 Everybody signed in if you haven't signed in please do so Okay We are going to get going here He did Take what it states Oh cross the street, yeah cross our Sabbath We're going to bring the meeting to order Staff. All right, everybody good. Okay Scott you're on you're on to good CC TV is up. All right, so it is 702 And we'll bring them we meeting to order welcome to the town of Williston's Development Review Board for Tuesday, February 12th There's three items on the agenda tonight We do always like to start off with an open forum if anybody has anything that they would like to address the board with Now is your chance? Nobody okay, very good So we're going to open up DP 19-14 VIP tires and service at 703 come on up and have a seat And when you are ready if you would state your names and your addresses, please My name Or good evening for it. I should say my name is Bruce Bailey. I have known Sign company called Bailey sign company out of Fulton, Maine I'm in maroon. I'm the facilities manager for VIP out of 24 Harriman Drive and Arvern me Welcome both of you So we're gonna let staff go first is Master sign plans are acquired in Williston for newer existing commercial building that will or could have multiple tenants for a type of sign That can only be permitted under a master sign plan And for a greater number of signs or for signs that are larger in size than are allowed by the Williston unified development by-law Table 25a Williston development by law chapter 25.5 provides a mechanism by which a commercial site may gain approval for a master sign plan from the DRB Master sign plans are required in Williston for new or existing commercial building that will or could will or could have multiple tenants For type of sign that can only be permitted under a master sign plan and for a greater number of signs Then are allowed by The applicant here is proposing to add new signage to the site including a new freestanding sign a Flagpole and multiple wall signs resulting in a square footage exceeding the allowed maximum size that could be approved administratively according to chapter 25 I will note now that the DRB's packets are not totally up to date after The hearing was postponed last week the applicants submitted a result a revised plan So as we're going through this, I will update you with the correct numbers And part of that is that the flagpole is actually not being proposed for this project No, just just as an aside because that kind of caught my attention Do you have to get a permit to put up a flagpole? So we have an allowance for flags and flag will listed We have a few sort of special things around it. You can't have more than three We have generally if somebody is doing a master sign But we included it in our recitation of everything that's going on on the site And if you were you know a single-tent commercial site, and you were erecting a flagpole One or two flags you Might not have to get a permit for that It's it's tough because it's still a structure So you might not have to come to the DRB for it. It might not be counted as a sign Sorry, right. So going from there the table under proposed signs Proposed sign S2 it'll show on your packet as being 85 square feet that has been reduced to 80 square feet Proposed signs D1 through D4 are staying the same size and we are eliminating signs at D5 through D9 So that puts the total wall signs proposed at 96 square feet rather than 121 square feet and Beyond that is the freestanding sign, which is remaining at 32 square feet with a total existing Excuse me a total proposed sign area of 128 square feet Willis in development by-law chapter 25 allows a maximum potential amount of allowable signage Under a master sign plan at 8% of the area of the street facing elevation The applicants proposal compares to that maximum as follows 16 foot building height by a hundred feet is 1600 square feet 8% of that is 128 square feet as You see in your packet Proposed sign area of 153 square feet was proposed the applicant has submitted Corrections to reduce that number to 128 square feet Frontage calculation we agree with the calculation of the building frontage and the maximum sign area allowed That goes on in your packets to say that The applicant had produced at proposed more signs than was allowed, but has again since then been corrected By eliminating signs D5 through D9 and reducing S2 by 5 square feet freestanding signs freestanding sign S1 is in compliance compliance with the by-law requirement the applicant has proposed landscaping the sign required by Willis in development by-law 25 point 7 point 2.1 Sign types not proposed Not included in the proposed sign area calculation is a 3.5 2 square foot window vinyl with hours of operation and pull lettering and The flagpole has also been removed from the application Special findings the applicant has proposed multiple wall signs exceeding 24 square feet of building frontage The DRB must make findings that allowing these signs is consistent with the Willis in comprehensive plan and the intent of Willis in development by-law chapter 25 Staff has drafted these findings below Finding effect one applicant proposes to install signs including wall signs a window sign a freestanding sign and a flagpole at 300 Essex Road in the game Brad I don't think you you don't need to read those. Okay. Okay, so generally it's just it's generally It's just fine to say staff has provided findings of fact and approvals and conditions Staff has provided findings of fact and conditions of approval as seen below Okay with that He works for you I might rather than rather than I step on your toes Does it make sense to Identify any changes to the findings of facts in a in response to the revised plan Also, you can admit finding a fact number three, which was the flagpole and Under conditions of approval is basically restating the changes from the first table I went over with the Reduction in Opposed to sign s2 and the elimination of signs d5 through d9 S2 was reduced to 80 but it shows 60 so that was 60 what would have been the allowable Size I was figuring that the freestanding sign wasn't calculated. So I reduced that originally by 32 square feet or But it's now 80 now, it's 80. Yeah, okay anything else Also, you like to add We'd like to add This is VIP from Maine If 56 to us wrote me in the after Eastern Massachusetts Wilson is their first store in Vermont. So they're quite excited about the location and Where it's going to take them through probably some other schools in Vermont. So this is the first store. So They certainly Very good corporate neighbor for the community All clubs and things. So I think it's a great addition for the for the town Signs that we've designed is conservative It's externally limited illuminated with Bullet LED lights, which are very very low wattage And There'll be shut down, you know when they close of business in the evening at probably 10 10 30 And they're not going to run 24-7 It overall it'll be an attractive package so improve the neighborhood Everything I guess We did have a little hiccup there that Brad had brought out with the 128 square feet Which we've brought back in the compliance And I guess we were under the impression. We were allowed 128 and 32 But that's always a side man's dream is to get more than what you're allowed So we have done read redrew it with the correct sizes Other than that Pretty pretty straightforward project All right. We have questions for the board So Is the Sign s2 the one you reduced in size is it still the same profile the same copy so to speak? Yes, you just kind of yeah all we've done made it small we eliminated the bay signs There was nine now in there for so eliminated five