 Good evening. I'd like to call the Tuesday, August 4th, 2023, Burlington Development and Review Board agenda development review board meeting to order. We have a quorum. And so we'll start proceeding. Vice Chair Caitlyn, I think, is joining us and Jeff Hand as well. Jeff's unavailable tonight. I just remembered that. So Caitlyn, I think, is on her way. We take agenda items in the order that they're posted on our agenda. There's a sign-in sheet. So anybody who's here to speak on an item or wants to be heard or notified of it, please sign in to the sign-in sheet. That's over there. And I think all of the communications have been posted on our website, currently up to date. And I'll swear people in as we go through agenda items individual. Just be easy that way. So the first item on our agenda is public hearing ZP 22640, 294-296 North Winooski Avenue. That's the request for a change of views from mixed-use restaurant to bar. And we just, is anyone here to speak on that? No, you are? I was a concern citizen. OK. Well, we got a request from the applicant to defer the public hearing to a later date because of some issues outside of the application concerning the property. They would like to get those resolved first. So we don't have a date set yet for the deferral. Perhaps you're aware of what these other outside issues are. Part of it is I'm not speaking for the present renters, but this is the middle of Ramadan. And people who would like to be here to address it, I think they would take consciously that they're religious observant people. And they're in the 10th hour of a fast right now. So I think it was in the end of Ramadan, goes to April 20. And to be totally honest, at the fast start to 6 30 in the morning and asking people to come in here and communicate with no water or food. Yeah, that would be a very good reason to understand. Sure, of course. I won't speak for either party. I was just an interested friend of the other. So that's what's happened. I just got the news when I came in here. Sure. OK. That's all. That's my two cents, and that's it. Front, sure. You know, it's the applicant's project. I think we're generally all in favor of, if they want to defer, we'll defer it. Mary, we don't have to defer to a date certain if they don't ask for one. You don't have to, but it has to be heard within six months. All right. So I'll make a motion that on ZP 22640, we grant the applicant's request and defer this to a later date within the next six months. All in favor? Second. Aye. OK. Great. That's good. So the next item on our agenda is ZP 2356, 326 College Street, Gen F Holdings, Skip McClellan, Building and Parking Lot Improvements for Stormwater Collection slash Disposal, including demolition and replacement of accessory structure and replacement retaining walls. Is the applicant here? Would you want to come on up and take a seat? Is there anyone else here to speak on this agenda item? OK. Well, why don't you raise your right hand? Do you s- what do you say? All of us? All of us. Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give is true and the matter under consideration is true and correct under the pains and penalties of perjury? All right. So someone want to take us through this project. I walked by it today. I have a good sense of where it is, but what do you got? You want me to do it? Your call, whoever. Well, it's hard to see from the picture, but Hungerford Terrace is on the left side. So we're adding a bunch of underground retention, or not retention, but infiltration basins. And then as you get towards the College Street end, it turns, runs up in front of the building again all underground. What do you call those? Chambers, infiltration. Those are more chambers, right? So it's really designed just to pick up all of the stormwater for most of my properties on College Street and in a couple on South Willard. And the accessory structure that we're taking down is basically falling down anyways. The foundation is deteriorating. So you can't really see it, but it's that dark rectangle in the middle. And the stormwater needs to go under it. So there's a bunch of utilities under it that need to be replaced. And so it just makes sense to tear it down. It's just a garage and a storage space above it. All that you're adding or something? In the retaining walls, yeah, down at the end of the 326th College Street property next to 82 Hungerford Terrace, there's a retaining wall there. There's a retaining wall right here? Right. So we're going to replace that. And we're going to run another retaining wall all along Hungerford Terrace just to level the grade above the chambers. Is there a plan you'd rather, Michele, Mark? I don't think there's one that's like 17 uploads in their various parts. Yeah, but I don't think I think they're all smaller than that one. So that retaining wall is just one waste block high. So it's maybe two feet out of the ground. Just so that I think we have a clear record on it, why do we need the retaining wall in that location? Well, I want to do it for maintaining the building. Right now, the grade slopes are pretty good to the street or to the sidewalk. So when we run boom lifts down there, which we really have to do all the repairs with the boom lift, it's almost impossible. We end up having to brace them up, which is not really a safe thing to do. Is it just walking through? How does the retaining wall? We're going to level the grade between the building and the. So the retaining wall holds that level grade? Yeah, right. Right now it's a steep slope. It's hard to see it because there's some spirea that's sort of overgrown in that area. It's called as a granite retaining wall, is that right? It says on the drawing. What we'll do is we'll use waste blocks and then cover them with granite. Yeah, I think there's a picture in the plans. There's another piece that we did around the front of the building. And the garage shed you're taking down does not be replaced with anything? It's going to be replaced with a little bit bigger structure than what's there, slightly bigger. But garages and then the storage room on the second floor. Maybe you could bring that up, Mary. I'm trying to catch up to you here. You're going to want to see the vertical retaining wall. There'll be a public room on the second floor for the tenants. There's your wall. That's the wall that nobody can see, though. That's between 328 College Street and 91 South Willard. Yeah, in the back. It's a retaining wall that's five feet away from 328. So there's another picture in there. So can I ask Mary, can I ask you a question on this permit? Yes. Is this for just 326 College Street? Or because of the way these properties interrelate, does this permit attach or run with the other properties? That is a good question. This came in as 326 College, but it is among one, two, three, four parcels that will benefit from the stormwater improvement plan. As one of the conditions, I have instructed Mark and his team that we need applications to join this one to make sure we're covering all the parcels that are having stormwater improvements. So that includes 87, 89 South Willard, 91, 93 South Willard, 332 through 334 College, and 348 College, correct? Yeah. Plus 326, so that makes five parcels. 326, 328, 348 are all on one parcel. So I mean, it is a comprehensive plan that covers half a block. Yeah, that's the only way to do it really. All that plan is part of this application. You have it in front of you. There will be some porch changes for the South Willard Street properties, but they'll be included on those separate and discrete applications. And all the applications are in. You have them all right, Mary. Well, I mean, most of the work is going to be underground, and he's going to repave the parking lots and. Well, only this one needs to go to the DRB, though, right? The others. Only this one needs to go to the DRB because of those retaining walls in two feet of a setback. And one is already there, the Hunger for Terrorist retaining walls. Both are there. No, and the other one. Yeah, they're both there, yeah. So it's a lot of plans for a major project, which I don't think makes much of a wave. No, I mean, it actually reduces the ways, right? Yes. Bad joke. Good luck. Any further questions from the board? All right, well, as well as a public hearing, so with that, we'll close the public hearing. I suspect we'll vote on it hopefully tonight. It seems like a nice project, and it's good to see stormwater improvements. Hopefully it'll be affordable. So I asked. No one else? Yeah, no one else. So that's good. Yep, two of your projects. So I'll call. Yeah, you got four. Tight. So the next item on our agenda is 98 Sunset Cliff Road, ZP 23-9. I will call the hearing and swear people in, but I have to recuse myself. I found out one of my partners had provided some advice to one of the people involved here. I don't know who, but I'll take no other action from that. So first, let me get, is the applicant here? Or are applicants attorneys? Yeah, come on up. So is there anybody else who wants to speak on this application? OK. So if you all raise your right hand and the applicant too. And the applicant too, yes, you. State that do you swear that the testimony you're about to give in the matter under consideration is true and correct under the pains and penalties of perjury? All right, I will recuse myself. Let me set the stage. This was a approved public hearing. We found out that approved via a public hearing, we found out that the notice program that the city used was inaccurate and that certain neighbors had not got notice by rule. We felt we were required to reopen it. We did. We set it for tonight. And now we're having the reopened hearing. And I will step out. I'd say one of them too. I think this is also the project where there was a stair that was on the adjacent property. And I believe that that's not on the adjacent property. Am I correct? I can actually clarify that. So maybe I'll jump right in. You can introduce yourself when you speak. Yeah, so my name is Elizabeth Herman. I'm Lucy and Key Wong's architect and serving as the applicant here. So just a correction, really, on the stair. So that stair is existing. That is part of the actually, if the plan is up there, I can point out the stair that we're talking about. There is right there. There's a little white spot that appears to. So just to give people a