 I'm going to call this meeting of the City of Montpelier Development Review Board to order. It is October 5th, 2020. My name is Kate McCarthy and I will serve as your chair this evening. So I'd like to start by introducing the other members of the Development Review Board. The way I'm going to do that is say their names and then they can unmute and say hello. So we'll start with Abby White. Hi everybody. Abby White here. I think I'm the newest member of the Board last week or two weeks ago was my first meeting. So good to be with you. Thanks Abby. Rob, good one. Right here. Hi Rob. Roger Kranz. Good evening everyone. Hello Roger. And then Michael Azorchuk. Hello, it's Michael. Good evening. Thanks to Abby Shaded. Also with us this evening are Meredith Crandall whom you know and broadcast on Orca. So you will see that as well. Who conducts staff review. As she said earlier, she may be doing just by audio because of her connection. Am I the only one who's getting a delay from Kate? Yeah, I can't hear Kate very well. Okay. How about now? That's better. Okay. I'm also going to use my headphones. So Meredith, I'm handing it over to you for the staff. Okay, Mike, I think my connection is a bit rough. Is there any chance you could share that staff overview document I sent to you. And just share that first page that has the zoom meeting info on it so that anybody watching via orca can, I don't think it's essential, but it helps. I'll get started. Just take me a second to share it. Okay, I can start. So for those viewing this meeting via orca media, you can participate in the development review board meeting via the zoom platform through either video or telephone access options and those are going to show up on the screen shortly. And you can download. There will also be a link to how to download the complete meeting packet. So if anybody has problem accessing the meeting, please email me, Meredith Crandall at M Crandall at Montpelier hyphen vt.org. Hold on one second. It's a little loud in your background. I forgot to turn something off. So whether if you're having difficulties. Well, okay, while accessing the video conferencing features and zoom meeting or otherwise have questions that are technical questions you can message me through the chat function and zoom. This new zoom meeting is being recorded, as well as streamed via orca media, turning your video on is optional. The chat function should only be used for troubleshooting or logistics questions as noted previously, the chat will be added to the public record if it's used. Please keep your microphone on mute when you are not speaking to reduce background noise for those participating by phone star six will allow you to mute or unmute if you don't have a separate mute button on your phone. So I can also sometimes manually mute and unmute most participants. If you are interested in speaking on a particular matter I did not say you would like to speak previously. Please raise your hand, either physically or by using the raise hand button on your toolbar. For those on the phone you can press star nine to have that raise hands show up and zoom, or you can state your name if you're unmuted. If you have recognized you to participate, please unmute your microphone, confirm that you can be heard and provide your full name and address for the record. You are then free to provide your questions or comments any to keep them to two minutes. This is for non applicants. The members will have the opportunity to respond or ask questions of you and the applicant may have an opportunity to respond as well. The chair may grant additional time for speakers who have follow up questions or comments. After you have finished, please mute your microphone again. The chair will then move on in the event that the public is unable to access this meeting it will be continued to a time and place certain. If you're having connectivity issues try turning off your video or closing other applications on your phone or computer. If you are having trouble seeing the document screen share all files are uploaded to the agenda's and minutes pages for this meeting on the city website. The next item on our agenda is the approval of the agenda, which we will do by roll call. Are there any modifications to the agenda? All right. Is there a motion to approve the agenda? So moved. Motion by Roger. Second. Second. Thank you. Thank you, Meredith. All right. The next item on our agenda is the approval of the agenda, which we will do by roll call. Second by Rob. I'll call the roll. Rob. Yes. Abby. Yes. Michael. Yes. Roger. Yes. And I also vote. Yes. I feel like I'm missing someone. Okay, great. We have an agenda. Thank you. Item five on our agenda is comments from the chair and I do not have any comments this evening. So we'll move on to item six, which is our meeting minutes from September 21st, 2020. And those eligible to vote are myself, Rob, Abby, Michael and Roger. We are all eligible to vote. Are there any corrections or modifications to the minutes? Okay, I have one, one edition, which is a request that under the comments from the chair from our last meeting, they'd be amended to include that I made note that we are going to be using deliberative session. On a temporary basis until the end of December. So it's a trial period and that was part of my comments from the chair that I think is important to include because it's a change to our procedure. So if that could be added, I would appreciate it. Thanks. All right. Corrections or additions, then I would entertain a motion to the minutes. So moved. Motion by Rob. Second. Abby. Any further discussion. Okay, I'll call the roll Rob. Yes. Abby. Yes. Michael. Yes. Roger. Yes. And I also vote yes. Thank you. We have adopted those minutes. I apologize. It may be that my internet connection is, is unstable and you're going to be able to tell that better than I can. So if I need to change something, please. I'll leave it at that. In some way. The chat, which I'll try and keep it a different room. All right then turned into our only application this evening, one national life drive. This is a review of a 17 foot antenna to be installed on the roof. So the first thing I'm going to do is swear in the witnesses who are here to be heard on this. Okay. I'm going to start with. This is our Joe time back. Have you raised your right hand. If you're going to be testifying. My camera's backwards. Sorry. I trust you. So do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth under the pains and penalties of perjury. I do. Great. Thank you. Thank you very much. All right. Great. So what we usually do is we start with an overview from staff on the project and then you as the applicants will have a few minutes to provide anything that you would like to add. Roger, do you have a question? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I'll make, I'll make comments as well. So yes, we should put that into the record. So. Okay. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth under the pains and penalties of perjury. I do. Roger, do you have a question? I don't have a question, but I need to say that I am a sustaining member of Vermont public radio. I give a monthly contribution and that will not interfere with my partial judgment on this application. Thank you, Roger. I appreciate that. If that is amenable to the applicants and the other board members. No objection. Roger. No objection. No objection. No objection. No objection. Okay. So I'll say the same. All right, we're all showing our colors. No, very good. I appreciate having those things up front, no matter how small they may seem to do. Great. So, Meredith, could you please give us an overview of the project? Sure. So I'm going to keep this fairly short. I'm going to put a antenna on for, for, while there's both. Anyway, it's two parts to the antenna, but the one I'm really concerned about, and the one that triggered development review board review is one that is more than 10 feet tall. That is going to be going on top of the national life building. That's the only reason this is before the DRB. So we're going to be able to be administratively approved. Just a quick note that this will be the first time that this particular special use provision is reviewed by the development review board. Because typically these types of installations have been reviewed by the PUC. And so we, we've, we've any need for a zoning permit. So that's the first run through since this provision was adopted in 2018. So, feel free to critique it as much as you want. We'll take any comments like that into consideration. So all that's all I've got really for it. It's a pretty straightforward. Okay. Thank you, Meredith. I'm going to turn it over now to the applicants to it to, we have the staff report and we've received your application materials, but would welcome your overview of the project. Didn't any information you'd like us to know upfront. Thank you, madam chair and thank you, Meredith and the staff's been really great in reviewing all of this. So as, as was said, this is a, an application to actually install two antennas one which is 17 feet tall and thus does not qualify as a small facility. It's called the transmit antenna, and that antenna will be located on the national life rooftop basically clamped to an existing pipe that's on the roof. And then there's a second antenna much smaller one that's basically side mounted off the top of the penthouse. That one is basically extending horizontally really horizontally more than it is vertically so you won't really see that one also and that one is also basically going to be clamped pipe. The operating equipment for the antenna will all be inside an existing washer closet. All of the cabling associated with the antennas will basically be run right into the building so you won't see them on the facade of the building at all. We received the reason that were before you as Meredith suggested is the public utility commission decided that this was the first time they were going to determine that that an installation before them was only a one way form of communication instead of two way, even though this was a one way form when the owner produced transmits and receives but we did not prevail on that battle so that's why we were before you and very grateful that you're here. The other aspect to this is we've received design review for the project, I guess two weeks ago, and we've also just today, we're issued or we weren't issued but a minor notice went out under act to 50 that basically if no member of the public or other party objects, it'll be approved by the 21st. 21st. What I should have probably said at the very outset is that the real reason for this and Joe Timecky who's the chief engineer for VPR can expand upon it if you have questions is to improve VPR signal strength in Montpelier and Washington County. Right now its antenna is located in a place where it's just not able to hit a lot of the places where people drive to or walk to or go. So the idea of this facility what's called a translator facility is to take that signal that's coming from Burlington and basically rebroadcast it within Montpelier and Washington County. Not just for VPR listeners but also for public safety in the sense that there's a lot of like public emergency alerts that all go out through VPR and that includes you know if there's a event specific to Washington County. So I think we there's a lot of criteria for you to go to so maybe I'll stop there but I'm either Joe or I are happy to address any of that with you. Great thank you for that overview there are a lot of criteria and we'll give you an opportunity to remark on those as we go through if you choose. So typically what I like to do is just kind of walk through the staff report identifying the areas that need more work and not spending much time on the others but then also giving DRB members a chance to ask any questions. So I think we'll go ahead and start that process. So the first section of standards to which this is subject is the overlay zoning district design review district and as we heard the design review