of them and we reduced the size of the wall signage The IP ties and service by a few witches To just kind of made every letter to bring that down into to get it down into that 90 square foot Did you guys get a revised drawing when they Smaller dimensions. Yep question to the board for your hours of operation basically will be 730 to 6 Monday through Friday and then Saturdays is 9 to 6 and Sundays is usually 9 to 4 I'm assuming that's our hours because that's our hours in Maine in New Hampshire, but I can verify that Stop by we got a lot of tires My name it's a beautiful town long ride to get here And enjoy it Is there any residential Development surrounding your site Cross I did not notice I only Okay You can be back to tell the select board you want them to put a turn a left turn lane there in front of your place Now what kind of repairs will you be doing at the facility we do tires we do breaks we do pretty much everything And What they have for mechanics. I know they've hired a couple some new manager that came in just a little while ago, so When I was I was there for 15 minutes when I got into town and they had a Waiting room full of customers. So I thought that was a good time What do you do like at your other stores if a vehicle doesn't pass inspection and someone decides they just leave it on your property Well, we usually do an abandoned vehicle We have the police come in get the Venn number. We felt abandoned vehicle tow it away or Yeah, how long would it typically sit around? Well, I'd like to tell you not long at all But if they don't report it to us usually the way we find out sometimes is this time of year in the winter time A plow guy will call me and say, you know, if you move that car. I could plow your park a lot a lot better So and that's you know, that's a problem for us But we have people that tell you I'm gonna get it fixed in a month when I have the money and then they don't show back up You come in and the plates are gone and everything's out of the car. So but We try to be good about it A little tour around of it Dave over to the the auction right around behind. Oh, there you go Other questions questions from the audience anything else you would like to add You going back tonight, we'll have a safe trip back to me. Thank you Okay, next up is DP 19 dash 0 6 hj properties LLC Okay, we are going to open up the hearing at 719 or DP 19 dash 0 6 more ways moving more ways moving And the Roebert subdivision six and I do need to state that Andy Roebert with the engineer does work for my company as well. There's no conflict of interest Okay, you would state your names for a record, please Justin more way from hj properties Williston, Vermont Heidi o'clair hj properties will listen Andy Roe Lamar on Dickinson Essex Welcome. All right staff. Okay. So this is a request for discretionary permit review It's a proposal to develop a mini storage facility with access drives At Sunpike Road in the industrial zoning district West the property is And the board may recall the approval of the Subdivision in between Opposed for lot six of the Roebert subdivision Project history the DRB did review this project previously as a pre-application in November of 2018 There were five recommendations made by the DRB at that time that have been responded to by the applicant Briefly there were some erosion control things to be added to the plan The conservation commission had recommended demarcating the wetland buffer in the back with some boulders and the applicant is proposed to do that The DRB may recall a conversation related to lighting The applicant has presented a security lighting plan for the site that is in compliance with the rules The DRB asked that there be two parking spaces added up adjacent to the entry kiosk at the front and that Or truck turning movements on the site to be assessed that has been done and Also requested that the applicant meet with representatives of the fire And public works departments to clarify some of their Comments and requirements necessary to build the site out to Williston specifications and that has been done As I noted before this is lot six of the Roebert subdivision So the recommended action for tonight is to for the DRB to approve this project with I'll review some of those findings here proposed use is mini warehouses or self-storage We understand Rental and leasing that is an allowed use in the industrial zoning district West Residential component to this project residential uses are not allowed in the ICPW There will be new site work necessary to prepare the site for this project as it is currently undeveloped So clearing grading paving of the site Installational landscaping fencing, etc. Would all be part of this proposal There is no subdivision or adjustment to the boundary lines of the Roebert subdivision proposed as part of this in terms of reviewing this project under chapter 24 outdoor lighting as I mentioned the applicant has presented this as a security lighting plan The main thing to take away other than that the lighting levels of the proposed lighting is in compliance with the by-law is That lights with the exception of couple of fixtures at the kiosk our motion control for that security lighting plan So wherever there's that limitation of nine five-foot canvas parking lot lighting that would be on all the time This is instead lighting that's on intermittently. It's allowed to be a little bit brighter But it comes on when there's motion detected and it stays on I believe We'll essentially only be lit in its interior when someone's accessing it There is a proposed landscaping plan because we do have a landscape buffer requirement for sites like this The applicant has proposed buffers on all three Sides that don't face the street and the street tree section In compliance with the requirements So here we see side sideyards nine-foot type three informal planting buffers To the north back by the wetland 50 feet minimum of existing wooded vegetation That's an existence on the site today And as I said on the south on the street a typical street tree section along there next page here There's not really a parking lot landscaping requirement on this side because there's not really a parking lot As I mentioned there are street trees along shun pike road in terms of outdoor storage Which does require site plan approved by the DRB. There is currently no outdoor storage proposed as part of this site everything There are wetlands present on the site and as I mentioned in responsiveness to the pre-application The wetland buffer of 50 feet will be maintained and demarcated on the site with boulders In terms of access there's a single curb cut driveway onto shun pike road location of the access has been reviewed by public works found in compliance with their specifications Traffic generation the DRB did not require Traffic study There is an overall study covering the roe bear site and traffic impact fees will be addressed by the zoning administrator That's me at the time that a permit is applied for Signage there's not really a likelihood to have multiple commercial tenants. There's no need for a master sign plan on this site Any signs that are proposed on the site will require a simple administrative sign permit again from me The terms of stormwater treatment that is proposed on site We don't have any water wastewater connections. We do have all other utilities shown In terms of design review this site is not in the town's design review district So we did not have design review Normal standards for setbacks We did receive comment from police or rather from public works to Simply comment that they have no comments and from the fire department noting some of their typical