicable. The letters are fixed, painted and are engraved directly on the building or structure are concerned, that's acceptable. Question. Yeah. In the project description it says 802 spirits from Motleyker store, and then the sign as it's shown here says from Motleyker store, 802 spirits. So the design for, fill this out, it should be from Motleyker store, 802 spirits. So the 802 spirits logo is one that the DLC has had for a number of years, and we're trying to get people to understand that that's where there is a liquor store. So we're trying to use that on state signs and store signs, and so it should say liquor store 802 spirits, so the picture is correct. Okay, thanks. One other quick question, how are those affixed, are they just like double sticky tape? No, so they are actually bolted, bolt mounted onto the plywood facade that's on there now, and then if there's any holes from existing lettering that we filled with caulking. Yeah. It says it in the description, flush mounted to plywood wall with hidden bolts. Right. Yeah. One of our most expensive signs. Any signals? All in favor? I hope the other 74 stores go this easily. Do you do the whole state? That's what we're working on. So we have about 40 stores in the works right now. And you personally are going to go do them all? I'm working with the great big graphic set of more stuff, so we will visit every store, decide what we do, do the permits for all towns that require them, and get them all out there. Okay, you need to sign this right above my name. Oh, sorry. Oh, nope. It usually goes backwards here and then to me, works perfect. Yeah. You do not need to go to the DRV. Correct. So you'll get a permit issued out of the department of planning and economic development from us. And will that need to be displayed for two weeks prior to? There'll be a notice along with the permit to be displayed. And it's not too, yeah, it's not, it's not 15 days. Oh, no, it is two weeks. 15 days, right? 15 days, not 30. So we'll be notified when it's ready. We pick it up and we can. Or we'll mail it to you. I think there was some email correspondence. Yes. So one will go to one of you and one will go to the other. I can't remember who gets what. Okay. Awesome. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Thank you. Feel free to email tomorrow morning if you want to. Okay. Great. Thank you. River Street between Langdon and State. You want to make that permanent. Correct. That's correct. Yeah. Okay. Next we go to the F domain which is located in the city of Langdon. We will have that later. I'm a former executive director of Montpelier. Yeah. Nate Hausman board member from up to your alive. And I sit on the design committee of Montpelier live. And vice president. Oh, Yes. So we have an existing permit for the river art installation. That is located on the state street side of the Langdon Street bridge across the river. of a, yes, our hope is to try having it over the winter to see if there are any issues with it being up over the winter and assuming that there are no issues to plan to have it up year round moving forward. And so, and we've been in front of this committee a couple of times for the seasonal approval and have gotten approval and have also it's been received very, very well by the community. And so our purpose I guess in, and I should also say as part of that we did an engineering review for this committee's request. And we also have talked to the property owners, of course. And so all, we've gotten all the green lights in speaking with Audra downstairs. She indicated that she didn't think that there would be any problem with snow. So one of the reasons why we were initially thinking seasonal as we wanted to pilot it for public opinion, but she indicated that she didn't think that there would be any challenges with the river flowing even in winter. So the idea, our request is to approve that. If the ice gets high enough, take that, that'll be the least of their reverse. Yeah, so that's our, you know, if it obviously if it gets carried away by ice it gets carried away. Just this winter or? I mean, ideally, I think if the committee could approve it to be permanent, so much the better. But if you feel more comfortable approving it as a pilot, that would be fine. Clearly you're gonna weather more over the winter than it does during the summer. And I always worry about maintenance on these things. You know, those flags get beat up as they do. You know, it was responsible. I feel alive as possible for the things. Yes. And so that's what I would probably seek if we put a, you know, the responsible and maintain it, you know, flags deteriorate and new ones. That's how it makes sense. Yeah, we have no issues. Similar to landscaping maintenance. Yeah. I guess my other comment is it is art that it being permanent seems like maybe there could be some other ideas that happened there so that it didn't necessarily need to be blue flags all the time. Sure, and I mean, when we say permanent, we just mean so that we don't have to come back to you next year for another season overview, but no plans to take it down, but also no plans to say that it's gonna be here for the next 30 years either. So we'd certainly be, And certainly part of the original conversations and ongoing discussions have been changing the color of the little flags that flap in the wind and things like that too. So we'd, yeah, we'd be welcome to invite that. Any other questions? I guess we all know what it looks like. Yes, there's a photo attached as well. They're very popular. It certainly would make our lives easier. It is a significant amount of work to take it down and put it back up seasonally. Yeah, I just want to put in adjustments to the scope. I just want to add that you'll maintain it. Sure. Okay. It's possible for maintenance flags that kind of thing. There's nothing that looks worse than one of these things that it's just, let's call it. Oh yeah, absolutely, yeah. We have a series of criteria, present preservation or reconstruction of an historic style. That's not applicable in my feeling. Harmony of exterior design with other properties of the district. Compatibility of proposed materials with other properties in the district. This is so different. Not applicable landscaping. Not applicable. Prevention of incompatible design buildings, color scheme, that's acceptable. Location and appearance of all utilities, not applicable. Recognition and respect for view quarters, significant vistas, that's acceptable. For my own clarification, I have a question as to what the scope of landscaping is. Does that just mean plants? Because this feels like landscaping to me. It qualifies under public art, really. It's not, I mean, technically, you don't even have, no, you do have the zoning framework because of the design review. I believe that we typically would be exempted, but because it's in the river specifically that and it needs a approval from the flood manager that it also had to go through DRC. So it's, I mean, the landscaping doesn't really, I don't think it qualifies as landscaping. And I don't think we, I don't think we, if somebody puts a, you know, like a gnome in their front yard, we don't, I'll do a zoning permit for that. You know, it's plant shrubs. It's not really, necessarily all the time. That's different. Do I hear a motion? I make a motion to accept the. Okay, it's all in favor. I'll say it in a second. All in favor. Thank you. I'll sign it both my name and I'll sign it. Great. Thank you very much for your time. Hundred State Street. You're going to want the system? We can if it'll work. But what I think we're going to do when somebody has an objection is listen to the presentation, ask for public comments and then have our discussion. I think during the presentation, we'll do what we did last time and turn off the lights so that we can actually see the screen and then figure you'll do that stuff, that stuff on the screen. Yeah. This should be pretty straightforward as long as there's an open USB port. You get to be in two homes for the next day? Oh, is there, there's a password, isn't there? Presentation, I wait for you to get done. Well, if I can sort out this password thing there. I thought the exclamation point was extra. Yeah. All right. Oh. Do you need me to back on? Well, I'm just trying to, I don't know this computer very well. We're going to do our best to try to get through this tonight. All right. I don't want to rush things or I have questions answered because we're up against seven o'clock at night. I understand that. We're up against seven o'clock at night. I'm going to explain that the design has not changed significantly since I saw you last, but I will tell you what we have been up to. One of the things that came in too late to be sort of talked about at sketch plan review was the transition for these rooftops, these stair tower tops to be