little idea of what's going on at the shoreline here. So there are a series of existing concrete retaining walls. But we plan to leave in place. The only way now to get down to the lake is through a subterranean 50-foot tunnel that leads from the existing house. It's a little odd and not the most ideal way to get down to the lake. So what we're proposing is to have a set of stairs go down to a point where we land on one of those retaining areas and then just extend the stair from there. So the hand that you see here. Actually, Rem, can you help me out with this? Yes. Yeah, so this was actually removed to avoid any issues. Because currently, there's an existing stair that protrudes over the property line. So that's what you saw in the previous plan, which looked like a new proposed stair. So is the hand. Going down the stairs, come down, turn left, go down the next flight of stairs, you get a landing, and then turn towards the lake. Can you just walk towards the lake there? Or is there a drop? No, there would be a temporary metal hinged stair that would get you down. Because that's all concrete along the waterfront, isn't it? It is. It exists. So you have a stair to get you down onto that concrete landing, and that's not showing on this. Yeah, it's about two. It would have to be about 18 inches, depending on the water level. Is that the only clarification or change from the previous submittal or other changes from what we? There's one other clarification I wanted to make, which is minor. The setback is actually 13 feet, not 14 feet. And that was clarified in a note that I posted on the portal. Otherwise, no, no minor. Anything else that you want to add? Because obviously, some people have something to say, so. Yeah, I thought I just briefly mentioned what the project involves. So there's an existing home on the site that will be removed and a proposed new home going in place. I think one of the important things to mention is that the new home will be further from the lake. And we're trying to do a lot of beautification and site work that improves the lake shore and creates a low mo zone between the house and the lake. We do, as I said, the existing retaining walls will be left in place to keep the shore from eroding. And there's a really lovely landscape plan that is also part of the application. The house is a little bit bigger than the existing house, but it sits within the setbacks and is just pulled a bit further away from the lake than the existing home. And other than that, I think this is the lake shore side of the site plan. The upper half shows some of the landscaping on the driveway side, the road side, and the pickleball court. Can you get the whole, as much of this, that plan to show at one time, Mary? Just, I know it's gonna be smaller, but great, that's good. Thank you. Thank you. So, anything else you wanna add before we? No, I... Okay. And I'm Chris Roy, I'm the applicant's attorney and they asked me to come here to give some of the issues that have been raised by the appellants, and you guys don't wanna hear from me, so I'll keep this as brief as possible. The one thing that the Wongs really wanted me to emphasize here is that this is a residential project in a residential zone. It's a permitted use, and as is evidenced by the staff comments here, there are certain dimensional and lot requirements that have to be met, and as staff has laid out, they have been met. This is a very carefully and well-designed project, and there really isn't anything in the zoning bylaws that would extend to regulating through the zoning process a recreational residential use like pickleball. Sometimes you might have subdivisions that deal with it in restrictive covenants or declarations. You have some communities that have noise within performance standards that are found in zoning. That's not the case in Burlington. You have a separate noise ordinance, and for a permitted use like this, noise isn't one of the issues, and that's evidenced by the fact that, as staff pointed out, none of those provisions that needed to be satisfied relate to noise. So at the end of the day, this really isn't a zoning issue, and I understand that the neighbors feel strongly about a pickleball court, but at the end of the day, I think the city of Burlington has decided that things such as noise generated by recreational use covered by the noise ordinance and not zoning, and if there were any restrictions on use of the property, such as restrictive covenants and the like, that wouldn't be something for the DRB to worry about. Anyway, it's not within your purview, and you probably have enough other things to handle that you don't need to start getting into those matters. So I just wanted to, because I understand that people are going to be here and make comments about the project, and that's why they asked to reopen the hearing, but I did just want to, on behalf of the longs, really sort of lay out how they had approached this and working with Liz, had really endeavored to come up with a project that would enhance the neighborhood and which they could be proud of. I have one other question I have. It doesn't look like, there's no lighting on this, or is it, is there lighting? No. Okay. Any other questions from the board for the applicant? Is that? Okay, well, see how should we do this? Can we start at this side? Let's say somebody who feels they should go first. I want a neighbor. Okay. Yep, you want to give them a seat. I thought the A.J. Swarman, A.J. Swarman, everybody, and I thought, and if you can introduce yourself as you speak. My name is Cluttings Farr, I'm here from the world from the mind of Mr. Farr, who represents the line of affairs, Drayburn, their opposition to the L.A. The staff gets one or two, that's the most critical. I also have an expert that is joining us via Zoom, so I don't know if there's a way to... That's for you. Who should we be looking for? Lance Willis is... This is just being filed today, correct? That's correct. I sent that earlier today to Mr. Greston. Lance Willis has the ability to speak. He is our expert. I'd like to have him speak on this application if that's okay with him. He has the ability to speak, yeah. Oh, okay, okay, okay, thanks. All right, so as I mentioned, my name is Cluttings Farr, I'm gonna stand if that's okay. Thank you, I'm originally the board, appreciate your attention in this matter, appreciate you also rewarning this hearing and giving us the opportunity to speak on this application, so appreciate that. So as I mentioned, I'm here representing Ms. Farrow and her property is directly adjacent to this project and less than 55 feet from this pickleball court, which has been proposed. And we are not here opposing the residents, we would not be here if we were talking about croquet and badminton, and so I appreciate that. Pickleball is an interesting, it's an interesting pastime that I, when I was contacted by Ms. Farrow, I didn't frankly know anything about it. I played tennis, but I had no idea that pickleball was as controversial an activity as it is. And I suspect, and maybe all of you are far more advanced than I am on this issue, but maybe the rest of you have no idea like I did that this is a thing in the country. This is a huge thing. Pickleball, and I will have Mr. Willis speak on this issue because he is a doctor and an acoustical engineer and an expert in acoustics. This craze of pickleball has taken hold across the country and there has been a lot of acoustical testing that has resulted from pickleball and what they have discovered is that this noise, I don't know if you are familiar with pickleball, you'll know that the racquets are hard mallets, they sort of more represent a ping-pong paddle in a larger surface area and the balls are hard plastic. So unlike a tennis ball, they make a popping sound. And so what I've produced here for you, I respectfully wanna talk a little bit first about, oh, here we go, yep. So as you can see, this is what a pickleball paddle looks like. It strikes this ball which is a hard plastic ball which is more like a wiffle ball and so the sound you get out of it is more of a pop. And that popping sound is a repetitive popping sound that has been likened to the loading of a mortar. And so when you read through what I've provided you here today, you've got a letter and I wanna talk a little bit about your regulations because I respectfully, I certainly respect Attorney Roy and his analysis, but I respectfully disagree with how that integrates into your code of ordinances, which I'll talk a little bit about. But what you have behind that is Mr. Willis's CV. He'll introduce himself and speak to you on this issue in a minute. But then you have several kind of case analyses for lack of better word that are going on across the country which talk about where these issues have taken hold. So first, just starting briefly with your ordinance. We have a single family residence and we have what someone is asking for as an accessory use. And you have a definition in your ordinance of accessory use as something that's customarily incidental to a residential use. And so I'd start with the premise that this is not customarily incidental. Perhaps we can look across the country and look at tennis courts that have been customarily incidental to residential uses. But pickleball is pretty new and pickleball courts, you can't really look around most of your neighborhoods and find pickleball courts in people's backyards. And what we're discovering across the country is that there's a reason why these are not in residential neighborhoods because they're incredibly loud and they're very disruptive. And they are so disruptive to people that they are causing tremendous outcry from this consistent constant repetitive popping sound that actually penetrates the insides of residences. So we would first argue that this is not customarily incidental to residential uses. And it may be similar to the types of listings that you have in your ordinance tennis courts, but it's not at all the same thing. It's really not at all the same thing. Then if you kind of go further and a little bit deeper into your regulations, section 51, G2 and 3, concern residential uses. And that section of your ordinance very specifically provides these accessory uses need to be reasonably necessary to conduct the principal use. And obviously I'd argue having a pickleball court