site planning requirements for new development in Williston And I've recommended that Most of the conditions of approval. In fact, I think in this case all of them are our standard Special conditions drafted for this and I'll just note that should the DRB wish to make a motion for Approval because this was originally scheduled for February 12th. That's the date in the motion. So you'd have to update that Thank You Matt your turn That was pretty thorough. We don't have much to add other than to just remind the board that this is not an occupied site So there are no water or sewer services The kiosk. Oh, no bathroom. What's over correct? No water and sewer services being run to the building As Matt said, there are a couple of parking spaces added outside the kiosk on the outside of the gate We looked at Maneuvering a fire truck within the gate between the buildings and down the aisles to the satisfaction of the fire department From orders being managed on site stormwater permits been issued Construction general permit from the state addressing erosion patrols also been issued at this point And I guess just one thing to clarify. I think in the staff report it mentioned a couple of lights at the West end of the building Proposal is to have the lights on at the end of each building remain on with the lights down the aisle to be controlled by motion detector That's different than what Matt was describing It's the plans in the letter are clear Matt Just described in his staff report that the two lights near the kiosk will be on And I just wanted to clarify that what is shown on the plans and described in the letter are the lights at each The end of each building will remain on the lights Self-faces of the building will be controlled by the motion detector and will come on and off his activities President right so sorry John I I glossed over that there are lights on the ends of the buildings as Andy describes I had noticed that in here. Yeah, those those lights do meet actually well below our parking lot lighting standard So that when I so when I mentioned that security lights are brighter because they they shut off That's true. What's also true is the lights at the end of the building are our subject to a lower threshold I Do believe there was a significant conversation during the pre-app about which lights were beyond I I think we asked and I still don't understand The purpose of having those If they were on motion sensor when someone got past the kiosk and those would come on and they wouldn't be on all night So what is the advantage of having those on all night? It's a safety. I did meet with the chief of police and asked him for Willis and what he would prefer And he said he wanted the lights on the ends and this in the middle. He was fine with motion So I did specifically meet with him. I asked him to do a write-up and he Didn't have time to do it before this meeting But you can check with him if you want, but I didn't he said she said I Guess the other thing to buy like this is what's being proposed does comply with the by-law You know, we're not asking for a variance or an exception or any special treatment what's being proposed does comply with the by-law Heidi did check with the with the police in order to basically I guess I'm opposed was it supported by them And did ask them to submit comments prior to the originally scheduled hearing Failed failing to see the need for those as security lights Because if it's completely dark, then people aren't going to want to pull in They're not going to be completely dark because They would be on a motion sensor. So Until someone drives in Time anybody was there and moving in those areas When there would be a need for security Then they would be on So why light up Williston? Unnecessarily it I also took pictures of other storage facilities in Williston and they have all of their aisle ones on all the time in Williston it's I Mean I we took pictures of all the different units at night time and they have every single light on all night long It's not on motion. So ours is a lot less than what all the other facilities in the areas have Don't believe that Someone else doing it what we might determine to be wrong makes it okay for you to do that So I'm just I mean you asked me what other facilities were doing I asked why you feel those lights On all the time. How does that improve security? And if someone has there anyone whether it's someone that should be there or someone that shouldn't be there Are going to turn those lights on What's the difference other than? Putting on that's what I might consider unnecessary light Out there because someone's not going to pull into a facility. That's completely dark But it's not you said the kiosk is there by the time you get out to go through the gate Those next lights would have come on because there's a motion sensor, but you don't know that if you haven't driven through it You just see something that's completely dark Well anybody anybody who has anybody who was back there has to have bought a card from you So you will inform them at that point that guess what the light? It'll be dark until you actually get there and then it will light up out of curiosity Do they have to get out of their vehicle to actuate the gate or will the control be on the driver's side? The control they won't have to get out of their car the control will be on the side of the building With like a there's a stand-up control thing that they can punch into from their vehicle Wait a minute To be on the opposite side of the building if it's I'm just saying if it's on the building only if we've only got British cars driving in here Well, we can put it on the other side. I mean, it's just a freestanding unit So we well that was my question is because if you if you don't have to get out of your car That that provides the personal a bit of safety because all he's got to do is just Punches all code in and up goes up goes the gate He's gate Which way is the gate going to is it going towards the fence or towards the building building goes against the back of the building What's the height of the lights off the end of the building all the lights are it's a car excuse me eight feet high So they're eight feet LED cutoff fixtures 13 watt I believe are they the fixtures that are in here the WL Yes The two parking spaces that you added If somebody were to use those parking spaces, but were to have a unit in building one Would you have sort of people having to wait there if someone was using like so if there was Outside of building one or how are those units accessed like if there was a car You would have to enter through the gate in order to access any of the units Okay, so you'd go through the gate and then come back around Exactly drive around that building those parking spaces are mainly just for people accessing the kiosk system inside that Okay front room, so then if you're driving around then you have to back up in order to Exit you might correct. There's there's no exit. There's no that'll be a fixed gate in front of those two parking spaces okay Garage doors on either sides of the building Nor the most building in the building so there's they are they're bisected. They're split down the middle So there's only one Well, you said it's a fixed gate, but but the one to the that the parking spots face is Not a gate. It's fixed correct So given that I'm gonna I'm gonna question that parking spot Because Unless you've got a very odd-shaped car That thing's gonna come up about three or four feet short of a parking spot Right because it's at an angle and the fence is truncating that parking space So if you pull into that you're gonna not be able to pull all the way in like