round, rounded roofs with glass enclosures. The other thing is is there was some exploration of trying to provide a bike path via the Haney lot down through the Haney lot and up to the bike path. Right now because of the grading difficulties we have in that area, we haven't found a graceful way to get people up there. Currently the path that was proposed is from State Street down through the project where you come on top of this walkway at the top. Well, it's kind of hidden by the bridge, but a walkway along the top here and connect with the base bike path here. You go between the parking lot and the building for that. Yeah, between the hotel and the parking garage out. And there's about eight and a half feet of drop from the bike path down to the level of the Haney lot because of the way they did those bridge approaches and we haven't found a graceful way to do that without creating a huge dam here. And unfortunately because of what we're working on in terms of storm water, that's the one place we cannot afford to dam water up because all watershed comes down through here. One thing we could consider and I'd love to hear from the board about this is we could put a pedestrian bridge from the second level of the garage over to the bike path level. That would be doable without having a negative impact on that. The other thing I wanted to talk to this board about is you'll have seen in the staff comments, Meredith is... They don't pick those. Oh, they don't? Okay. Well, the question was raised whether or not a vine is a shrub for purposes of meeting your landscaping requirement. Our landscape architect says, yeah, I mean in terms of it being a herbaceous woody plant with a root and a thing that grows up, it just has a different growth habit but we are asking that the city consider the plantations on the green screen system as being satisfying the requirement for shrubs in this project. We will ultimately have the right number of trees but that is something that we, I guess we're gonna need consideration on. That's a development review board decision. So they can talk about the design for landscaping but they won't necessarily talk about the numbers of trees and shrubs. Fair enough. We have also, we had previously submitted, oh geez, I don't want that. We had previously submitted lighting plans for the garage floor plates. I'm sorry. And I think the question was raised whether or not, you know, what was going on with the exterior lighting? The exterior lighting plan had been prepared during the original round of approvals. We do have a point-by-point analysis for the entire site including the expanded garage and those are within normal values. The one area of discussion we can have is whether or not, based on comments from the police, we wanna allow some light dress pass and overlight this back area a little bit. Normally we try to light things in a way that by the time you got to the property line there was no foot candles spilling over but it may be desirable in this case to consider doing that. And as far as those fixtures themselves go, our proposal for typical street lights is an LED fixture where the LED lamps are buried up in the top of that cone. Phillips Lumac makes a nice looking fixture. These are somewhat traditional, I think. And it was our thought that between the hotel and general site pathways and everything in downtown that this would be an appropriate choice. You wanna push me off in another direction, that's fine, but these are a good-looking fixture. We've used them before. How similar is that to existing? Well, it's not exactly the same. In terms of, you mean in terms of the shape of the housing itself? Well, it's not an exact match but if that's a concern, we can keep looking for that. We were after it was the LED feature there. So the existing LEDs that are in place now, why not just match with them? I think those aren't correct. James has matched the same standard. Has he? Okay, yeah, I'm sorry, James isn't here, but I think it, okay. It's gonna be a warm color to have insurance involved. Well, that's a hot discussion in the lighting trades right now, I guess. Whether or not you want blue, white, light or yellowish kind of light, it doesn't matter to me because we're after a certain light intensity. Does this board have an opinion on that? Actually, you wanna match what you have currently. Yeah, that's right. I think the city standard called for like 3000 Kelvin which is like, yeah, more. That's warmer. Yeah, that's the warmer light. I'm bluing, so that's what we're doing. There will be fixtures of this type over the entries to the garage and then a couple of other corners for just general security lighting. It's nothing fancy, but it's a good fixture. That's how they do as well. They're all LED, slightly bigger, slightly different for, you know, slightly. The lighting is, well, this is well-shielded, but when you get looking up in the garage and the ceiling lights. Yes. Figured out that people are gonna be looking at directly involved or gonna be shielded enough. Well, I can show you. I'm just looking for the right fixture. Okay. I hope this is it. Some of these file names. Okay, that's a minor fixture that's just used in the stairwells. But this is it. So it's got this translucent white base on it. These are pretty big. I mean, it doesn't look like it, you know, but I think this fixture is a couple feet in diameter. And it's pendant-mounted so that it hangs down. It's not hidden. Here's a, you know, 18 in one direction. What this does is it hangs down between the flutes of the concrete framing of the garage so that when the light comes out of the bottom of it, it's not getting cut off by the pieces of the beams. And then we did give a point-by-point analysis for the lighting on the floor plates of the individual floors here. So when you're outside, you'll be looking through a filter of things. But those larger openings where we have the sculptural thing going on, I mean, I expect you'll probably be able to look up and see some of these. But we should also take a look at some of the visual analysis stuff because, you know, when you look at how these things sit in the landscape, you know, it would really be people on the bike path or in anything who would run into that problem. The very top of the garage, just on that open deck where we don't have a ceiling to mount, just wanted to show the same fixtures available with a pole mount. And it's simple and it's clean and it's neither modern nor historical looking but a great quality of light and a good manufacturer. So we felt comfortable recommending this. So that's gonna be on the roof? That would be on the top tier of the parking garage. Just running down the center, yeah, this way she did say bring a mouse, but I... I wanna go back to this roof file here. We had done a couple of views that were requested specifically. I don't know that this board got to spend much time on it. This is the view, I actually, Public Works asked us to take this particular view, but this is the very end of Shaw's and next door, this fenced in area. That was that building, it was just torn down recently. And here's the railroad right away. You can just see the end of the trestle bridge here. And if you look down through here, that's about what you can see in the garage is that art panel, just to put it into context. And then here's the hotel beyond and then there's the Capitol dome. We also looked at it from Memorial Drive and I actually, my coworker climbed around behind the gas station and took this view. And here it is, right here in the foreground is what will become Confluence Park. Here's the trestle bridge here and here's again how you'll perceive this garage from that distance. You can see here, this is top deck. This will be essentially lining up with the floor level of the fourth floor of the hotel. There's the fifth floor of the hotel. And in the distance beyond that is the existing six-story portion of the Capitol Plaza. The state house dome is back over here behind these trees. But this is new stuff that we've done since we saw you because the discussion of context was so important. And I did bring physical samples of the proposed brick granite and I also brought a piece of the green screen for anybody who hasn't seen it before. I think you all had, but that's the actual, that's an actual piece of it. What we buy will be more like a four by eight sheet, but, and it goes with the solid part up, obviously. There was one thing on the garage elevations I did want to point out and this isn't the one I wanted. Well, what I was looking for was the exterior elevations. Here we go, that arched component. The screen is making this squished a little bit. I know that a couple members of this board sort of question this element. And when I went back and kind of reported to the rest of the city government and talked to the other team members, they