is not reasonably necessary. I think we can probably all agree that you could live in your residence and you don't really need a pickleball court in your backyard. It's really dissimilar from a garage or a shed or something like that where you need to store your lawn mower and your snowblower and items like that next to that you use in your house on a regular basis. If you proceed on to E and F of that same section, you'll see that it talks about accessory uses that can be permitted if they don't result in the increase in extent of preexisting nonconformities and more importantly violations of the provisions of this ordinance. And so F also says the combination of uses on any given property shall meet all of the provisions of this ordinance. And so if you look further, you get to your noise ordinance. And that noise ordinance is what is really important here today because noise ordinances, you know, Burlington noise ordinance provides very specifically that you can't create a nuisance on your property. The general prohibition in 21-13 B provides that it shall be unlawful for any person to make or cause or be made any loud noise or any loud or unreasonable noise. Noise shall be deemed to be unreasonable when it disturbs, injures and endangers the peace and health of another or when it endangers the health, safety and welfare of the community. So it's not just an individual person's standard, it's a community standard. Any such noise shall be considered to be a noise disturbance and a public nuisance. And I will, at this point, you know, I'd like to bring in Dr. Willis to talk to you a little bit about what pickleball noise is, why he knows about it and how he can educate you on this subject. Lance, are you around? Can you hear us? I'm here. Okay, excellent, excellent. Is it possible to get Mr. Willis up on the screen so that we can all see him? I think it's nobody you're talking to. Oh, awesome, there we go. Okay, perfect. So you'll find, behind the letter that I sent, you'll find Dr. Willis's curriculum vitae that you'll see before you. Lance, can you tell the board a little bit about who you are, who you work for? Yeah. Yeah. We have his resume, we believe in credentials. And we've got his resume in here, so. I don't, I was using something vital that we should hear about too. Well, yeah, respectfully, I do. Go ahead. Because Mr. Willis is the seminal preeminent expert in the entire country on this very issue and who would have known that there is a sound expert on pickleball? That's what's in here. That is exactly what's in here, but I think it's really useful to understand what his background is. Could you just give a brief overview, Lance, of what your background is and how you came to be the pickleball acoustics expert? Sure. So I'm the principal acoustical engineer, Ors Bendarian, and Willis Acoustics and Noise Control, that's a firm in Tucson, Arizona. We first began consulting on pickleball issues back in 2010. A community called South Brooks, just north of Tucson, that was our first experience with trying to mitigate pickleball sound. And over the last 13 years or so, we have had a steady projects, what we've been working on, pickleball site planning and also working with people living close to pickleball courts who have been impacted by the sound typically from courts that were either sighted too close or there was no attempt to mitigate the sound coming from the courts. And so, Lance, can you describe a little bit about the acoustical testing that you have done with pickleball courts so that the board understands what the process is and how you measure that sound? It's a national standard, it's an ANSI standard, S12.9, part four of that standard gives a methodology for assessing this type of sound. What people tend to complain about is the popping sound that paddles make, is a highly impulsive sound. And we need to do a special type of analysis that's outlined in this standard to get a representative assessment of what the community impact is going to be from this type of sound. And have you participated, I understand, you not only participate in working for folks that are impacted by the sound, but you've also participated in preparing mitigation plans for this type of activity, is that correct? Yes, we provide noise evasion plans to apply to pickleball sites. And you've been involved in actions where pickleball neighboring property owners have brought actions against folks that have constructed these pickleball courts, is that correct? Yes, I've seen that a number of times. Can you tell the board a little bit about, as I understand it, there are several municipalities in the country that are now considering regulations concerning these types of courts with respect to residential land uses, is that correct? I believe that's correct. There's one that I know of in Park City, Utah that has passed a pickleball code amendment that was last year, and I believe there are several others, although I'm not directly involved with those. Okay. And can you describe a little bit about, you talked a little bit about the standard for measuring pickleball noise and how it's an impulsive noise. Can you explain what is the standard in the industry and your professional opinion for the siting of pickleball courts to residential uses? Well, there's no standard specifically for pickleball. However, this type of sound is covered in ANSI S12.9 part four in terms of assessing the annoyance of this type of sound. And what is your, have you had an opportunity to review this particular application by the longs relative to Ms. Farrell's property? I have looked at the site plan and I've looked at the setbacks for the pickleball courts. And can you talk a little bit about how close is this property to Ms. Farrell's property line or this use to Ms. Farrell's property line? It was within 55 feet according to the drums that I have. And did you have a, in your professional opinion what conclusions did you come to with respect to that use that close to a property, a boundary line? Well, our experience has been that anything, any pickleball courts within a hundred feet of residential land uses are almost guaranteed to draw noise complaints. And I have been involved with several legal actions of the pickleball courts within that distance of a hundred feet. What would the decibel levels be that someone would be experiencing at that closer range? With the ANSI standard, we are talking about an adjusted sound pressure level, which accounts for the additional noise impact of the highly impulsive sound characteristic. So that adjusted level is typically somewhere around 60 DBA at 100 feet or one pickleball court. Okay, and we're talking about it much closer. How does it, does that change when you're talking about something that's only 55 feet away? Well, at half the distance, it will be about 60 B Louder. And is this a sound that would be experienced inside of the home in addition to outside of the home? Most likely courts this close, it is very common to, with clients that I've worked with, they say they can hear it inside their house. Some have told me that it disrupts Zoom meetings. If they're working from home, they have a difficult time with conference calls and so forth because of the background noise. And is this a noise that can be mitigated in some way? I mean, at this proximity, would there be some way to be able to completely provide abatement for this type of a noise? Unfortunately not at this distance. This has been somewhat codified already in the Park City, Utah pickleball amendment where they are requiring a minimum of 150 feet setback from the ball course to residential land uses. And that's typical, it's a good working distance. In most cases, we can mitigate that. There are some exceptions where topology plays a role. And occasionally we can get a little closer than 150 feet but once you get within 100 feet, it really is very difficult to mitigate this to an acceptable level. Is there anything else, Lance, that we haven't talked about today that you think would be important for the board to know? Maybe you can describe a little bit about the difference between tennis and pickleball. I know it's often compared. Right, yeah, most of the cases that I see where someone is filing a complaint against pickleball is when there is a tennis court that has been converted to pickleball. And it's in a location that is fine for tennis. The tennis court may have been in operation for decades but as soon as they convert it to pickleball, there's a noise issue. And it's because there is a drastic difference between the sound output of a pickleball court versus tennis. In your professional opinion, would the installation and use of this pickleball court in this location create a violation of the noise ordinance in Burlington, Vermont? I believe it would. The noise ordinance refers to reasonableness and I have seen a number of lawsuits over pickleball courts at distances even further than this, you know, approaching 100 feet. And so it does tend to be, people believe it is unreasonable. Is there anything else that you'd like to add that we haven't talked about tonight? I believe we've covered most of it. When it comes to citing pickleball courts, there are two factors that you have to consider. One is that the main method of noise abatement is going to be a sound wall. And a sound wall can give you so much attenuation of the sound, but there's a limit to what it can do. You must also have a sufficient setback to make a difference in what the sound wall is able to accomplish. And in this instance, there's not even a sound wall that's been provided, correct? There is something on the drawings on the west side. I haven't looked back. I haven't looked at that in detail. I don't believe there's anything on the east side. However, I have worked on a number of cases where laws have been filed despite the fact that a fence cover has been installed going up to 10 feet. And that was not sufficient to mitigate the sound. It is, as I said, once you get within 100 feet, it's nearly impossible to mitigate this with a noise barrier. Any questions from the board for their expert at this point? Just checking, okay? Let's let them finish their presentation then. So I think in summation, I think the message here to this board is that if you permit this use in this particular location as drawn in these plans, you will inevitably be