you can with the adjacent right They're set up as Angled diagonal spaces. Yes, right, but normally you would pull You're gonna be able to pull up ahead as far as the I don't think it's gonna meet a Requirement there unless Unless we got a totally different scale here than I think if you look at where 20 feet would So there's a 25 foot aisle behind it 20 excuse me 25 foot aisle and it if a second car was parked there that would extend partially out into that aisle But there would still be plenty of room to get two vehicles behind it And it's also a second parking space That is Heidi said is for the exclusive use of the kiosk. It's not for anybody Accessing their unit. What did you size the space for in terms of what type of vehicle would be parked in that space? We had looked at if something was sitting there in front of the fence 18 feet long Which is the by-law requirement for a parking space depth. You would still have room to get Buy it behind it with two vehicles and we're also I mean, we're also talking about a very low Frequency use site to have two cars there at the same time and to have two cars coming and going Certainly could happen, but it would be Unlikely they some not frequent my recollection. It was just the very first time, right? But they would you don't go to the kiosk every time Yeah, but we don't we don't design to inf we don't design to only frequent occurrences Correct. It needs to be a party spot and we wouldn't normally put a parking spot where the tail of vehicle was sticking out into the driving lane So what what is the board suggesting that we need for an aisle with there? You're showing you're showing an owl width, which I assume you want to keep clear We're showing 25 feet for a pavement with that greater than is necessary, but but if we go from the Edge of the fence all the way back to the far edge of the pavement. We've got 41 or 42 feet Which would be more than enough to accommodate Two-way traffic in the aisle in a parking space Would the board be satisfied with a single parking space there if there's a concern with the dimensions of the second part? I don't know why the fence This doesn't slide over enough to get the parking spot to not be in the entrance driveway It seems like a really simple thing Is there an access to the unit? We would have to get rid of a whole unit Or set in even a foot or 18 inches the door would be in about a foot inches And at least move the the fixed section of the fence there in a foot Which would increase the depth of that parking space by at least a foot Just doing this back of the envelope, but if you if you get that foot You should have 24 feet in the drive aisle Which is Williston standard for two-way traffic where there's parking So and if the board wanted to I think just saying You know a condition of approval final plan shall show The that the two parking spaces do not interfere with a minimum 24 foot wide drive aisle Without radius too much, there's probably a little bit of room On that drive aisle on the other side to the landscape buffer if it had to bend Correct He standard in Williston's rule would be that you've got 24 feet of drivable pavement Behind the backside of a standard parking space, and that's fine I just like to see a plan be submitted that shows that 24 foot width in Parallel with the the parking You know and the full parking spot You guys because it doesn't show in here If you should showed where your snow removal is going to go because the one thing I'm kind of passing it by is Whoever bids on this contract is going to have a one heck of a time getting that section in front of building one clear Because there's no place to push the snow You know going down the aisle they got to go in and come out They're almost going to need to come in with all those tractors with a rear mounted snow blower That pulls all the snow forward as they go forward to get get that clear We do our own snow clearing. What? Snow clearing Okay, I'm just kind of curious how you're going to clear that front section Because trying to back that up is going to be could become ugly. Yeah There is 20 feet of space between the edge of the pavement in front of Building one in the fence Push it all okay, it's marked on your fault. I couldn't see where there was no removal was it's no pile were marked Okay, thank you Could have making that fence go across maybe could you diagonal it that way you don't lose any of your spot We could look at that as well. It would be a little Odd maybe having the diagonal fence right in front of the the overhead door on the first unit But maybe the first section of fence is perpendicular and the next one could be in an angle Yeah, is the board satisfied that if the parking spaces can be can be situated so that we have a 24-foot drive aisle That's fine other questions from the board. So Matt on the proposed lighting with the With the dawn to dusk 100% of the time proposed at the end of the building does that meet the Wilson by-law? so The board addressed this a couple times Related to sites that are essentially understood to be open for business all the time And it's not a perfect fit to that some lights could be allowed to be on whenever the Business is available for the public to enter the way to look at it would be to look at the lighting that's proposed to be on in that way and In other words you can have lights that are on overnight But they need to be significantly dimmer than when the site is quote-unquote open for operation open for business This is this is a little bit confusing in that on top of this you have security lighting that's coming on and that's treated separately under the by-law So what I'm suggesting is if the board's concerned about the lighting level? It would be within the realm of possibility to allow Some but not all of those lights on the building ends just like the lights at the kiosk could be allowed to be on Overnight it could be it could be within the realm of possibility to allow those lights on the building ends but but at a Significantly lower level or to be dimmed to a significantly lower level when you know, it's after dark and no one's around There's not an outright prohibition on some kind of lighting being on overnight and It's and it's tough with storage facilities like this because they're they're essentially open on all the time We run into this with other things to hotel parking lots we run into this because a hotel is always Sort of open Maybe this is a little different But I think there's there's a couple paths the board could take and I would say that you know downward facing fully shielded eight feet off the ground and Are you going to see them horizontally driving along shun pike road? Yeah, you'll you'll see that there are lights on but you'll know from the lighting plan that the levels do drop to zero You know before they hit the edge of the landscape buffer on the site, so we don't have light trespass. We don't allow that but It will it will probably even at its full proposed level be one of the Less illuminated of these types of facilities in town one. Is that show the turning radius? There was a separate plan one with the Landscaping Yes, but can you just walk me through that Discovery was Through the gate before I had to make a turn That's what the second one between building four and five illustrates and We also looked at if that truck was down between I'll be to be in the aisle of five and six could it back out and maneuver out even though the fire department The fire department wasn't concerned about coming all the way down Going around the end of the building the east end of the building Fire truck is about the size of This is based upon the actual There's another one