asked me to push back a little on that. I think there are some people in the group who like it. I'm gonna ask if this is a deal breaker for the design advisory committee because I got constituencies for both approaches. I will say that I liked it when I drew it. I think if it's detailed well, it'll come off well. I also think that with the introduction of the slightly curved roofs over the top of the garage, that having that curved element is a little less random than I think you were concerned before. But I did want to point it out because I know specifically you asked me to look at that and that's where I landed on it. But I don't want to be confrontational about it. There was a lot of opinion about that. Have you you having that chance to render it as if it were built? It's still kind of got all those horizontal lines coming through it. I've got a better color model image of these elevations, but I was having trouble finding them. They might be on a different side. You were gonna render it as if the blocks actually were doing their job versus the way it's currently rendered. Right. To show the segments that that is being worked into the construction drawings, but we didn't want to present anything tonight that hadn't been in your packets. So that those improvements will show up in the next application package which has to be in this week for the next meeting. What you're talking about is making it look like it could be an arch. I mean, the way it's set up there now without modern construction, it couldn't possibly construct that stone that's hanging out in space. Right. So those segmented arch blocks with the appropriate sort of trim relief to them will line that opening and make it make sense as a masonry opening. You know, and have a little bit of vertical size to it considering the scale of that arch. That's our proposal, but I didn't want to present anything you had seen prior to tonight, tonight. Right, can we just ask you, when we go back to the elevation drawings, if the landscaping and everything in the back with regard to the bike path connection ends up having that elevated platform boardwalk, how much of that arch will you actually see? Well, I've come back to something I said moments earlier which is that we're proposing to eliminate all that. You are, okay. Yeah. Okay. I could make that connection. Okay, yeah. Just to eliminate the boardwalk too, okay. Right, because I think the concern was that big change of grade there and too much stuff plugging up that corner. Gotcha. Because that was the only place we could do it. Now I understand. But I am, like I said, we would be willing to consider something like a pedestrian bridge coming over from the garage at 528 so it could connect right into the bike path. That might be a little more practical. That would mean that people would have to walk through the garage to get. Yeah, they would. I expect bike riders are gonna come into this garage. We're proposing bike storage in there. Hmm. You know. We- Skateboarders too, probably. Oh, you won't be able to keep them out. Yeah, you won't be able to keep them out. I just worry about bicycles riding through the garage that seems an inherent conflict. Kicking your bike in there and parking it, you know, next to it, the entrance is one thing, but actually riding through there is part of the park. And I think a pedestrian bridge would probably just clutter things up. Okay. Okay, I won't argue with you about that. There's a whole lot of stuff going on that you probably don't wanna hear about the floodplain planning and all that stuff. So I guess with those few points brought up that I wanted to bring up, I want you guys to maybe hit me with some questions. So the arch. Yeah. I'm still not a real big fan of it. And you said you did have something to show me or not. We're gonna include that in our next application package, which is due this week, right? Yeah, depending on what Dan says at the DRB, but that doesn't necessarily come back to here unless there are design changes that need to come back. Okay. If they all vote on the design or you can not vote on it and wait to see what else comes out. You have an alternate, you're preparing an alternate. We are preparing an alternate for that. Yeah. And I'd be happy to come back just on that one issue that made us, you know, limit the hearing to come back and show us the details of that. I just have to throw myself onto mercy of the court and point out, you know, how many other threads there are to this thing right now in terms of other permits activity going on. So it wasn't that we were given the idea short shrift. We just didn't get it done in time to make that submittal. I think for me, it was like the one thing that I was looking to see. I know, and that's why I'm bringing it up. The other thing too is the curved roofs, that wasn't on the renderings the last time. No, that is in response to comment we got at other board meetings. I think that might have been the city council started it. But the idea that the tops of those towers flat, they were lacking in some jazz. I personally like that curved shape, that slightly curved roof shape. I've used it in other work of mine, so it's something I kind of dig, but it also allows us to sort of bring me a total mass of that thing down because we can allow that roof shape to sort of follow the runs of the stair down and we don't have to have that big empty volume over the intermediate landing. So the one closest to the hotel sheds onto the garage? Yes, the purpose of that being that we didn't want any snow or anything sliding off of that and dropping down to the entrance to the garage. Now another thing that from many, many months ago talked about was the steelwork at the openings. Yes. I wanted you to look at different approaches. I think this is fairly similar to me. It's exactly similar to the previous thing. I'm of two minds on that one and I'll say why we left it there because we've incorporated other kinds of big art into this design now at the encouragement of the city council and members of the public. So one thing we could do is we could have us do this and make it part of the approved design or we could engage in a process where there's some competition for these pieces of public art and that gets integrated into the design. We create the place for it and then we go about, because we're not specifically proposing that the paintings that we're showing here are what we want to do for art. Those are images that I just captured because I thought they were cool, but I think our belief is that all those paintings and perhaps that sculpture as well ought to be something where we have a little bit of a public process to do that and that was really well received at the city council level. So the openings where you have steel. Yeah. You're calling that sculpture. Those bars going every which way. Is it architectural element? Well, I mean, I can get the same job done a lot of ways. I'm using that steel sort of to brace up the lintels, but it doesn't have to necessarily be that shape or those colors or, so that's how that's left at the moment. If that's unsatisfactory, then we can talk about that and come back with some more options. I think we talked about kind of different relief for some depth to it as well. Yeah, it does sort of fit within a space about 20 inches wide and those pieces are freedom, sort of occupy that whole plane. But no, I'm. What was the idea behind the random sort of bars going every which way? My thought process and again, I'm not a sculptor, but my thought process was that it sort of was meant to be a callback to the steel elements and various parts going their way on the trestle bridge. And at the same time, be kind of similar in a way to bikespokes. So not explicitly one thing or another, but when you look at that trestle bridge, obviously it's made up of triangles, but we don't perceive them that way. We perceive them. We look through them multi-dimensionally and there are pieces going different directions depending on which side of the bridge they're on and what part of the trestle panel it is. So that was the genesis behind that idea. And we thought by having different angles, it sort of broke up some of the boxiness of the, there's a lot of square linear things going on here. We're looking for opportunities to soften it up. How many are there at this point? There are sculptures like that here on this corner here. There's another one in the center of this wall here facing the street and then there's the one by the front entrance. We left the last 40 some odd feet of the wall here is essentially blanked out now to receive whatever happens in the future from the, you know, if the church does their project. And so there are, this opening is glazed in, that's where the stairs are and this one is solid because it's facing another build. So there are four of them. Solid, just