permitting a very violation, a very clear violation of your noise ordinance. And I think your code prohibits you very squarely from doing that. And so I think the concern here in the basis of the opposition, as Mr. Willis has made very clear, is that what you can't do is permit accessory uses in residential neighborhoods that are walking the applicant directly into a lawsuit from their neighbors for violations of the noise ordinance. And your folks in your zoning office are gonna have to turn around almost immediately and cite these folks for a violation of the noise ordinance. And so essentially what we've done is bait them into a violation that is ultimately gonna have to result in the removal of the thing that we're permitting in and of itself. And so that doesn't forgive me, but it doesn't seem to make a whole lot of common sense at the end of the day. And I think that despite Attorney Roy's representation that you don't have anything in your regs to regulate this, I think you do. And I think you do for this very reason because you don't wanna permit stuff that you have to turn around and tell people to take out, right? Because it's violating the noise ordinance. It just defies logic. So I think that is the basis of our opposition. This is gonna be incredibly noisy. It very squarely violates your noise ordinance. You've heard from the preeminent expert in the country that this is not something that is permissible. And at this distance, it just simply cannot be abated. Flat out. There's nothing that could be done here to mitigate this type of a use in this location at all period. And it's gonna violate not only Ms. Farrow's right to quiet enjoyment of her property, but it's gonna do the same thing for all of the neighbors in this area. So appreciate your consideration. Thank you for your time. Well, let's see if anybody has questions for you on this. I do have one question for Madam. I can't have your name right now. Mr. Dr. Willis. Dr. Willis. Can you, how does this compare to like basketball dribbling on a asphalt court? I don't have data that I've analyzed for basketball. We do get contacted every once in a while about basketball, but it doesn't really seem to have the same level of intrusion that pickleball does. I just judge you by the number of complaints that we see. And the Utah ordinance that you referred to, was that for residential or commercial or any kind of pickleball installation? Sorry, I missed the first part of that. You mentioned an ordinance was being drafted somewhere and was that for residential area or was it for commercial area? What was the context of that ordinance that was being drafted? Oh, the Park City, Utah Code Amendment, right. That one was passed in April of last year and the purpose is to require setbacks for pickleball courts with regard to residential land uses. So I've actually, Mr. Rubino, I've included that in your packet. You'll find it at the end of your packet. So you will find that the regulation says that a minimum setback of 600 feet from lot lines of adjacent residential property lines. So that is the standard in Park City, Utah. Now, then it says the planning commission may reduce the minimum setback to no less than 150 feet. So when the applicant submits a noise study, so you have to actually do more, you can get this potential reduction. It can't under any circumstance be less than 150 feet. But in order to get that, you've got to submit a noise study by a certified professional which demonstrates compliance with their code and their noise ordinances, approvals conditioned on the construction and completion of the noise mitigating features included in the noise study. So you'll get a recommendation from one of these experts then you got to have the inclusion of these. So there's quite a lot of requirements that Park City has implemented in considering something like this. But most importantly, as Dr. Willis has said, you can't get below 150 feet anyway under any circumstances, even if you do one of these noise studies. And here we're at 55 feet, which is less than half of what they've said is the absolute minimum. You have information on the lot sizes for Park City, Utah, the house lot sizes. I do not, but I respectfully, I don't think it matters because what they're saying is it's 150 feet from. It matters if you have five acre lots or if you have city lots. Well, but if you're only 150 feet from the residential land use, you know what I mean? I'm not going to argue with you. I just asked the question that was that. I don't, I did not provide that. I simply provided that portion of the regulation. If you'd like it, I'm sure I could find it. Any other, you have a lot of people from the public, is anybody else want to speak from the public, any of the neighbors? I think my client would just like that. Okay, sure. Well, I have other stuff to add, but I did want to say that it's 55 feet from my property, but I think it's like 35 from the property on the other side. It's not even 55, it's closer. So it's pretty outrageous. While I'm here, I'll just say that I'm Bonnie Farrow. I live on the West side right next door. Sunset Cliff Road is within five miles of Burlington, but it's a completely different world. It's rural, it's located at the end of a dirt road. Houses line one side of the road. There's the lake on one side and then a wooded common land on the other. It's a private dead-end road. It was originally designed as a seasonal camp community. So the lots are irregular, they're small. My house, for instance, is under a third of an acre. It's an unbuildable lot, and the only reason I got to build my house on it was because there was a seasonal camp on it. So it was grandfathered in or the footprint, whatever. And so it's a bucolic setting. There's deer going through our yards at all points. We drive past horses, there's community gardens. But the lots are irregular and very small in size and my house sits just six feet away from the property line of the Wong's house. And five feet away from my neighbors over here, the Dudaks. We are cramped in, but we have the benefit of, we look out our back and the lake is right there and we don't feel cramped, but it is close quarters. And they kind of arc around, so there's a few houses that are maybe two or three houses away that are gonna be facing this pickleball court and hearing. I'm also hearing that the ones on the other side of the bay, because of the lake, we're gonna get the echo. Am I talking too loud for you? Oh, I thought you said you're going like that. So they're gonna fall victim to this as well. So it just seems kind of crazy to me to let this person coming in have a pickleball court. It's not a necessary feature of a home. We're not unreasonable. These are some of my lovely neighbors. You asked about a basketball court. They're putting in a basketball court and it's even closer to my house. And I'm not complaining. I'm not like not in my backyard. It's a different noise. It's not the repetitive pop, pop, pop. A pickleball court is a quarter of the size of a tennis court. So it's not just a pop, pop, pop. It's a rapid fire pop, pop, pop. Anyway, I guess I just wanted to say I've lived there 12 years now. I've never had a noise problem with any neighbor there. I mean, there's short-term construction projects going on, that's to be expected. But a permanent pickleball court would forever change the neighborhood and take away, I'm sure, send away the deer and make it just not the quiet environment that everybody moved out there to enjoy. So it's a disruptive nuisance. It's just too much sound for too small a space, basically. And I guess I would just like for all you to go online and Google pickleball noise and you just won't believe what comes up there. And unfortunately, this is the first pickleball court coming to Burlington, but it may not be the last. And so I feel like this is probably a little early and most of the people in this room had no idea how noisy and disruptive it is. But I'd also like to say that I play pickleball and I walk to Community Park, to Appletree Park and I play pickleball and the courts are always available or I go to the Miller Center and I can play inside or I can get on my bike and go to Letty Park. It is just not a necessary thing to suddenly hold a neighborhood hostage. So that's somebody that's gonna live here for five months and 29 days can enjoy, at the most, can enjoy a pickleball court. It just is not. Anyway, I just hope that you guys all Google pickleball noise and look at the materials and deny the permission of this pickleball court in such a small, closely clustered neighborhood. And that's all I have to say. Thank you. Can just introduce yourself and, you know. Everybody's doing so well. My name is Gail Anderson. I live at 82 Sunset Cliff, which is on the other side of Bonnie. And I'm Dan Dudek. I live at 82 Sunset Cliff as well. And I think we're gonna be about, we're gonna definitely be less than 100 feet from this pickleball court. First of all, I wanna say, when I first hit the wongs, we're gonna put a pickleball court. I'm like, oh, that's great, good for them. That was my first reaction. I played pickleball. That was my paddle. I brought us a demonstration. So no problem with pickleball. But then as I started learning about it and finding out about this high-pitched sound, this relentless sound, and I got more informed, I went, oh my gosh, because we use our front yard. It's narrow as Bonnie says. And that's kind of where there's gonna be in front yard, you know, to play with our dog. We garden out there. We sit, you know, and have dinner by the lake quietly, you know, we sit and read. It's a quiet place. It's a dead-end road, and it's a beautiful serene spot with nature. And, you know, I also go over to Appletree Point with three other neighbors. All last summer, we went every Thursday to the tennis courts slash pickleball. They double as both. Never had a problem getting court there. So it's within walking distance or biking distance from our house, and it's even closer to the wong. So they live even closer to the path that you take to go to the pickleball courts. So I'm very concerned about it. I don't want them to feel unwelcome or that we're not, you know, supportive of their project. They do have a small lot, as a lot of us do, and they're really putting over 5,000 square foot house. Pickleball court and a basketball court just