there's one there's two or two of them coming up from the bond here They can't be any bigger than the ones they've got now They can't be any bigger. They won't go on the road south of the interstate actually smaller But what if there was like say an 18-wheeler or whatever from big moving truck is that that's They would be able to drive in and then they would have to unload down the aisle and drive back Which is standard for most self-sorting things Okay, any questions from the audience Thank you for coming Okay, we're gonna close 748 okay next up is DP 19-15 Any FCU addition and we will open the hearing up at 740 hey welcome everybody Let's start out by Let's start out by With name and addresses and if any of you guys are going to be speaking Let's get your names and addresses on the record as well. My name is John Clarose. I work for civil engineering Associates, we're out of South Burlington Josh Crandall from Freeman French Freeman architect and Your first name again, sir Okay, very good So Scott so the firm that I work for Does business with both? CBA civil engineering associates and Freeman French and Freeman. Okay, and you don't feel the need to accuse yourself correct very good Okay Emily. All right This is a request for a discretionary permit Review of a proposal to construct a 2,300 square foot addition at a stairwell and reconfigure the parking area at New England Federal Credit Union nephew Located at 141 Harvest Lane in the business park zoning district Interior renovations are proposed but not subject to DRB review The property is currently developed with a three-story building For drive-through lanes parking and related site improvements This is the first time this proposal is to be reviewed by the DRB Pre-application review is not required due to the scale of the proposed project Previous development on this project was reviewed as followed The lot was created in a 1980 sub 1987 subdivision Creating most of the parcels along Harvest Lane The original site plan was approved in 1994 and then in 2005 there was site plan amendments to add drive-throughs and ATM Circulation changes in landscaping the findings of fact The proposed use the applicant proposes to maintain the existing banking use Commercial banking is allowed use in table 32 point a under NAICS 52 finance and insurance Access the property has one curb cut on Harvest Lane. No changes to access are proposed The applicant has proposed to construct a 2300 square foot one-story addition that is 27 feet 9 inches in height The addition will be used as a member education center and hold seminars for 30 to 60 people a Three-story stair tower 35 feet and six inches in height is also proposed for emergency egress The stair will be installed on the Western facade facing Harvest Lane Both additions are below the 36 foot height requirement and comply with setbacks The existing building is 40 feet one inch and three quarters in height New site work the applicant proposes to reconfigure the parking area and drive-through access an Expansion of pervious area is proposed at the drive-through entrance and eastern rank of parking spaces The extent expansion complies with the front and side yard setbacks Bylaw chapter 14.7 requires safe and efficient circulation patterns in the parking lots a New median will be installed between the drive-through exit and parking area to eliminate vehicle circulation conflicts Pedestrian safety near the main entrance is improved with a raised crosswalk a Striped drop-off area and a sidewalk along my handicap accessible spaces pedestrian access Bylaw chapter 13.7 requires that internal sidewalks connect to the town network The sidewalks shown on the site plan comply The revised plan sheet dated February 7th shows a painted crosswalk where the pedestrians Will cross the loading area near the dumpster enclosure on the south end of the building Public's works comment number four address the need for truncated domes on each side of the access drive on Harvest Lane and The revised site plan also shows those changes No additional conditions of approval are necessary for pedestrian access Setbacks in landscaping the proposed landscaping plan is provided on the last page of the plan set Existing landscaping along Williston Road Harvest Lane and the eastern parts will boundary meet the chapter 23 landscape landscaping standards in the table below The existing street trees comply with bylaw chapter 26 Parking lot landscaping Bylaw chapter 23.5 requires parking lot landscaping and the applicants landscaping plan meets those requirements All medians will be planted with trees and species will species will match those removed for construction The revised plan dated February 7th modifies the angled and accessible parking area But the proposed medians remain the same or slightly larger to accommodate the proposed landscaping plan Parking the applicant proposes to configure the existing parking area The parking lot and pervious area will expand by one parking space But the total number of spaces is reduced from a hundred forty nine to a hundred forty three The project does not require a requirement for additional parking Emily, let me just interrupt you one second Does the board have the revised plan from February 7th? It should be the first It should be a loose page And it's got some yellow text highlight boxes on it It's not stapled to the 11 by 17 plan set, but it should be right on top of it Yep I didn't get it Sorry about that. Thank you So the applicant is proposing 143 parking spaces It's more than what would be required today, but again, this is reconfiguring an existing parking lot that was approved under old bylaw rules The number of outdoor bicycles parking spaces provided Ten is in compliance and then my numbers for the long-term bicycle parking spaces Are wrong where it says 75% for office building long-term spaces? It should be 50% and then the way you Round up to the nearest whole number should be done at the end So the applicant's proposal of five long-term spaces is the correct calculation End of trip facilities for employees are provided there are two shower rooms and lockers shown on the floor plan And the applicants revised site plan does show the ADA parking spaces in compliance with what we would require traffic Traffic impact fees will be assessed by the zoning administrator with the administrative permit for the additional 17.2 vehicle trip ends Generated during the PM peak hour by the proposed development Outdoor lighting the applicant has provided a revised lighting plan for the property The number of light fixtures in the parking lot is reduced by four Existing fixtures and ballards are relocated and the new fixtures will match the same height and style of the existing Bylaw chapter 24 point 7.5 requires that illumination for pedestrian ways be the same as parking lots Staff recommends a light fixture installed at the emergency egress on the western facade To illuminate the doorway and sidewalk. I'll note that it may be something that was already proposed There is a canopy proposed over that entryway. I just didn't see the numbers on the lighting plan for it Stormwater stormwater treatment does have a state discharge permit Water and wastewater the property is currently connected to municipal water and wastewater Additional what wastewater allocation will be required before administrative permit approval from Public Works Utilities existing and proposed utilities are shown No changes to the connection are proposed However, the applicant is proposing to relocate the on-site fire hydrant to the proposed median between the drive-through and the parking lot The fire department reviewed the plans and provided