the brick and granite. Oh, how many of these panels you mean? No, sorry. Yeah, just the brick and the granite. There's a solid panel here on this corner because it addresses the church, both the church and this other, what people call the garage building. And then there's another solid corner. Well, there's another big section of solid wall between the two buildings and then it turns to green wall once it comes out from behind that, from the hotel. Yeah. So there's four steel sculpture panels. Yes, yeah. The other, is there any provisions for art panels on the state street side in the building? These I think are, you know, people are gonna see them driving by. Yeah. Probably from the light path that you're gonna be gonna have to have quite a look up and it seems like more people would see side of them on hard, I don't know whether you have the elevation of that or not, that could, is there a way you should do the same thing on that side? Yeah, so this is the side facing Christ Church or State Street, but you know, we could do that same treatment uniformly across here if you wanted and just mirror the image that's on the other side of the building or we could have these individually. And then there are sort of relieved panels on the solid sections. There are lots of relieved panels. You can see them indicated here. There's like a two inch reveal where these pop back and those happen, those are sprinkled sort of all over the place. The question is, is how much of that do you really, how much of this do we really want to have happen? Do we want it to be to find the building or do we want it to have it sort of be focused as a sort of feature? I was thinking more of having, you know, whatever spaces could work could be constructed so they could be that, not really changing the whole design of it. Okay. Yeah. Constructing the surface so it works. So that would work here and here. It could work here, although I think it would compete with other things going on. It could happen down here as well. So yeah, there are other opportunities for our building. We have talked sort of at the city council level of maybe having the council for the arts and some of the local arts institutions could get sort of involved a little bit in curating that art or helping choose it. And then so if that were the case, this board or the development review board could say, well, when that process is done we'd like to see it before we paint it up or something. And that would be perfectly appropriate. So it sounds to me like I dropped the ball a little bit on the steel sculpture part of this. I apologize, but I can add that to a list of things we should talk about next time I see it, if it is your pleasure. Yeah, I mean, I think it's an interesting, if it's gonna be something that is designed into it, we would wanna know that that's what it really is gonna look like. If it is a spot that is being left open for people to sort of create something that seems like a slightly different animal. So I don't know. So can I get a sense of the committee as far as which of those two approaches you favor? Would you like to pin some of this down and leave only the painted portions as being sort of competitively arrived at? Or do you think it's appropriate that we make that a public process? Cause I could go either way and I'm happy to come back and explore the fine grain detailing of that with you. But I do sense a real urge for public involvement in some of this art. Whatever sculpture you put in the windows, that's gonna be one of your last installation items, right? So it basically has some time. I'm thinking about the public input, I'm thinking about having a design competition for that, as you suggested. I don't take some time, but... Well, yeah, behind all of this is a concrete structure that holds everything up. So yeah, I mean, I think we would have time if there's a consensus that that's the right way to go about it. Because at a minimum we ought to pick some paintings for these big panels here, which if you approve this, you're just gonna approve these white spaces as receiving future art. And we can act on that permit and build the project in it. You know, I mean... It just probably just means labeling of not allowing the drawings, right? Yeah, okay, we certainly can do in the final permit drawings. But again, if the portal sculptures or whatever you wanna call them, those, I agree. I think we talked about that and I just slipped my mind. If we want to explore a design that becomes part of the approval, then I guess we'll have to do a little more work and come back on that. Any questions? Well, you've got the drawings up. How about the living wall? What's, you know, we had talked about maintenance of it and who is responsible for it and who get last. Yeah. I'll dig into that a little bit. Well, I brought a physical sample of it and you can see the other thing we've done in the elevations. You can see where we've perforated it with some kind of playful openings as well. The plant materials specified on a landscaping plan include trumpet vines and Virginia creeper. And according to our landscape architect, it's gonna be like maintaining new trees. And it's gonna be about the same amount of commitment as if you did a new plantation of street trees. Someone's gonna have to periodically go through and remove dead growth, you know, and the roots will have to be monitored and watered and cared for, you know, until these things really establish. I think we can all think of examples of buildings that are really covered with ivy and there is ivy in the mix as well. You know, once it gets past a certain level of maturity, that stuff is like kudzu, it really hangs in there. So the big commitment is in getting it to establish. And I think that may be a question for the management team in the end because all of this is gonna have to be managed. Every surface is gonna have to be cleaned, every surface is gonna have to be lit and all of that. The landscaping, whether it was on the ground or on the wall, still has to be maintained in accordance with your ordinance. It becomes part of the approval. So what? So you're showing us, you're representing a living wall here. Yes. And what stage of growth is this representation? Is the ideal state at a certain day from? The black and white elevations don't really show plantings growing on the wall system, but the renderings do show them fully grown out. Are you jumping here a little bit? I think the main strategy is, can you just show for the record? James Philly shares, landscape architect. I didn't see you speaking, oh my God, sorry. So the strategy with the living wall here is to have several different species. And the idea is that they'll be doing different things at different times. And then we'll also have evergreen climbers in the background. So part of the maintenance will be seeing which vines thrive and encouraging those. And perhaps we've really over planted. And so the idea is that right off the bat we'll have a lot going on in the ground. Year two, we hope to see it sort of at the second floor. Year three and four is where that really will take off. And we're hoping to have three or four floors of coverage at that point. The other point of the maintenance that's great here is that because we have a garage on the inside, the maintenance will be able to pull any dead stuff from the inside of the garage through and control any of the dead material that way. That's it. So what they'll do is they'll put the clippers through and pull any of the dead stuff that they can pull through. That's the idea. You're saying it's gonna take like three or four years to fill in? Yes, that's right. Generally with plants, the second year, first year they go in, they're pretty static. And then by year two, they take off, year three and four, they really start to grow a lot. That said, we've got really aggressive species like wisteria and Virginia creeper and things like that. So I do feel we're gonna get good coverage. I think the key is, as Greg said, the trellis that we're putting on it is definitely not ugly and it's actually quite nice. And so part of that, the joy of these vines and these green walls is seeing the plants kind of make their way up over that fourth dimension of time. And I think overall the experience as the years go as the vines grow will be a beautiful thing. And I think that the people will enjoy it. Kind of seeing it for the rest of our time. Bill? Yeah. Bill, you want to go to the microphone, please? I didn't know you were about to go. I'm sorry, I was answering those late. I know it needs a design expert or a cultural expert. I just wanted to share. I was happening to be in Minneapolis last weekend and came across a parking garage with a green wall and took pictures. People wanted to see one in place. Do you know how old it is? I don't have any idea, I just buck Minneapolis. Yeah, that's