committee has said that this meets the standards and finds a complete the proposal complies with the requirements. So do DRB members have any questions about that? Okay we'll move past that. So the next batch of standards we need to make sure are adhered to are our general standards starting with the use standards. Staff report indicates that we are indeed looking at an antenna but not a communication structure or tower the thing that it's mounted on so we're looking at this part not this part because the building is already built. It is a permitted use in this area and the proposal from staff is that this isn't allowed use. Staff has, Meredith has flagged for us that we pay attention to the words that we're using because when we get to the use specific standards later in the staff report they're called something slightly different so that that is considered flagged. The next section is the dimensional standards which has to do with when something's built on the land how far back it is how much how much covers how high it is and nothing about this changes the dimensional standards of the underlying structures so recommendation is that it meets these. And then the next batch of general standards are demolition riparian areas wetlands vernal pools steep slopes erosion control stormwater management access and circulation parking loading and signs these are not applicable. So you are fading it but not right members have any questions about how these are met. We lost to Kate there for a little while you might want to we before you hit like we heard you through signs saying they're not applicable and then it went dead. Okay. Okay. Okay. I'm gonna move I'm gonna move locations and see if that helps hold on a second or may actually maybe what I'll do for shut starters is just turn off my video can you is it stable. Okay. Thanks and and do let me know so yes. The general standards either don't apply or to appear appear to have been met but I want to give DRB members a chance to ask questions are there any questions. No. Okay. Very good. So that brings us to the special use standards and as Meredith has indicated in the staff report this is when there's something that may require a different level of review or standard because of the nature of that development requiring just another look. So a wireless communication facility is one such use. And this applies a zoning permit is required when there is not a certificate of public good granted by the Department of Public by the Public Commission and when it's over 10 feet and both of those conditions are met as we heard in the overview. So I'm just looking through our standards here. So the standards that apply to this are eight standards on page seven of our staff report related to section 3122.i roof mounted antenna supporting facilities. Staff finds that these eight standards are met and just for for the record and because this is the first time we're going through this I just want to note that the eight standards are that roof mounted can only go on commercial industrial institutional multi unit built over 35 30 at least 35 feet in height. It shouldn't it cannot extend above the roof line of the building by more than 20 feet. Visual impact must be considered in line with standards of this section galvanized gray finish unless the board finds that another color is contextually compatible. There are requirements for transmission lines and signs neither of which apply in this situation because neither are present. And then roof mounted structures are shall be screened by a parapet or other device etc. And based on the testimony we've heard as well as the staff report. These eight standards appear to be met. Are there again not not to rush but I will just turn it over to board members. Are there any questions about how this application does or does not meet these standards or any clarification you'd like from the applicants. I have just one question. It's curiosity is something else. How tall is the tallest structure up on the roof today. So what I can say about that is I'm not sure of the exact height but you've probably noticed and it's actually in the simulations that we provided that there's this Christmas ornamental structure that's only lit up during the holiday season. It's basically a flagpole with lights on it. That is substantially not substantially. It's probably about 10 feet would you say taller Joe total 10 or 15 feet taller and that will continue to be the case. And obviously that structure will be seen at night. Ours will not ours is not proposed to be the antenna is not going to be lit in any way so okay well thank you that's a useful comparison we do keep our eye out for the holiday decorations right when we're coming home on the highway. All right thank you that is a very good reference point. Are there any questions from other board members. All right the remaining criteria within the special use standards have to do with stealth wireless communications facilities and tenant supporting structures which as we've determined are the building and it is already present not being modified and discontinuance but that doesn't apply because we're not discontinuing facilities. I as as someone who is working with this section of statute or zoning for the first time I do need to ask Meredith a question which is what is a stealth wireless communication facility. Honestly I'm not 100% sure it's not very well defined maybe Mike can speak up on that. Yeah the stealth facilities are ones that are disguised as something else so you will periodically see if you're driving down the highway these very poor examples of pine trees that are which were required and by Vermont and other states is when they get their permits to you know if you were going to put them in along the highways to try to go and disguise them as pine trees so but there are other ways of using stealth technology and in making the antennas look like something that they're not something more common in the landscape so that way they don't stand out. Okay thank you that that is that is