comments their memo is attached Designated snow storage areas are shown on the plans and in compliance with the bylaw Solid waste Trash and recycling containers are located to the south of the building and are currently Unscreened the applicant is proposing an enclosure as well as additional landscaping for screening Their proposed solid waste plan complies with our standards in the bylaw This project is subject to design review On February 5th the historic and architectural advisory committee the hack reviewed the project They found that all categories comply with the requirements as proposed I will note there was some discussion about the Pitched roof the angled roof of the addition the architect that explains that the way the addition is lining up to the existing building to provide light into the Main entry plaza and then the existing offices on the second and third floor that the angled roof provides for all that So the hack did not have any additional comments or requests for conditions of approval Comments from police fire and public works and interdepartmental project review was held on January 18th The fire department and public works memo are attached and recommended as conditions of approval The police department had no concerns at the pre-construction meeting I believe the the reason for the revised plan set was in response to the fire department's comments with the turning radius for their emergency vehicles So the applicant reconfigured the parking lot so the vehicle swing can be accommodated and not interfere with that location of lighting poles or the hydrogen or parking spaces and then The revisions based off the public works comment that there be truncated domes at the the entrance And hatching that crosswalk that sort of thing With that staff recommends Approval of this discretionary permit with the findings of fact Conclusions of law and conditions of approval. Thank you Why don't you walk us through your project Was to reconfigure the parking lot provided a safer access between vehicles and pedestrians property lines Frontages on either side here on this this site plan and on the one in front of you presumably Like I said before the main benefit reconfiguring parking lot really is to separate the drive-thru access with the parking lot activity and In addition, we've now provided a way for pedestrians through the parking lot and safely cross into the building in addition to Maintaining the previous drop-off area that existed so the project did get allocation approval And for that Stormwater permit is under review in the state stormwater in the site primarily So can you can you actually walk us that's the first one of these we've seen in a while Can you kind of walk us walk the board through how that how that works and the reasons reasoning reasons for it sure, so the challenge with any side is What do you have so there's an existing permit stormwater permit for the site that permit provides treatment through detention within the pipes and the structures Okay, so in order for us to So does that does that system exist now? Are you going to be installing it? Start that chambers. Yeah, those will be installed. So it doesn't so there's no there's no detention Now the only tension is within the structures themselves In order for us to do any expansion and has to meet the current State stormwater rules and this is the storm tech is is in lieu of a storm water detention pond Correct the challenge We have on this site is it is quite flat And there is existing infrastructure in place primarily everything That comes one into the property from route to or from the neighboring properties or perhaps even from harvest lane Gets channeled to a singular stormwater structure that crosses under harvest lane So we're really restricted by the elevation of that outlet structure So when looking at it the most I Suppose the best use of the elevation we found is through the filtering practice and it's actually Fairly economical by concentrating stormwater into one practice We really you know type of soils they are they are Primarily fill soils in the area of the existing building but on the other end of the site where you know There is existing green space that that's a heavier silty clay loam. So You know, we could you could perhaps do a stormwater pond but there is like I said the issue with elevation and to Do not get as good at treatment levels through detention as you would through a Storm tech system, which is essentially a sand filter below some storage pipes. So that's you know, there is a cross section I think on c4 4.3 or 4.4 of the storm tech chamber it like I said It's essentially storage pipes with sand beneath them. So when a storm event comes it has time to filter through the sand Exit out exit out the bottom and across the across harvest or whatever that wherever that is right So we're actually part of the new system. We're tying into the existing stormwater piping on site It filters enough so that you're not going to get a backup. It must filter it pretty quickly This system is sized in this particular case for the hundred-year storm to Match the pre pre development flows Was in good condition is what the state considers it so So there is no increase in flow Permit in hand it is under review You know we when we I should say prior to submitting the permit we did discuss the project with the state and Discuss the permit path and what the projects going to look like and what system we're going to use so they they have been That has been discussed with them. So they were aware that you were proposing this system before you Locally where else have you used this system? One thing one prominent one comes to mind is the DMV or the old DMV and in Burlington in the north end They are commons another system Essex Right, we're at the five corners. I think it's one first street Is that perhaps the name of the large building? You know when McGillicuddy's and all that So there's a system in ground behind that building in the parking lot You know it's and it's another system. We've you know we use on developed sites primarily Such as this one. This one's fairly well developed Okay All right, why don't you why don't you also want to give us a rundown on the on the architectural elements? Sure, absolutely. It's As Emily noted it's a modest two thousand conditions to the existing structure largely Making the existing evidence I The roof on your new structure, how does that marry to the building? It does not touch it correct So the snow and rain runoff does it run off the end of the Look that potentially hits the wall or does it have a tracking? So you so you made the roof sort of you have like a couple of feet that actually lean back towards the and I'm curious. He did you what's the material that looks gonna be made out of your memory? So page a two zero one the second to last sheet It shows the building elevation northeast and it kind of shows how the two Together So Jock is showing a perspective that was generated from the east of the building Reusing As noted by the hack committee the one deviation and maybe differentiator between the two structures is the slope versus the Existing flappers. Can you talk a little bit about the stair tower? On the west side of the billings, that's actually an image of the It's below the maximum height limitation and It connects the three stories and discharges to great That'd be a pressurized tower He's a fire will that will that pressurize that tower so it stays clear air So it'll pressurize the tower so it stays clear I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about the fact is is if I open the door To exit during a fire is the tower going to be pressurized to keep