it. We've been working with it. The guys that provide this also have done a whole foods in Chicago that's doing well and it's very brutal culture. I'm not looking for it. Came across it and said, oh. Good, good. I am certainly not a plant expert at all but I seem to have this recollection of act by mind that Virginia Creeper is an invasive plant that spreads. It does and that's, we're going to harness that. That's what we want is to give. It spreads. I don't think it's technically an invasive. No. I checked the plants. Okay. It is very aggressive and that's why we selected it. I'm sure you do. I checked it against Vermont's invasive list and it will sink again but I don't think it was there. It should be fairly easy to control. In this application, that was the other reason we felt good about it. So do you have an image, an elevation of what this will look like year one? We could do a time study. I know that when we first went through this process we had shown elevations of it at sort of year three and four where we anticipated the vines to be up around the third and fourth level. Another thing that is a factor in this and it's not so well shown in that rendering is that we are also calling for a river birch all along the two main frontages there, the two elevations and we're expecting those to go in anywhere from 10 to 12 feet, maybe even a little bit bigger and those birches will go in and grow quickly and I think they will also cover the first 25, 30 feet of the building to kind of create a scrim to look through. Especially in winter when we fill out that'll be attractive with the green ivy behind. Yeah, like I said, I don't have one showing it in interim stages, this is what it looks like day one and we're talking about a process that'll take two or three years to get up to the fourth floor. Oh yeah, yeah. Like I say, it's okay to have that process happening and to watch plants growing and work their way up a climbing trellis. I think that's, there's something very attractive of that as well as having a green square the way they kind of meander their way up. Especially on the heating building that GVA did, you see those vines kind of going up the side and they're beautiful how they kind of pioneer their way up and around to cover the full elevation. Almost to me that's more beautiful than the wall of green, that's thick and heavy. I like seeing less structure. Yeah, I think it's not, this was cheap or something I'd be concerned but this is a very beautiful product and then when it's on these four by eight sheets and as Greg has shown by cutting these little elliptical apertures and that's what I'm looking for. I saw it in one of these pieces. Yeah, I think it's... Bill, your picture is really useful because it shows a kind of varied texture of the different plants. Right. Is it possible for you to find out from Minneapolis? I will, I'll ask. Their climate is very similar to ours. Exactly, we showed a case study from Chicago I think when we did this first process and I can dig all of that back up. There's a lot more parking going just in Minneapolis, St. Paul, over here. I don't know if it's in the line. It's an uptown. Uptown. That's your information after the play out there. Yeah, we've obviously planted it kind of uniformly with a hedge texture that we have but that's the limits of our song where it's... Yeah, no, it's very difficult to show that. But... I guess this is what I was looking for. Yeah. So is this... Yes. This is... You order this from the manufacturer of this with these cut into it or are you, is somebody gonna pay? We'll have to customize those. I think they can do almost anything. They have a really good ability to do stuff but I'm sure we can just cut that easily too if we need to. I mean this looks like a powder coated thing and then they're gonna... I thought processes periodically you should have the opportunity to just sort of come upon an opening and be able to look out at different levels on the building. And so it was meant to be kind of playful. That's it. And I think that maintenance will play a part there keeping it a little bit lighter. We don't want this to be a super heavy feeling when you're inside either in the summertime. One thing I thought about the square towers that you had for the stair towers. Yeah. And I don't quite understand how you... Exactly what you're gonna do now. I understand the curve was... But I think there might be some interesting views from that if people look at the downtown. I'm just thinking about the square towers that you stand up there and look around and see the downtown. Somebody suggested, I don't, I can't remember who but it seems like a great idea to go around the top floor of this thing and sort of mount on the parapets on this little picture showing what you're looking at. I've seen those before. And I would really love to see that happen here. So that people, they could get out of their car and they're parking but then they kind of walk over to the edge of the garage and kind of check out downtown. Because yeah, I think you'll have amazing views from the top floor of this thing. The enclosed part of it, I just think that not to be thought about it, I don't have a strong opinion about it. Oh, as far as the stair towers themselves, where there's a lot of glass on them. Yeah, another layer to that could also be the lighting and how the lighting is handled inside of there. Perhaps it's different. I just want the curve most to kind of, you still could get the view out of them. Oh, yeah. Oh, right, right, right, right. They go right down to the floor, right? Well, they come down to, they're gonna come down to five feet off the deck or something like that, but the stairs are going down underneath them. So people will be able to look up to them. Yeah, but they had the top floor, those are shown as all glass. Wasn't the intent to soften the towers to reduce the overall height? Yeah, the squared off caps just relieving people a little cold. We had the one, the north elevation though, which is the one that's gonna be facing State Street. Yeah. That one has glass and there's people that are gonna be able to see out and that's gonna be the one with the elevator, right? That's where you're waiting for the elevator. There's that big window right there. So they'll be able to see out there. Yeah, and you'll have a little bit of solid wall where the elevator itself is, and then the rest of that is all glass. Yeah. And I'm actually picturing that, maybe some kind of parking symbol happens up here. Unless I'm mistaken, I think the signs will come in as a separate application after permit. And I assume something like that would be part of the sign package. So you mentioned a second floor pedestrian connector. Yeah. So if that doesn't happen, how is the connection made? The way it had been per the original application, which was, I'm trying to find a site plan here. It shows it. Yeah, it shows me in the hotel. Right. It comes down from State Street along the buildings through here and along the top of this retaining wall down in the corner where it catches up with the bike path. And then all of this is down at elevation 518, 519. So this is a story or more or less a story below the bike path at that point, which is trying to get up so I can get over the river. Oh, why is the space between the buildings? It's 10 feet right now, which is the same way. No, it's, you know, I mean, it's an urban thing. It's kind of an alley. It's close. And yeah, I mean, you got a five-story, 12-building here and a four-story tall building here. But, you know, it only lasts for about 40 feet before it pops back out into the sunlight. And is the vegetation on that side? There's a green wall that's, there's a solid masonry wall that comes down to here. And then it's green wall to the corner. So facing the area here around the, this is, this bump out is the swimming pool. Is our old paths handicapped accessible? Yeah, that route is ADA compliant. That's the problem. I mean, to put a ramp down on this corner, it really occupied the whole corner. And this heavy dotted line here is our river setback. So we really don't want to put development in that zone. Although there's some uncertainty about that. I, in the comments, we didn't quite understand where you were going with that. But I think that's a conversation for tonight. Yeah. And so? Greg, anything else you want to say? No, I think we should give the public some time. I know, yeah, I don't want to move things along too fast, but I want to keep them going. You guys? I'll see if I can more just understand the relationship of the, what's happening, like this is a concrete wall, retaining wall. It's a retaining wall. And then what happens in this space here? It's gonna be like a, it's gonna be like a water. It's our same planting. So basically all the way down the train tracks, we have this river birch and red