good to know it is not one of those. Okay great all right so let's move on to the next section of standards in the final section of standards. Our site plan standards in the zoning bylaw and it has been determined that this is a minor site plan not a major site plan and within that there are a few things we're looking at. One is access and circulation has to do with how cars and people and cars and people walking and come and go to the site it's not applicable because the addition of this antenna will not affect that and then the next piece has to do with landscaping and screening and this is something that comes into play when there's a significant change to the to the site when there's a change of use. I'm stumbling a little here Meredith but when when there's a significant change of use that affects the that affects the building and the site and I believe that the the recommendation is in the kind of also logical conclusion is that this is not a major change to the site and as such it's our option is a board to find that this section does not apply and I'd be interested in other board members feelings about that. I very much agree. Me too I agree. Okay thanks Roger. All right just one question how many other antennas are up there now of kind of this one's going to be the largest it sounds like so just for comparison. So I think and joke keep me honest about this but this this may be the tallest antenna it won't necessarily be the most noticeable between the two rooftops there are multiple wireless facilities so the majority of them are on the other building not the national you know not the national life of where the where the agency has most of its buildings this one has Montpelier police and fire department on it it has a number of different you know smaller like anything from dish antennas to other whip antennas so the only you know for the for the most part the reason for that is the building is so tall and it's positioned so well that all wireless providers or radio or everyone realizes this is the best facility and by doing it this way you avoid having to have a separate standalone tower that you would probably see for multiple places. So I'm not sure if that totally answers your question but this is one of about I think we think we counted eight separate installations total and as part of this we ran what's called an inner modulation study to basically make sure that we don't the vpr signals are not going to interfere or won't cause interference with others and vice versa that helps to answer the question thank you I was trying to get a sense of the scale that's helpful good any other question is about the site plan standards from drb members okay I will just note that the other parts that we usually look at in site plan review like outdoor lighting outdoor seating display storage solar access are are not germane to this to this review given the nature of the development being proposed all right that felt really quick but it also seemed like the right amount of time to spend on that I will at this moment make sure of that by pausing and seeing if there are any additional questions from drb members or from the applicants I think we're good on our end okay very good well then at this point I will let you know that to better manage deliberations during this zoom environment in which we find ourselves we are operating temporarily under a policy where we deliberate enclosed session for all applications and the motion to go into deliberative session doesn't indicate any problems or concerns with with your application it's just something we're trying to do with each applicant for consistency's sake they'll deliberate this evening and deliver a written decision as soon as possible after the close of our deliberations so with that I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing on this application and move into deliberative session at the close of the public meeting a motion to close the public hearing on this vpr transmit and receives antenna's application and move into delivers session at the end of the public meeting thank you motion from rob is there a second second second from roger second from roger thank you I'll call the roll on the motion rob yeah abby yes michael yes yes roger yes and I will also vote yes um thank you very much we will get you a decision as soon as we can and really appreciate your being here tonight um thank you thank you very much thank you for working through all of this and uh we look forward to hearing from you thank you for your thanks thank you good night good night all right we'll move on to other business our next meeting is october 19th does anyone else have any other business just a quick note this is from meredith um all the d rv members i have emailed you the link and access information for the deliberative session so please make sure to check your email after we close this out and I will probably log out after this I won't go to the deliberative session unless you think you need me meredith nope this seems to be working well enough I didn't even send you the link well then a vote of confidence excellent all right um so I'm going to propose we not take a break um please just log off of this and then log into the deliberative session before we do that um the thing that I asked for is a motion to adjourn to deliberative session is that correct yes to close I mean you can close it to close the public meeting and yeah move to okay all right is there a motion to close the public meeting and move to deliberative but we're closing the meeting we're because we yeah that's what I meant closing the meeting close the hearing on the specific application and then we close the meeting which is the overall conduct of business so I'll move we close the meeting all right motion from roger is there a second second second from abby um rob yes abby yes michael yes roger yes I also vote yes um the meeting is adjourned we will reconvene in deliberative session at the separate link thanks to everybody who watched and participated and I will see board members soon