the smoke from following people coming in That's all I was asking right but ball That's a that's a building fire code question that the Department of Public Service will be okay Did they ask that So this is an perspective that's from the corner of harvest lane you can see the Stair tower there on the west elevation at the roof there is proposed to be a PVC mep ring with the The standing the the foce didn't see Ridges which is going to emulate the style of the roof on the northwest corner of the building That is the only Roof that we're anticipating is going to be visible from grade so there's uh So there's lots of glass southern facing There's going to be lots of cooling cooling and heating needs. Where are you planning on locating the mechanical equipment Equipment will be in Similar to the existing locations which is the Third floor, which is the highest roof And the roof to the first floor on the south the southern most here of the building that new Mechanical unit on the lowest All right, okay Meet all meet all the requirements for screening and correct correct and in addition We are providing window treatments within the nbc space This matt was this this building must have been built prior to the the high work the high restriction I can only assume that it was Staffs staffs made some attempt to determine You know, it's it's clear that the building that was built is the building that was permitted including the 40 foot height It's it's not as it's also clear that there were no special findings allowing for that height As we do today with the exemption. So And we couldn't find a specific height standard in the bylaw that that was limiting at the time So it went in how it was permitted and it's different from how it would be Bless you. Yeah Questions from the board I have why on your um your little uh on the lighting chart here it says that the um As proposed is a maximum of 12.04 Because that that's pretty far in excess of the 5.2 that's allowed Right portions of the parking lot are not being modified they're existing so only Pretty much only half the parking lot is being brought into compliance with today's standards So some of the existing parking lot is Yeah, some of the existing parking lot has um lighting above that level of 5.2 foot candles. So matt just as a point of clarification There's an awful lot of work being done on this site Would this not be an opportunity to bring it all into compliance? so Whenever something's in front of the board or the zoning administrator, there's an opportunity to bring some all or A very small amount of it into compliance The board's practice has typically been to try to have proportional Bringing into compliance proportionally amount of work going on. So, you know, you led with the statement There's a lot of work going on here That the board might impose some conditions that require compliance for things that the applicant may not have anticipated touching especially if it's, you know Refixed during some lights. Uh, it's certainly within the realm of the board to do that From a cost standpoint. Is there any reason not to bring it all up to current standards? That's a trick question. Okay The important thing to To see and also described in Emily's Review was that we are reducing the total number of fixtures on the parking lot by four And reducing number of poles, I believe by one. So There is going to be overall overall light decrease anticipated as part of this project All led is it all led now It is all led now Okay, including the existing Everything's led Challenge Hours of operation And afterwards also 24 hours a day Yeah, okay. Yeah, you had an interdepartmental project review meeting Is that the first I actually was yes, I thought so congratulations. Thank you We should give them a little plaque or something all departments came Is there a master sign plan for this site already? No, and it doesn't need one because they're single tenants so they can get all their signs administratively And I guess my other question would be about the parking I recognize that there's fewer parking spots here than there were but this kind of gets back to what Scott was just asking You know if this were new it looks like we'd be asking you to max out at 135 spaces You're putting more than those eight spaces back in you could go down to 135 by actually Lowering your investment I'm just wondering do you feel you have a need for the 143? Have you done any kind of studies as to what the right number of spots for that site is? Yeah, absolutely No, we definitely had a lot of discussions on what the parking needs are for this site and what The wilson's regulations require One important thing that we did provide in our initial cover letter is a parking generation summary How we get to 143 parking spaces Uh essentially We anticipate the MEC space to have approximately 0.7 vehicles per member that would attempt So that's that's how we got to our 30 members during business time use and 143 parking spaces For any purposes That's a great question. I mean The short answer is yes They would have to generate some type of additional trip that we've also Evaluated and provided in the cover letter for it was mentioned in the staff report But the member education center is Well, perhaps is it better? Would you guys like to describe that? Sure? Yeah, I mean it did exist It's another science education center And we do seminars for members helping them with retirement needs and things like that We usually have about 30 attendees per seminar And the seminars are held approximately 5 37 p.m at night Usually about one a week On average No more than 10 a month Does that answer your question? Yeah, it is not super relevant to my two To anything here, but is it like a stadium style seating or and it looks like a two-story building? Yeah, so we're having internal discussions about that I would really like stadium seating but my marketing director would not so She likes total flexibility So no, it will not like it will likely not be stadium seating But it is so it'll be just a vaulted Ceiling or high ceiling Yes, vaulted ceiling, you know a video projection screening for powerpoint presentations speakers podium Potentially a very small stage for someone to stand on and likely 40 or 50 seats in the audience with some tables for People to put their materials on What it could it be Rented out to to a member like could a member rent it out if they wanted to have A seminar on some other topic or something along those lines We do offer this our space today to outside organizations We haven't charged anyone for it as long as it's a You know compatible type of event We've done some things for the center hospital and some of their some of their staff when they've been Short on facility space I Probably say about once a month we have another organization come in and use this space We'd certainly be open to that because we are a community center focused type of organization Usage usually in the evening Yes, usually it is although the medical center Meetings or generally staff meetings or department meetings and they come in during the daytime How many people are housed in the building when you're In Without the So uh today we have about 50 employees in the building And then at any point in time there could be 20 to 30 members So about 80 and would Trigger if let's say it did become a higher demand space just because it's attractive and You know just having like there's just not a lot of Of facilities like this that exist and let's assume it became a higher A higher demand space where you were getting requests more frequently than once a month Let's say three times a month or four times a month Would that trigger an of