fescue grass planting sort of pallet. And that would continue on down here and even wrap the building. And so the idea is to keep this continuous, yeah. So what goes through the arch? Unfortunately, this is area that's left for flooding. We have to leave it at that elevation. So water goes through the arch? Yes. When the flood comes. If there were a flooding downtown in that figure, everything would be underwater. Sure, yeah. Water would flow into that lowest level and then flow back out. That's the idea. But so our pedestrians, I saw a gate and some rendering there. Are people encouraged to walk through there? We wanted to put a gate on the west, on the east end of this, heading over towards the north branch of the river for access if this gets temporarily assigned as a farmer's market space or something. So the ground plane of this building is flat now, or essentially flat, which makes it available for, an expanded farmer's market coming inside and under cover if that needed to happen or other types of activities. As we explored that possibility, we said we should put a gate in there in case, just to give us the flexibility to have people come to help. So the pedestrian can walk kind of, that sidewalk pokes you out here. It would be up on the upper side up here. Yeah, so we'd be up here. And then this elevation drop is 10 feet. It's about eight feet. Well, it's 10 feet floor to floor in a garage, but the existing grade out here is two or three feet lower than that. And then this area is level as drawn here? Yes. And is just sort of... It'll be planted with birches and this fescue grass, so it would be planted, but we have to choose river birch. One, because just going through down the railroads, we've noticed a lot, this wonderful kind of scrim of river birch along the edge of the railroad track as it goes sort of to the east and to the west. And so we found the idea was to kind of keep that feeling and that look continuous down the side of the train track there. The other thought is that we've had to, the grass we've chosen is a very hardy grass because the railroad will spray. We need to have whatever we have there, very low maintenance and very resilient. So that's the kind of the birth of these two things. And then the idea is to have birches of different heights and different maturity, to kind of give it a more natural feel rather than just plunking them in a line to kind of acclimate it. Birches are a short-lived, high-maintenance tree. Well, part of it is also there's a power line running down there so we can't have ginormous trees kind of along that corridor. That's one of the practical things we've been dealing with. So the thought is that if we have sort of 25-foot birch trees that are regenerating and we're encouraging the younger, we have sort of two or three different maturity levels being planted that we would have this succession. So we would always have this scrimmage. If we did lose a tree or two, it wouldn't, you know, we wouldn't suddenly have a gaping hole to a parking lot or to whatever. I understand the need to let the water out. That makes sense to me. The language of arch really means to me like something special and some sort of entrance and some sort of like, hey, this is a really cool moment to kind of go through. This feels like it's on the back of the building and there's no reason to go through it and it's kind of just coming to this sort of grassy area. That's my thoughts, but I mean, I like the concept, but I feel like... I think in the background too, there is a model being run now of exactly what we can have there in terms of flooding and what levels we can, I think. Yeah, that is a thing that's running now for the next couple of weeks. So we've kind of presented the most extreme version here of what we would need there, but if we could bring that grade up and then bring the arch up, I think, great, that would be it. Just one more. I don't know. No, it's a sort of architectural integrity question. Yeah, yeah. Which seems to be antithetical to its form. Right. I came away from our last get-together and sort of understanding that perspective. And I mean, from an architectural theory point of view, it's right on. I mean, but then I said, well, they want to get rid of the arch and everybody was disappointed. So I will take another look at it, but I mean, I have to have an opening down there. If it's not an arch, it's going to end up being a square opening, which maybe is, in your mind, is just drawing less attention to itself and therefore is... But if we go to that elevation sheet again, I mean, you can kind of see the difference. Just close this site plan. This is the side facing Memorial Drive with the arch and the art panels. And this is the side facing Christ Church without the arch. And it's just a little less... It's a little more plain-spoken. And in keeping with your thought process, I mean, I wouldn't want to line it with a colonnade or anything else. Similarly, because again, I'm making a promise that I'm not ending up keeping. So again, in this case, plus is more aesthetically. Okay, I will do this though. I expect that we're going to see you at least once more before this whole process is done. I don't know. I mean... Right. I mean, it depends on if... What you guys want to decide on. If you don't decide on everything, definitely bring it back. And if there's major design changes between now and... I think there's a couple areas and they're consistent with our last meeting. I'm sorry to say, but I mean, that's kind of where we are. That this arched opening and then the treatment of these portal braces needs more attention. And if you could write a condition that said, you know, we'll move you on, but we want to see this again before construction or something. I don't know. I mean, I could do a final thing. I think there's too many things up in the air. Yeah. And that's partly just a fairness thing with other applicants when things are up in the air. We tend to table. Well, I came in expecting this was going to be more than one meeting. I didn't know we were ready for a vote tonight. I might have worked this weekend. Let's hear from the public. We had 20 minutes before the DRB starts. Would people like me to turn the lights on or leave them off at this point? I don't know how much people are going to be wanting reference to the... Okay, we'll turn it on. We saw how much difficulty he had finding any come-tries. Is that you? That's me. Yeah. That's what I mean. First lady. Did you guys want to see these at all? Yeah, the marble. Yeah. I can see that. And this is for the... Trim bands. Trim bands. And we actually need to come back for retaining wall finish, too. So we have that. And this is going to be this... That's going to be the trim bands. Right, I'm just looking at the rough finish. Which tends to get dirty. I'll just ask after the presentation. What? The finish? Yeah, but it's going to catch his dirt. So that's what happens to the... Great, quick question. That flame finish? Yeah. My experience with that is that it tends to catch a lot of dirt. Okay. And then you get moss growing on it. And if you want to look at the state office building, the marble building right across from the state house, that has continual problems because it's a rough finish. So you would prefer the opposite side as the home surface? Different from about appearance. It's not going to make any difference. But for a maintenance issue, I think it is. And if you look at the wall in front of that building, that used to be a smooth finish. And for some reason, they sandblasted it, so it's rough. Now it catches all the dirt and moss and stuff grows in it. You know, it's just a practical thing rather than, probably not within the purview of this committee. Let's hear from the public, please. Okay. My name's Paul Carnahan. I live on Savon Street. I've got a couple of quick comments from the public perspective. The first one regarding the much discussed arch, I would agree with Seth and Ben that it seems to be, it's announcing an entrance that isn't there. It seems like it's a strange thing to put there. It's also, if you're standing on Memorial Drive, it's going to be bisected by the raised bike path. So you're not really going to get that full arch. You're going to just sort of get the suggestion of an arch. And then from the drawings, you're also going to get this diagonal going through it. That's the parking level. Because the parking levels are diagonal. So it seems to me it doesn't work at all. I love the idea of the arch above it. It seems to me that square openings would work just as well as the arch. It doesn't seem to me to add anything to the building and in fact sort of distracts from it. The public art alone would be, with just the square openings that consist of the rest of the building, it would seem a logical way to go. Then I also want to comment about all