seems like the green space is just wiped out. Now I don't know if that is anything relevant to you and how you feel about it, but I just feel like it's just gonna be a big change. We walk, people walk their dogs down our road. They come over from Appletree. They walk down, it's quiet. And I just am very concerned about it. I just, it's also a very high-pitched sound. I'm a tennis player. I haven't been for years. Still play tennis. We had a tennis court when we lived in Connecticut. We're aware of it. It's a very different sound. It's a high-pitched rapid fire. Bump, bump, bump, bump, bump, bump. And it's just not appropriate in such a crammed-in area. I just, I know it sounds like, and I guess I have a question for you. Is this the first pickleball court that's been applied for in a residential setting, like in an actual, on someone's property? I'm probably, they are in the public parks. I know they have them. Has anybody ever wanted to? I've had any issues with it so far. I don't think. Nothing else, no. Has that even been applied for anyone? So it's probably new to you too, because again, my first reaction was, oh, good for them, how fun. They're gonna have pickleball. I'm just gonna make a suggestion. Yes. We heard very eloquently from your attorney, from the expert. Okay. We have a lot of letters that neighbors have written. The fact that all these folks are here, and I'm gonna assume that they're all sort of on the pickleball, not in the character of the neighborhood side of things. We get the message quite clearly. And I don't know what else somebody would add to the conversation, but rather than just reiterating the issues that have been clarified so far. I've got, excuse me, not to interrupt. I have something else I want to online. I looked up a, it was a pickleball website. I thought, well, let me see the other side of it. And there's an interview with a pickleball referee slash expert. And even he said that pickleball should not be put within 100 feet of a residence. And he's a person that's liking it to the decibel level of freeway traffic. And that's coming from someone that promotes pickleball. Is it a referee? And he just, quote, first of all, courts that are expected to be getting lots of views should not be located close to homes, exclamation point. So that's like another perspective. It's not a lawyer's thing. It's a pickleball person. And I also want to say that, I know you've heard experts. I'm a human being. My husband and I bought our house two and a half years ago. We retired there. We're there to enjoy it. And we love our neighbor. We've had, you know, wonderful neighborhood. And this is more of the personal side of it. Be very, very distressing for us to have a pickleball court there. As lovely as the Wongs probably are, I've met them briefly. I have no, nothing about that. But I just, I would be very disappointed if this was approved. And I'm just telling you the personal side of it. Anything to add, dear? Just this site, and I assume you've looked at site issues as well too, is very wet. The entire area, literally the common area on the other side is a wetland. There's been standing water on the property all this spring. We can show you pictures if you'd like to see them about that. I don't know what has been done about the compensation for the impermeable surface that's going to be put on for the pickleball court or proposed for that. So that obviously is a concern consideration as well. Thank you. Brad, the property owner is online and has raised her hand if you have her at the right time. Okay? First and added. Jeremy Brad, I'm an attorney at Kramer Pettiborah, Eggleston and Kramer. And I'm here on behalf of John Clark who is the neighbor who is 35 feet away from the pickleball court. And I won't belabor the pickleball issue. I just want to make two quick points on that. First, under the city's ordinance, it's the applicant's burden to prove and demonstrate compliance with the nuisance regulations. And I think you've heard plenty of testimony about how noisy pickleball is, but I saw nothing in the application that met that standard. Second, a nuisance is a evaluation that takes into account community standards. And I think we've heard that this is a quiet community. You need to look at the setting where this is being put. This isn't a neighborhood with a lot of noise. So in this neighborhood, it would certainly be a nuisance. The next point I just want to touch on is I think there is a issue with the lot coverage calculations. The DRB's report says this is a 27,000 square foot lot. And I believe the applicants indicated that they would be adding 9,874 square feet of development and coverage. And I'm not sure where the DRB calculations came in, but my math says that's 36.57%. So that would exceed the 35% lot coverage. And unfortunately, I didn't see in any of the application materials anything that segmented out how that calculation was made by the applicant. So it was difficult to recreate, but based on their own numbers, it shows that it would be over the 35% maximum lot coverage. And then the last issue I just want to bring up, which was the initial concern of my clients was the stairs that the initial plans showed that would extend onto their property. And I heard the architect's testimony in the beginning, but I still haven't heard that there will be no development that crosses over the boundary line and extends on to the clerks. It does seem to be the application of the clarification. And I would just ask for clarification then on that point. There's absolutely no development plan beyond the borders of the law. Let's not have a conversation on that. Okay. Thank you. Other neighbors that have anything else that they want to add other than we get a pretty clear picture of the neighborhood and issues. I think you might have folks online also who are looking to speak. Is my understanding. No, we're not. Got it, okay. He's the property owner that's online. No, no, no, I think you also have neighbors online as well. My name is Evan Dick. I'm at 124. I think a lot of us would regret that there would be a conflict between existing folks and our new neighbors, the Wongs. But I think in this case it's, as you said, we all understand and we're just going to go on record as someone speaking because should there be a appeal. But I think, imagine you got a loud barking dog. Everyone comes up to me and says, hey, what's your name? I'm Evan Dick. I'm at 124 Sunset Cliffs. We're just here. A barking dog. Everyone can relate to how they can drive you a little baddie. So I think it's in that sort of level of things and possibly worse. Mary, if people sign in, does that give them the ability to have status to appeal anything or do they have to speak? The standing is different, but if they want to participate they have to sign in and speak, yes. Okay. Were there neighbors also? I only see one hand up online. And if you'd like to speak and you're on our online list, go ahead and raise your hand. I only see the property owner at present. I think that Marcia Hunley is online. She's online, but has not raised her hand. Are we technically doing hybrid meetings now, Mary? I didn't think we were. This was a request for this hearing. To be hybrid. To allow Zoom option. Okay. So who was it that you just mentioned? Marcia Hunley. Can you see her, Mary? I can see her. She's also provided something written that was posted. I think she's having trouble figuring out how to raise her hand so maybe if we could unmute her and then she could just chime in if she wants to speak or not, was that possible? I just, can you hear me now? That's Marcia. Okay, Marcia. I would need to swear you in if you're going to speak. Do you swear to tell the truth and hold truth and to pay in a penalty of perjury? Yes. Okay, and you submitted something. We've had a lot of testimony. So we're... Really, I would just be repeating what I said except for one other point, which is kind of more a neighbor's point of view. It's so surprising to think that people would come into a new neighborhood disregarding what their neighbors feel is important for them to enjoy their property. And in a much larger area of land, a much larger piece of land, I guess a pickleball court wouldn't have the same impact on neighbors if I had five acres and I could put up a Ferris wheel or something. But that's really all I want to say. I said what I wanted to and I just want to preserve the right to be involved. This project, unfortunately, goes further. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, I just say the property owners online, I want to bring them in right now. Can you bring her in, Mary? Yeah. Hi, it's Lucy Wong. Okay, and Lucy, can you hear me? Can you hear me? Lucy? Yeah. Okay, so I need to swear, you need... Yes, I need to swear you in. Okay. Swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth on the pain of penalty or perjury. Okay. I just have one comment. I had a laugh about the pickleball noise, but we live in the state of Florida and I think they forget about Monica Sellis and Serena Williams being two of the biggest grunters on the tennis court. And we have a neighbor here with the pickleball court. And when we go there to play pickleball, there's a tennis court next to us and there are four grown men at 8 a.m. every morning that they're grunting outweighs any pickleball noise. I just wanted to fit that in because tennis is not always quiet. Thank you. And I just want to thank the neighbors for the warm welcome. Thank you. And all their fine comments. Okay. We've heard from the neighbors and you've got a chance to add your comments at this point. I just had a question about the noise issue with pickleball. I understand it has to do specifically with the impact of the ball on the racket. That's what it's being testimony that we've heard, yes. So I just wanted to say there are a whole lot of rackets out there and focusing specifically on a racket and a ball seems really silly when there's so many options. So I just wanted, you know, I've done a lot of reading. Are you saying that actually as somebody who plays pickleball and knows a different racket? Well, I played pickleball and I know that Lucy uses a racket that is specifically rated for as a quiet racket and did a bit of reading. I'm not an expert, obviously, but I just wanted to bring that up because I know that there are a lot of tools that you