change of use review would that trigger anything or that it could there isn't any So it's more of a question for probably no question for matt Probably then yeah, I mean there's there's often a point where Things evolve so fundamentally that Especially if the accessory use begins to overshadow the primary use but In the case of a site like this where you know, it's built like a bank. There's a drive-through like a bank has there's Office space like a bank has Yeah, I wouldn't I wouldn't anticipate that we do have we have different rules and different parking generations for You know theaters and places of assembly and entertainment centers and things like that if you if you started showing, you know Monday night movies there's something There might be a point where the town had an entry to to revisit things like that But most likely we would see that not so much because the use changed But because the intensity changed so much that there was a parking problem So, you know, if we have a site that's really going over what it's built for parking and we start getting complaints about Street parking when there shouldn't be or people are parking in other people's parking lots things like that To be honest in in the time. I've been in Williston, which is more than 10 years. We've never had a complaint Where someone's gone that far over regularly we get residential complaints about parking very rarely commercial Just a little math. I mean you said 50 employees and 30 members and even if you had 30 people at the the education center, that's still 110 So it seems like you still have plenty of parking here We still have Part of our third floor is currently unoccupied and that's growth space for us So there's you know, we the building is built to accommodate more people than that Yeah, the building is approved for 85 employees at this at this point From previous approvals and we're not seeking to reduce that number. It's part of this application Are you seeing are you are you seeing an increase or a diminishment of traffic Through the drive through to the to the site given online bank, you know the percentage of online bank It's been pretty level actually we I mean we see online banking Mobile banking use rapidly increasing but the number of in-person visits have been pretty steady Fridays, you know still like showing Saturdays are very depositing their check Saturdays are big and we don't understand it We've got 10 ways to Sunday for you to deposit your check without coming in but some people still like to do that So it's not saying it's not something you're seeing growing, but it's but it's staying level Yeah, we certainly don't have any intention of growing transact in-person transaction volume there We're all about remote delivery You guys didn't design the drive through over in South Burlington did you? Freeman French and Freeman did yes You don't have a challenge That's a challenging site. Do you have a big truck that would be commentary? Nobody drove a No, no, no a dual I'd have 350 All right. All right. All right. All right Thank you No There we go. All right Anything else another questions of the board all set All set Anything else gentlemen anything else you want to add? Okay Thank you for coming We're going to close dp 19-15 NEFCU edition at eight Probably not Have a good evening Okay, the town of wilson's development review board for Tuesday, february 12th. It's out of executive session at 9 0 5 Do I have a motion for dp 19-14? VIP tires and service Yes, as authorized by wdb 6.6 3 hi david charner moved the wilson development review The application materials submitted in all company materials including the recommendations of town staff and advisory boards Required to comment on this application by the wilson unified development by-law And having heard and duly considered the testimony presented to the public hearing of february 26 2019 except the findings of fact Conclusions of law and conditions of approval proposed by staff and review of dp 1914 And approved this discretionary permit For a master sign plan Is that yeah, it is master sign plan from The approval authorizes the applicant to submit final plans obtain approval for these plans from the staff Then seek administrative permit for future development, which must proceed in strict conformance with the plans On which the approval is based we're going to make changes to the Sign tables proposed sign tables On s2 we're going to change the size from 85 square feet to 80 feet And we will eliminate signs d5 through d9 Total wall calculation will go from 121 to 96 feet And total square feet from 153 to 128 square feet On the approved table we will change s2 From 60 square feet to 80 square feet And eliminate signs d5 through d9 Findings and facts we will eliminate the flagpole From finding number one And we will eliminate finding in fact number three great Do I have a second I'll second that Pete seconds at any further discussion All in favor Six eyes no nays motion carries Do I have a motion for dp 19-06 More ways moving In the obar subdivision block six Yes as authorized by wdb 6.6.3 i john hemmelgarn Move that the wilson development review board having reviewed the applications submitted in all accompanying materials Including the recommendations of the town staff and the advisory boards required to comment on this application By the wilson development bylaw And having heard and duly considered the testimony presented at the public hearing of february 19 2019 I'm sorry, not everybody 26 six and we went two weeks in And findings of fact and conclusions of law proposed by staff for the review of the of dp 19 day 06 And approved this discretionary permit subject to conditions above This approval authorizes the applicant to file final plans obtain approval of these plans from staff And then seek an administrative permit for the proposed development Which must proceed in strict conformance with the plans on which this approval is based We're going to add a couple of conditions number 22 End of building security lighting shall be At 25 percent from dusk to dawn until triggered by motion Isle lighting shall be shall remain on a separate motion sensor system And we'll add number 23 plans shall show two parking spaces which do not interfere with the 24 foot drive aisle Thank you Any further discussion? I'm just doing it backwards That was my motion I will second it You'll second it any further discussion All in favor No nays motion carries Okay, uh, do I have a motion for dp 19-15 nefc addition? As authorized by wdb 6.6.3 I peter kelly moved that the wilson development review board having reviewed the application submitted and all accompanying materials Including the recommendations of the town staff and the advisory boards required to comment on this application By the wilson development by-law and having heard and do we consider the testimony presented at the public hearing of february 26 2019 and the findings of fact and conclusions of law proposed by staff for the review of the dp 19-15 and approved this discretionary permit subject to conditions above This approval authorizes the applicant to file final plans Obtain approval of these plans from staff and then seek an administrative permit for the proposed development Which must proceed in strict conformance with the plans on which this approval is based Great. Uh, do I have a second? I'll second it. Dave seconds it Any further discussion? All in favor I Six eyes. No nays motion carries I have a motion to approve the minutes of january 22 I don't think I got To approve the minutes of january 22nd 2019 as read great. He makes a motion. Uh, do I have a second? I'll second it. Dave seconds it Thank you everybody