the fences around the bottom, keeping people from going in and out of it. That seems to me a missed opportunity and sort of an unfriendly aspect of the plan as seen now, particularly on the east end, where the architect was suggesting a gate. I would suggest just no fences at all. I mean, what are we trying to keep out? I'm not sure. If the problem is you think cars are going to roll through there, you can put up granite ballards or those low bumpers for cars to rest against. It seems to me, I really don't like the way that there's fences all around the bottom of this, particularly when there's the bike path on the, what is that, southern side of it. Going along with that, I'm curious about what's happening on the eastern side of the parking garage. I think Ben was starting to ask about that. It seems like there's sort of a no-man's land that's been created behind the old garage. We've got two garages going here, so it's a little confusing, but the historic garage and then the modern garage. Maybe there's parking going on back there and one of the plans, it seems to show a driveway. I'm not quite sure how traffic is going to be monitored going back and forth through that alley with cars. It seems like that needs a real resolution. Looks like the architect has totally ignored that area. Maybe because it's not part of the land that the city is renting from the kidneys, but maybe it should be. I don't think we should be, since this is a city project, I think the city should be taking responsibility for how that space is going to work. I also wanted to talk about the comment on the connection of the garage to the bike path. It's already been discussed. Again, I think Seth and Ben have been sort of asking questions about that. It seems to me it's a really weak area and aspect of this plan. Right now, I think there is still a door showing on the plans at that bottom right corner of the illustration that's on the screen right now, which basically opens up into nothing. It's going to open up into a bank, so people are going to have to scale an eight foot bank to get up to the bike path or they're going to go toward the river through this area that I've just described as a no man's land. Maybe it's paved, maybe it's not, maybe it's grass, it's unclear what that is. So it seems to me you're promising the pedestrian something that you're not delivering on. The architect suggested a bridge across. Eric said they thought that might clutter it. That might be true, but it would give a better access to that bike path. Right now there's the alleyway to the west of the garage. I would think that the local businesses, none of whom are represented here today would be very disappointed with the connection to the downtown, to Main Street. We're building this beautiful bike path bridge connecting this back area to Main Street. One of the things that's important with encouraging downtown success and vibrancy is having multiple paths to various places. So I think people are going to be taking that bike path bridge into the center of town. It's going to deliver them right next to the Savoy and right along Main Street. I think it's a real shame not to provide a stronger way for them to get up onto that bike path or pedestrian path and get into the city. Second comment is also about pedestrians. The path for, if you look at your plans, the path for pedestrians from the garage over to State Street are perilous. This hasn't been fought out at all. You've got people walking straight across one of your, either one of your two main entrances into the parking garage and you basically are walking them through a parking lot. There appears to be, maybe be a sidewalk along Northfield Savings Bank, but to get to that, you have to cross one of the main driveways into the garage and then walk across in front of the drive-through for Northfield Savings Bank. On the other side, there doesn't appear to be a sidewalk at all. I suspect because you are, you have probably a fairly narrow path, traffic path going in there. So I would say please look at the pedestrian access to this. Can I just, just as a- Did I read the plan wrong? No, no, no, you read the plan's right. I'm just saying that because the pedestrian access is something that's technically on the hotel site plan, there's going to be further discussion of that tonight at the DRB because the design review- Okay, these guys don't do- These guys don't do- The design review doesn't do access issues that's the development review board. Okay. So just if you have other comments like that about that section. Okay. Because this is just design review. So just to help make sure you know what I'm talking about. Okay, sorry, I thought that was a big thing that we're pushing here in Montpelier and it looks like it's not. That the architect, I would think that the architect could have some ideas about having to do that. So I guess just the final comment is about the trimming of the green wall that can be trimmed on the inside. As a volunteer, several years ago, not any longer, but with what used to be called MVCA, I spent many hours weeding the two front areas under the trees in front of City Hall and picking weeds from between the pavers. Our Department of Public Works has lots to do. They're not known for weeding, which is fine, but I find it incredible to think that they're going to be pulling the dead branches out from inside of the green wall. It just, I mean, it's not gonna happen. They've got a lot of things to do. Thank you. Thanks, Paul. Steven Whitaker, Montpelier. I'm gonna point out a couple of things, time is short and I think you're gonna need to take this up on another. At a prior meeting, it was asked and responded that the green wall needs to be based in earth, that it doesn't live in window boxes and we were told that this was gonna start down here. That contradicts what you're hearing about open gates, planters, doors, curb stops, et cetera, that year. But if this indeed needs to live in something beyond a window box, you got a real misrepresentation of the potential of this green wall. This has been tried in areas where I've seen and have family in other areas with the garages. The maintenance often falters. The dust, brake dust and tire rubber buildup from the vehicle, traffic in the garage, coats the leaves and kills the plants. And unless you're gonna set up a maintenance routine with biweekly power washing of the entire garage and wastewater treatment, you're not gonna have the success. I'd also ask you to think about what are the consequences of failed landscape design? It's not like you can go tear this thing down because there was a bunch of unfulfilled promises. This view, specifically the renderings, this is about a 25 foot bridge. So it strains credulity that a 45 foot garage is appearing to be six or eight feet below a 25 foot bridge. So the development review board did suggest or heard a suggestion, I don't know if they've acted on it, to do the floated balloon test, verified, compliance, witness measuring the cable up to the balloon to the height and possibly get corrected versions of these renderings because I have one that I did which is probably slightly exaggerated on the heights but conservative on the width. And I know that I went and looked at the charge of the designer review committee and you're supposed to not only preserve pedestrian access and flow, but the view sheds of the neighborhoods. And to in effect be blocking this, taking a city lot, a city lease, what is it, a 50 year lease on the Haney lot and be blocking the view out to the hills and be blocking the view from the Confluence Park which is potentially a joke at a 10th of an acre. Blocking the view of all the church steeples in the state house, et cetera, and the superior court. Those run directly counter to the design charges of the design review committee. I only had a chance to preliminary look at those tonight and I haven't printed them. But so getting accurate renderings, objective verified renderings of heights, impacts and view analysis is important. Preserving the walkways to basically take a common city throughway, which is the farmer's market lot where we would get to the park and totally obstruct it by putting this garage 20 feet from the North Branch is again directly contrary to the criteria that's supposed to guide your decisions. So I'm asking you to not assume that this is tinkering with a pre-approved plan from before. This is a much bigger garage with a much bigger footprint encroaching right to the limit, even an unverified river bank. I would encourage a site visit to that site and look at where the river bank is and have the architects or the engineers mark the corner of where this garage is gonna be. And examine the challenge to get, we do need to maintain access pedestrian and bike access up there. That's a problem they can't solve then they don't get to build