can use and many of them have different sound ratings. And can I ask a couple of questions of Mr. Willis? Sort of. I knew he was going to do that, but I guess he's their expert. Mr. Willis, are you still here? Is he still online? He's here. Yes, I'm here. I'd like to not have a lot of back and forth, so if you've got some very specific questions. Since I didn't see any of this until I got here, I haven't, it's not like I've had a chance to prepare any lengthy questions, so I'll be very brief. Mr. Willis, have you ever been to the site? I'm gonna, I'm gonna go, I don't want to go through a legal jar of back and forth. This'll be very, very, very, no, if you have a specific question about his commentary on pickleball and status of that, that's one thing. But about the specific site, I don't think that's gonna be, okay. Well, we would submit, it goes to how well he can evaluate this application. We're not here to talk about pickleball across America. We're here to talk about the Wong's application. So, assuming that he hasn't been here, of all of the various lawsuits that you've been involved with, Mr. Willis, how many of those were clubs or commercial complexes that involved more than one pickleball court? Is that a number of them? Do you recall one that was a single private court in a residential neighborhood? And where was that? A couple in California. I'm gonna, I have a suggestion out of the board is gonna be okay with this, but we've heard a lot of testimony. We have this, which we haven't seen yet. I suspect that we actually might not deliberate tonight on this one. I'm thinking, wait. And I, since there's a lot of testimony, you haven't seen this, we could leave the, I have to remember how we do this, but we could leave the time to submit statements or testimony open so that we get that before we deliberate. If you have comments you wanna make to rebut this report and stuff you've heard tonight, you'll have the opportunity to do that in that form. And if that's the case, then I'm happy to. So, like I said, we've got a lot of testimony. I think we've got more than we can digest at this point. Mary? Yes, sir. If we want to at least leave it open to receive more testimony, do we have to keep the hearing open? Keep the hearing open just to receive more submission documents. Over the next seven days. And then maybe we can deliberate. For your discretion. Yeah, and we could deliberate after our next meeting. If we get that information. And we're leaving it open only to receive, you're limiting it to receiving comments. Yes, comments. I'm sorry, do we have to have a motion? Okay. So moved. So, second? Chase, seconds. We haven't closed anything yet. All in favor? We go for it. If you say yes. Okay. So, you're burning to say something. I'm burning, I'm burning. Yeah. As a tennis player, I take a ball player, this is my power. In use. Sure. You want me to come over? Yeah, we have to speak at the mic. Okay, sir. It's just a quickie. I just wanted to make a few points. One is to correct, and I don't remember your name, I'm sorry. There's never, you never use a racket to play pickleball. It's a paddle, and it's hard. There might be softer ones. It has to be clarified. We've got the testimony, and I think they have an opportunity, if they have something you want to clarify, that there are soft pickleball paddles. But then the other part of it that no one brought up is that, yes, half the time you're hitting, it's hitting the paddle. The other half the time it's hitting a cement court, which is also making sounds. You can't mitigate that. The second thing is I want to just say to the longs that there's nothing personal here. We love our community, love our home. I don't want anybody to take offense. I want them to feel welcome, and I don't want ill will with anyone. So, okay, thank you. With that, we are leaving the hearing open for a week to receive testimony. If you want to rebut what's been presented tonight or add more information, we have to receive it. And with the goal of deliberating after our next meeting in two weeks, assuming we're okay with everything we get. So, with that, we are moving on. Bring it on. Yes. Lucky you. That was fun. I'm looking at this though. No, I didn't hear it. Look to get some. Paul can't help him. I didn't go right now. I didn't go right now. Thank you. Go figure seven. I was at 9,000, 36% of your time. It's different. Pick a book. I'll go on coverage. Not everything that is construction is lot coverage in the same category. I figured you'd appreciate that question. I figured you'd appreciate the question. Open, patio. Sting rush blocks and things like that. So, they always are. Sorry, I was trying to find the application. But you can bring that up. I feel bad for Brad. You didn't have it hard. Don't do this for me. He is dose-separate. You got to wait on this one. Brad, would it be us asking staff to, and so would that be a motion or? No, the hearing's still. The hearing's still a question. Okay, great. So, moving on to our next agenda item if the pickleball team is done. That's everybody. That's quiet. Yeah, yeah. We'll be quick. You're welcome to come join us. This is, yeah. You can tell the crowd this one's not gonna take as long. Come on in. I'm assuming you're Rhino Foods? Yeah, you're more than welcome to join us here. So, our next agenda item is ZP2349, 21 Morse Place, Riley Properties and Silken Kirschner, proposed construction of tenant parking, including six regular and one ADA parking spaces. We have the applicant here, correct? So, we, ah, will you raise your right hand? Do you swear that the testimony that you are about to give in the matter under consideration will be true and correct under the pains and penalties of perjury? Nice to meet you. And is there anyone else here to speak on this application? Well, that's what it appears to be. So, this was actually marked to be on our consent agenda item. And we never got around to it. I would propose that we treat this as a consent agenda item. It seems relatively simple and limited. It's a nice project. Any members of the board have any objection to that? No? Is there anyone online who wants to participate in this review? That's right, we have an online. If so, please raise your hand. Yeah, I should remind them that's a lot louder. Nobody? All right, so, have you had a chance to look at the staff's findings? Yes, the staff report. Yeah, anything that you have an issue with that we need to address are everything okay? No, sir, everything's okay. Oh, please never, sir. No one in your office would ever let that happen. Tell Jeremy you said that he'll kill you. So, I'll make a motion on ZP 23-49, 21 Morse Place that, since it was on a consent agenda item, that we approve the application and adopt staff's findings and recommendations. Second that. All those in favor? So, there you go. The final item on our agenda is a sketch plan, ZSP 23-1, 179 Queen City Park Road, Zoo Holdings, LLC, Martin Corsell, sketch plan review, Browdy, you recuse? No? No, no. Oh, thank you. 65,000 square foot addition to existing Rhino Foods facility. We have the applicant here. Oh, sketch plan, we don't take, we don't swear people in for sketch plan review, we just, this is more informal, we look at the project and we give you some initial feedback. So, might as well introduce yourself, tell us about the project, tell us why you didn't bring any cookies, which I smell every morning on my run, and see where it goes. I'm Martin Corsell with Champlain Consulting Engineers. I'll let Ted Castle answer the cookie question. So, I'm Ted Castle from Rhino Foods, the owner. We don't make any cookies as the real bummer, but we do make some big brownies that we, that's what we, we know we're not supposed to bribe public. Yeah, yeah, yeah. We appreciate you honoring that. This is a joke. No, no, do not, do not, do not, do not. I'll be quick, you know, this is a big project for Rhino, we're excited about it. We'll talk to you, we've really, in the phase of trying to figure out what we can do and what we can't do. Martin will talk a lot about where we are and what we've done, but Rhino is a privately held business. We have about 200 and a little over 200 employees now. We hire a lot of new Americans and we're very fortunate to be in Burlington. We want to stay in Burlington because we like what we do here. We like the city of Burlington. We're on the bus route, which really helps us with our employee base. We've grown over the years and we basically make a lot of cookie dough and bakery products and inclusions that go into ice cream and have a 60% market share. So we're making lots of cookie dough for a lot of different things that grow our business over time. We're a certified B Corporation. I don't know if you folks know much about that, but B Corps are a group that you have to score over 80 points on assessment. Business is a force for good around workers, governance, environment and community. So, you know, we've been very focused on not growth in our business, but more about doing right by business. That's really what is important to me and everybody that works at Rhino. So, we really are excited to be here and show you what we've got going. This is a huge project for Rhino. We're a small business, we're privately held. We're not trying to bring in venture capital or sell our business. So this would be a way to really solidify what we have in Burlington. Unfortunately, we had bought the property between Rhino and Edland a number of years ago, maybe five years ago. So, I'll stop there because we can answer any questions you want about Rhino and our intentions, we'll have to answer them. I was just gonna, if you'd like, I'll give you a quick kind of overview of what the plan is, if that's what you're gonna ask for. Okay, so looking at the site plan, the north is to the right. You'll see that is the existing building with the existing parking again to the right there. That's around 44,000 square feet. The proposed expansion that we're looking at is around 65,000 square feet. It is that L-shaped building to the south. On the, in front of the existing building, you'll see there's one curb cut with some parking in the front. That then wraps around to the back. There's currently circulation around the entire site. What we're proposing is, will still be circulation around the entire site so that existing curb cut will remain. That will be for