their garage. It's really that fundamental. Light spillage from the openings. You've seen these bright 18 inch or 24 foot fixtures. Those are gonna be radiating out through the openings in this garage, well beyond the exterior lighting. You asked about lining. A pedestrian walking in the night happens to glance towards the garage and gets night blinded. That's not acceptable. You know, I'm not that I'm advocating for closing off all the openings in the garage. I'm advocating for not building it in this location. We're entering back, you see balloons, lights spillage. There's nothing, this is an entirely different project than what was reviewed a couple of years ago and approved as part of a hotel project. The city, by being the co-applicant has compromised its objectivity and its due diligence as far as, with the exception of Meredith, with what needs to be reviewed here and slow down, do it right, ask every question, demand verification, input penalties if it doesn't come through. There's nothing wonderful or beautiful or playful about this. This is putting lipstick on a pig and it's not gonna work. Thank you, Stephen. Anybody else, public comments? I don't know what's your pleasure. I think I can say what my view is, is that, I mean, we've heard some public comments that I'd like to take into consideration and see what the architect does about it. I don't think we're ready to move on it tonight, but. Agreed, agreed. I just have a procedural question in a way. Are we gonna be trying to find a special hearing time next week to do this, or do we just bump it to the next one and? The next one's pretty busy, right? The next one's pretty busy. I wouldn't be in favor of a special meeting. Next week and all. It depends on how. Oh, that'd be fantastic. Yeah. No, I really wanna move this along. Yeah, but these are substantive issues. I didn't come in here tonight expecting to walk out with an approval. I wanted to make progress towards that goal, though. And I think there's a couple of lingering issues that really need to be addressed. I do from think that this is the biggest project we've seen in Montelier for, I've lived here 42 years, certainly the biggest project we've seen here. And I don't want to make any mistakes that we can avoid in terms of design. We're completely on board with that. That's one very brief comment. Just wanna give Greg a little cover here with regard to the arch. I will say that it was discussed, I'm speaking here as city manager. The city council very strongly liked it, asked for it. So he got his marching order from the council to put that in. I'm sure we'll review that with him, but lest you think that he was being recalcitrant and not bringing in options of these marching orders from the other end of, you know, so that's fine. And we'll obviously follow the regulatory process, but I just wanted to make sure that I understood that that was where. There were a couple of comments made this evening that I'd like to pull the board on. The grills at the ground floor, the security fencing or whatever you want to call it. It doesn't serve any code function. I mean, there are some people who are concerned that people are gonna be back there hanging out. We don't want people filtering into the garage from multiple points, but I'm okay not having that fencing. But I just wanna know what the sense of the board is on that because that's an interesting possibility. I mean, finished grade is the same on both sides of that opening. So. Well, is it something where landscaping-wise it can be up elevated like that? And if you wanna come back and say that. James can back me up on this if he wants to jump up here, but we understood that we don't need a continuous strip of planting. We just need some places for the leaders to go up to get started and the revised drawings that were included in your packages for tonight did show an extension of the green wall system down to the grade to pick that up. That was a legitimate point unless the wrong drawing though. I would also like to see at least an effort at the bridge. I do take the comment of being able to park on the second floor and walk out and walk towards the Savoy as a really valid concern. And I would like to see a rendering or at least an idea of how that would, how that experience would happen. So you can, it's a little dark, but you can see here that there are panels here, here and here. For the, I showed on the A201 that was submitted, that's the pathway for those plants to go up there. But that's true. I mean, that has to come down pretty close to the ground for those vines to catch hold of it and take off. But it doesn't have to be continuous. Yeah, okay. I thought the fence was a code issue. I think nothing to do with the house. But I think, I don't know how the police would feel about it. Police I think wanted it to be very limited in progress and ingress for security reasons. Yeah, I'm glad. Well, maybe we can find a fence that doesn't, jump out at you so much or something. But I, yeah, I think that's sort of a policy issue. How are we going to operate this? Stupid, you know, what's our security situation look like? So, but it was an interesting comment. And one last thing I will say is I have to defend the folks on my team who put those visual analysis together. We've done hundreds of them at this point. And we find that we find them to be reliably accurate. The original Revit models for both the hotel and the garage were used. They were put into photos where we knew exactly where we were standing, how far from the object, everything. I think perspective can fool you sometimes, but I will bet you at cheeseburger that those are accurate. Because we've done so many of them. This has come up and people rarely want to believe them. So, bye. I'll ask that you note that a public records request has been made for those models so that an independent architect could model different perspectives. And the city has refused to honor that, not recognizing that's work made for hire, paid for by the city, and the architect should produce those Reddit models. We don't, we don't do that for all kinds of reasons. I mean, we've been happy to share whatever documents are submitted, but that's kind of like asking Microsoft to give them their source code. I think the results are the purview, design review, the process is something for the law office to deal with. Thank you. I want to see something and obviously that you want to see things that are accurate, that accurately represent whatever is going to happen. So, we don't look at it, if we approve that at the end, is this really, we want it to be, whatever we approve to be, what's really going to happen. We don't cook these things to achieve the desired effect, we put them into the model and they show us what we learn from them. I do think that this is an interesting perspective, that it would be nice to sort of see a rendering. That's from the Hemilon. We've actually submitted renderings, it's a several iterations back, but we did. We have that image, I can bring it next week. That would be great, thank you. Anything else anybody wants to say? So the bridge, the arch, and the portal openings with the steel in it, are the things that I need to focus on before coming back. How soon can you deal with the things we've addressed? Well, it'll take us the rest of the week, I think. I mean, if we could have a couple of days with it and staff could have a couple of days with it, we could appropriately be like so from tonight. Next week is the soonest we'll be able to have enough people. Yeah. Okay, I mean, I want to give you plenty of time. I know there's a time constraint, there's a vote on November 6th. Right. But I want you to not rush things and to have as complete a package as you can. Yes. For us. I think we may have to pull some people to figure out what day it works and what you're doing because I know Tuesday's out for you and me, because of HBC. Yep. I'll make it work, whatever you need me. Okay. We'll do it tomorrow. Fencing as well. And the fencing. Okay. Fencing. Yeah. Okay, well, that's the work. I want to say thanks, everybody. We usually don't have this much interest in design review meetings. I think we rarely have an audience other than the applicants. So. So, tangle it. Okay. Motion to approval. Seconded. All in favor? Thanks. This is at like high level elevation or whatever we're looking at. Oh, yeah. Well, we can do better than this. That was a rush job. Okay. I don't know where we should follow the agenda. Can you pass me that piece of paper? Should I put it in the record? Thank you. I think we'll start the design review, so. Should I? It makes me happy. That leaves that up. We're going to be going next. Whatever one. Yeah. There's nobody in front of you. So, should we be in 30 minutes or we can just postpone them since it's 708? 708. Okay. So, adjourn. Okay. Good luck. Thank you.