employee in and out and also for trucks in. So the plan would be that trucks would come in. That existing entrance loop around the building. As you can see on the very south side, the southwest corner, there will be 10 new refrigerated loading dock spaces. And then those trucks would actually continue out to a new curb cut on the south end of the site. We are proposing some parking modifications, as you can see, because part of where the new building is going to be, there is existing employee parking. So we are showing a new parking lot. There will also be new stormwater features, utility connections and site grading involved with this. So that's the quick overview. If there's any questions or I can jump into this kind of staff report and just go over a few items that might help. It's up to the board. I know the site extremely well. I live right around the corner. Okay. Run by it 250 days a year probably to get to Red Rock. So I know very well, I know the ins and outs very well. My first initial reaction to it was, it's a great use for that property. I had questions. You built a very nice stormwater pond out front. And so I was curious, is that gonna remain? How are you modifying that at all? If at all, it's sort of in that corner where you're proposing to, I don't know if it's remaining, if it's getting modified, that was a question I had. Sure. Do you know what I'm talking about, the stormwater? Oh yeah, yeah, so that was, yeah, I can certainly answer that. So the stormwater is going to end up getting changed. So I do have, I had, I had uploaded a rendering that actually showed. The reason I'm asking is, part of the location of the parking, so one of the issues in the staff report is the parking goes out front. And the thought I had is, when I go by it, that pond grows in with some nice reeds and not like it's wildlife, but you see stuff out there and it adds sort of a mitigating feature. So if you can put parking there, something that matches, I know there's a lot of reeds that grow in the ditch along the front, but something, my initial reaction was, I can understand why the need to put the parking out front exists, but it shouldn't just look like a parking lot dumped out front. I think some mitigation along the way, along Industrial Avenue would be beneficial. Yeah, so the stormwater basically, when we submitted this sketch plan, I can kind of see that oval along the bottom there. There's, can I go up to the board to kind of point if that might help? So I believe what you're talking about is the current pond is this shape right here. This is the four bay, and this is the pond. So what we're proposing was one big pond here. Oh, okay. So that, I didn't know if that was a pond or a berm. We're proposing that. When we submitted this, we're proposing that as a pond. Since we've submitted, we've been working with Watershed Consulting to kind of fine tune the stormwater a little bit. Andres? Andres, exactly. So the current proposal is actually, this will be a gravel wetland. There's also going to be a gravel wetland along the south side. In addition for stormwater, because this is now going to be a three acre site, we're gonna have to do some existing retrofit. Retrofit, so we're also proposing some bioretention along the existing green space in the front. Just chopping. Oh, so yes, thank you. That's exactly the one. So this kind of shows, so this rendering does show that would be the gravel wetland. This would be the other gravel wetlands. Very rudimentary rendering at this point. What we are proposing, we're gonna be working with a landscape architect to have plantings on the sides of that. This kind of, the way this is shown, does have, looks like standing water. There will be standing water immediately after storms, but it's not gonna hold water all the time, just outside the gravel wetlands function. So yeah, this does show that that would be the plan is that's not a berm, that will be a gravel wetland, will be landscape there, in addition to bioretention, somewhere along the green space up here to deal with the storm water. And then you would kind of quickly touched on the need for the parking. There's really three main reasons that we're proposing the parking here. Since this isn't expansion, we do need the new building to kind of flow with the production space that exists. So the manufacturing is kind of concentrated back here. So we need the product to all flow from that space to the new space to the loading docks. And part of that also, because Rhino, they produce a ready to eat food product, there's quite a bit of food safety involved. So really the employee entrance, all employees have to really enter a controlled location. One employee entrance, which is the existing employee entrance. So if we were to say, we couldn't move things in the existing building, but had the parking back in this location, those employees would have to walk kind of pass all the truck docks. It'd be about 650 feet to all get to there. So those are kind of the big reasons why we're proposing the parking here, but you're right, we do have a feature. It's not just if we're parking right up to the edge of the road. Yeah, I think it's important that controlled would mean not like just a fob to enter the building. Everybody has to go into the locker room and get into a uniform and then leave their crocs, put their self over the other side, put on boots. So it's a very controlled environment in our locker room. So the concept of the raw materials going into the production room and coming back out to the freezer is really critical. The people flow is like incredibly important and the production flow. So we actually looked at that. We've hired a company out of Connecticut, Food Tech to do the initial design of what's inside this building, but we're expanding, having the opportunity to do some more production if we grow, but also bringing our warehousing that we have a spot over at Vermont Commercial over in Williston and also 3PL and Avon Mass. And that would bring everything onto one roof which would make us much more efficient and hopefully have delight our customers by not raising prices every year as much as we are right now. Why is the South exit just a exit and not entrance and exit for the trucks? We're a truck to pull in, make that turn and then come back out. If you're a truck driver, in order to back into that building dog, you have to do what's called a blind sign back. It's very difficult. And in the current climate with trucking and transportation, there's a lot of clean and new drivers in the market. Around you have a better vantage point to not cause damage and to be able to get it there and much more efficient. Sorry, go ahead, Leo. No, no, no. Sorry, there are still loading docks on the north and west side also? Yes. Yes, okay. That's it, AJ. Oh, I was just trying to understand. So if it's easier if they circle around, come pull forward and then back straight up versus come in and then K-turn back in, yeah. From one direction, you can see down the side of your truck and the driver side and you can see as you're backing in. If you come in this way, you have to back into the opposite direction and maybe you can't. You don't have that vantage point as a driver. This is only a thought. Curious. I suppose you'll have to talk to Public Works. I just wonder if it doesn't make sense to align the entrances and driveways of what's across the street at Berndt. Just, I don't know if it does or doesn't or if it's functionally impossible. It just... We talked about that because knowing that that would be something that is advisable. It just, as you even look at that, you start to, you're saying like the idea, like try to creep that entrance north so it aligns with that. We're south from the other one, but I... It's sort of a, maybe the site plan is better to look at. It's just sort of like we need, we maximizing the space to be able to do what we need to do or it's not worth doing. And so I think it's a good suggestion. We just didn't know how to do it. And then that manage, where's the building? Where's the pond? Where's the parking? Where are the trucks? It just turned out to be like that. I guess is my answer. I don't know if that was the right answer. We had looked at it. The wood certainly reduced the amount of parking available just because of the additional kind of truck movements that would be needed as opposed to that kind of truck coming out straight. How many more trips, truck trips, do you think it would generate? The total number of trips was between 11 and 31. What's the... Additional new trip ends. Yeah, between 11 and 31 additional peak hour trip ends. Yeah, that's the switch hour. That's the switch over, right? Yeah. I mean, as you know, you know the place well, we're ferrying trucks back and forth all day long from the warehouse, bringing raw materials over. Is that why there... Is that what's a lot of those... Yeah, so we're renting how much right now? 60,000 square feet at Vermont Commercial. So all of our raw materials are delivered there and all of our finished goods are shipped out of there. So there's two trucks that are basically bringing raw materials over, coming around the building, getting finished goods that are frozen and taking them back. So in a way, you know, it is this thing of like, if we weren't doing that, it would seem like, wow, there's a lot of additional truck traffic, but the numbers that we have, which we can get you, we have it all scaled down, but that's the number. And I think that's why there is kind of between 11 and 31, because I think the 11 is what we were proposing based on what Ted just said and the 31 is more what the I.T.E. would show. Are you planning to do the solar panels? Pardon me. Are you planning to do solar panels on them? Well, right now we're working with folks about incentives and, you know, like, we'd love to do solar panels. Quite frankly, this is now a $20 million addition right here, which is a big number for rhino foods. So the things that we're looking at is different, the refrigerant, thickness of the walls, solar panels, and the cost of, like, every incremental difference, and we're working with Wellington Electric and talking to them and some other folks to try to help us figure how to do it. In the perfect world, we'd love to see it look like that. And access is basically, Queen City Park Road to, it's really industrial avenue, isn't what you're on, or you're really on Queen City Park Road. Used to be industrial, but they changed the name. Same road, okay. I can't defy the names. The point of our old plans, it gets very confusing. Yeah, I got a little confused by that. But that's, you can't use the Champlain Parkway, doesn't get you any better access, does it? So it does. So the Champlain Parkway will have a traffic light exit at Home Avenue, just on the other side of the railroad tracks, and then the one-lane bridge, right, that leads around. So we do, is that by Batchelder? Is that where the Champlain Parkway comes through there? Sort of. Yeah, yes. Yeah, so right now we do all of our, over the bridge right now. We don't go down Glen Avenue, do we? I mean, yeah, we go over the bridge with everything right now. And I think the Champlain Parkway gives us an opportunity to, is that correct? I mean, we actually haven't. The projects line up in similar times. Yeah. As long as everything goes smoothly. So the Champlain Parkway would give you another ability to access, not over the bridge, right? Would actually be better for Burlington and better for us, I think, if that was finished, because we'd be getting off there and coming right in front of the bus in eight years and be right there. Hey, they're working on it. You're gonna walk it right now. Caught my drive from Sadie Market down there. Yeah, solid three minutes. They'll have David there, right? And there will be a bus stop? There is right now. So I would, I don't know how many Matt or Garrett you might know, but we have quite a few folks that take the bus right now. I find it funny there's a bus stop next to the depot. What's that? There's a bus stop? You are next to the depot. There's two, they're walking right in front of the depot. But there's one, they stop right in front of the right. They stop right in front of the depot. This is the industrial area of Burlington, and I'm glad to see you. That's like, do you have to do a wetlands delineation on that other property? There was no wetlands on that, that was cleared. Does the fence that go across the back of the property, is that a sort of a staggered thing? Is that a sound barrier? Yeah, when we did the addition, so it's hard to see, but there's a small addition. We did a 15,000 square foot addition five years ago. And that was part of our plan. There's houses right near there, there's about four houses, and they're actually on a ridge, so they're almost looking down at us. So we did it for three reasons, there was sort of the wildlife concern, that's why the bridge is staggered. I think it's good for shielding just the visuals, and then the final was for sound. For sound? Yep. Do you think you need to extend that with the new, with trucks going on and out? One of the things you can't see is there's a pretty big burn there. We were amazed, there's a 11-foot elevation change from the corner to the, let's see, what am I saying, the south? The northeast or the southwest. So there'll be, actually that slope will be up, so we don't think that we're gonna need it. Yeah, I can see that. At least right now it isn't part of the plan. The only other thing I would suggest is just a fair amount of parking there to pay attention to your landscaper when it comes to the requirements for shading and that lot. Been in contact with them this week, and this is sketch planned, so we didn't show all of the individual islands or the shade trees, but that certainly will be a big part of the design, and they will be working with us and with Andres with the stormwater design, kind of the landscaping, the stormwater and the site are all really co-mingled on this. I would consider looking at shade trees there and adding some landscaping there. Don't just look at it on the expansion side because that'll sort of look unbalanced. If you're gonna put in some shade trees and some landscaping, you might wanna put it on the north side as well, which isn't quite in your plan, but I understand the sketch. You should have some if you remember, they all died, remember that? Yeah, I do, actually. There were some big trees and they all just died within three years. That's a big, yeah, I get that. You get a lot of runoff from the bus depot through that ditch. It floods quite, it floods right down the street. May speak of using different species next time. Yeah, it was a, yeah, a different, different. But you can do that. I mean, there's a nice entrance to the building. It's fairly prominent. I know we're not really necessarily commenting right now on the conceptual drawing, but I would consider doing something that isn't just a big block of gray. I understand it's an industrial building, but adding something to it. I would say just a comment. We are a manufacturer and we are gonna do everything we can to make sure that the people that come to Rhino are proud of the place they come and work. And you folks are always welcome. That big glass thing is a break room. It's gorgeous, it's beautiful. It's where everybody meets and gathers and sort of created a nice garden there. So, you know, we're all about trying to make it a place people wanna come to work versus just a building that, you know, there's no windows and there's no light and you're just cranking away, making cookie dough. So. It's a nice glass area. Do you have a glass sculpture in there? Do you have something? What's that? There's something hanging in the front. Those are birds? Yeah, I know you probably all wanna get home, but it's called the Crash Cafe and I could bore you with like, why is it called the Crash Cafe? I'm gonna do this because it's sort of fun. Why is it called the Crash Cafe? I don't know. Anyone? Okay, your hint is a flock of geese, a school of fish, a group of rhinos is called a crash. And those birds are the birds that warn rhinos for danger. So that's sort of a theme inside that building. That's nice. Any further questions on the sketch plan? No? Someone with their hand up, AJ. Okay, well, do we take public comment during sketch plan? All right, let's do it. Susan, are you interested in participating? And her hand is down. Okay, well. I guess that's no. Okay, she got her answer that maybe she wanted to know. Maybe she knew it was a crash or a rhinos. There it is. Susan, you may speak now, if you wish. Go ahead. Okay, I'm gonna hang up my phone because I want to have to speak. Hi, everybody. Hello, I'm sure I'm able to. So, to write out, I appreciate they are before, and that you've been a good neighbor, and that you've always engaged in neighborhood whenever you've been doing these expansions. I really appreciate that. So as a neighbor, I'm in red lock. I just wanted to get a better sense of the impact on the neighborhood in terms of noise and lights and traffic. You mentioned the possible change to a different refrigerant, and the refrigerant that you have makes this high-pitched, piercing, squealing noise, and you've been really great at trying to time that when it's not when everyone's sleeping. So I just wanted to hear you speak about a little bit first about the refrigerant. Yeah, so let me clarify that. The noise you're talking about is the liquid nitrogen deliveries on those big tanks. So we're not proposing any more of those. When I talked about the refrigerant, I meant the freezer inside the new addition. So those will be, that's what I was referring to. You're entirely correct. The biggest challenge for us in working with the neighbors is when the delivery comes with a truck of liquid nitrogen, and that will not change. Those tanks are still there, and they're not moving to the other side of the building or anything like that. And they're not increasing in number. This, no, I would answer it this way, is the number of deliveries of liquid nitrogen is directly related to how much product we're making. So this project primarily is a warehouse. It does have room for expansion for more production space. But again, that's really dictated by the growth of our business and the revenue. It's not necessarily dictated by this expansion if that answers your question. Okay, yeah, so the 65,000 square foot is not for production mostly. It's for getting it out to the trucks. We have two areas that we have that'll be sort of empty for future expansion so we could put another line in there. But primarily, I would say 40,000 square feet is all warehouse that's either dry, refrigerated or frozen. In how many truck bays are there now? There's only three. And they're going up to 10. The reason is is because all our raw materials now are delivered over to Vermont Commercial Warehouse. And then we bring them over on our own trucks that you see those Rhino trucks. We're bringing those back and forth all day long. Now, like if you said, a delivery of flour would come straight to this building versus going to the warehouse and then bringing it over here. So are you going to not have a secondary space and you're consolidating with this new addition? Yeah, yeah. I mean, it's a fine question. I actually do think the app can answer that. I mean, I think this is generally sketch plan and these are important details to work out. Obviously, I would recommend before you reach out to the Ward 5 NPA and have a discussion with them. There's obviously some neighbors who have interest in this. You know, the lights are important to consider. As I asked about truck trips, there's a reason for that. You know, I think Susie brings up a good question about the, you know, are you going to add liquor, nitrogen tanks and what impacts those will have? It is a constrained site as to the backyard. I mean, I know those houses. I actually looked at buying one of those houses and you can definitely hear the rooftop equipment being mechanical and it's important to balance that out. And again, this is sketch. Rhino has been thinking about some of those things. So some of the equipment is actually under the current iteration is proposed to be inside. There's actually some mechanical inside that would usually be outside. It's a little more expensive, but that could produce a better project. There still may be some roof mounted. There may be some exterior. Everything will be screened appropriately, but we'll certainly take that under advisement. Any more questions from the board? No, we look forward to seeing the application. Great, all right. Thank you very much. Thank you. That's our agenda for the evening.