 two applications before tonight when he was asked the applicants in and anybody who wants to give testimony either one of these two applications to please raise your right hand. Sure, you're safe. If this way of telling the truth, the matter is before it's more tonight, I'm Apprentice Aperture. Thank you. Excuse me. Hello, Josh. Hello, Mr. Chairman. How are you? Hi, what's this? This is the first meeting. The first person here. I was on a conference call. I said I would. Another meeting at 7 o'clock, but I would stay for half an hour and then I could. I did. Then here. Okay. Well, listen, our first application is application by Jeffrey Crandall, Craig Crandall, and Payton Flaherty for a final plan review of a minor four lot residential subdivision. And I gather you're speaking for the applicant? I am. Craig Chase. Chase and Chase. Okay. Why don't you give us an overview of this application? Oh, let me stop here. Is there any request for any party status in this application? Ron? I don't know. I'm just going to take turn myself across the board. Okay. Just maybe concerns about, terrible concerns, which just would understand a little more about impacts and weapons and some of the natural resources, right? Okay. Anybody else for the rest of the party status? Anybody object to Ron being a party for this? He is a buddy, not a buddy, but an adjacent property owner. Okay. Then party status granted. The, why don't you give us that overview of that one? Yeah, if you allow me, I'll just read from our project narrative. This land has both open and forested areas, steep and more level terrain, upland and wetland areas and in our opinion has the potential to meet any of the goals and objectives of the town plan. The project consists of a subdivision of an existing 39.45 acre parcel with an existing three bedroom seasonal single family residence divided into four parcels. Lot one has the existing seasonal residence served by existing onsite wastewater and water supply systems and will retain 23.72. Lot two, three and four, all being slightly over five acres are being created with development to be deferred at this time. So those test pits have been dug with agency natural resources regional engineer Carl Fuller present to ensure that the lots being created are capable of sustaining wastewater disposal if or when development of the lots is desired. In all the areas that we tested proved out for mountain systems or equivalents. Obviously, further design testing both at the stadium town permitting will be required for any development events on these lots. The parcel is in shoreline conservation zoning district. All lots meet the minimum lot size of five acres lots two through four meet the minimum road frontage of 300 feet. Lot one is served by an existing driveway and easement of undefined width off of Brookfield Road and to be compliant with the zoning regulations for the lots that do not have road frontage a 50 foot access easement in favor of lot one on to lot two from your lake road is proposed. It's our belief that it's in compliance with the zoning ordinances in the town. And we hope that you agree. Tom, do you have anything you'd like to add to that? Nope, I think it's breeze to sink. Okay. Question by members of the board. Well, I'm going to go through the criteria one by one. Ron, any questions you have? I think my, first of all, there's lots of benefits to the subdivision. It's put together and everything. There's some of us been concerned for several years about just being sure that our development does maintain the values we have in that area. And the values where we are in natural areas. And I think everybody that knows that area is very interested in keeping it, that's concerning some of our resources for the next decade and maybe the next generations going forward. I was going with a general question. Ron, you have an opportunity to speak the criteria when we get there. Yeah, it's general questions. I think probably can be asked now about the wetlands buffers and the wetlands themselves, the elimination on the site. Or do you want to wait till the criteria come up on that? I have a wetland elimination that's part of this application. Have you seen the plans? Yes, I have. I do want to add that this was extracted from the agency natural resources environmental interest locator. It is not comprehensive. It is not complete. It is what was available on there. Any development of this lot will have to address wetlands. Of any of these lots will have to address wetlands. At this point, until we know site specific where somebody might want to build a house, for example, it doesn't make a lot of sense to spend thousands on well installation to find out that it's 500 people away from where the public's house is. I totally agree. It needs to be looked at once a site specific development is proposed. One of the things that concern me is some of the lots, lot four, for example, may be totally unbuildable, which is not acceptable in the corner. Because if you have the 50 foot upper four class to wetlands onto that lot, you're probably going to have an unbuildable lot. And maybe not. But that's where the wetlands mapping on this site are extensive, and especially the lot one. I'm going to guess the point where you say we're doing. I'm going to stop you, Ron. You raised a good point. But I'd like to address that when we get to the criteria about natural resources. General questions were like four lost three lost. I'd like to get in here a little bit. So is there access? It looks like there's access from the Brookhill Road or from? That's the undefined. Yeah. So they have a driveway that comes in and as traditional use has always been for Brookfield Road. It does have a deeded easement, but there is no defined width to that easement. And our bylaws call for it. Presumably it'll keep that access, but it just doesn't need. Right. Exactly. OK. So if the board has no other questions at this point in time, we'll go through the criteria with some of the business standards. And the first one is the capacity of community facilities and utilities. And we do have a comment there. Please, sir. We do. You sent it to you. You can write a comment. She both had no comment. I did speak to Davis, the road foreman, and his only note was that on any of the driveways, minimum 18-inch culverts, do you want to see a notice? You know, if there's any driveway, it will require a permit from the site board prior to the locking belt. Other than that, then we have any questions regarding the past state community facilities? Fire chief, parks, recreation, water supply, water supply, and wastewater beyond site? Yes. And that would be subject to receding approval from the state of Vermont. Absolutely. There should be an addition of this. Suitability of the land. Land must be suitable for use without the danger of public health, the impact of the environment, and also land subject to flooding, poor drainage, inadequate passage of support development, may not be subdivided unless the applicant can demonstrate the appropriate measures will be taken to overcome physical limitations. So those are the two criteria. That's really what we've talked about before. I think elsewhere there is a discussion of natural resources. I think Ron, your question applies here. I have a question for you. You provided us with a drawing that does show wetland delineation. And you cited a source, which I took to be somebody that was hired to do a wetland delineation list. Is that not correct? That is not correct. This wetland was part of the delineation, part of the project that for whatever reason is posted on the state's environmental interests located. Our reason for putting this on there is boldly right on the face of it. There's wetlands. It needs to be dealt with. And that's what the review process of the state of Vermont will certainly trigger the review of that. Each lot, once they have a site-specific development, will need to be delineated. Others will need to be maintained. There's pretty good checks and balances. I'm not aware that these will require state approval. Missing something here? That would require state approval. They approach on wetlands, but would a proposed new residential trigger that? Absolutely. Any septic system has to obtain a state permit. And it goes before permit specialists at the state to look for other things such as natural resources, wetlands, et cetera. So you're saying that there will be further delineation at such a time that somebody poses without the site? I would say they would have to, yes. I had a same concern you did, Ron. I looked at this, and based on this delineation, which I realize is a pretty broad, scope of work that the state does at the wetlands mapping, there is, would appear to be, room on every lot, or a suitable house site. I might have suggested the envelope itself would probably precluded what you call being wetland here, that along with a picture-foot buffer. That's what you're saying, yeah? And I think we're to get to the buffers. I mean, you may want to talk about that further, but I think that the, based on what you know, there ought to be a probably an envelope that excludes the areas you understand to be wetlands based on the mapping you have available today. But are those, they're not, they haven't been field delineated. They're just correct. So these are presumed to be, they may not be wetlands. Yeah, I truly believe that they are and I believe there may be other fingers of wetlands back towards Mirror Lake Road in various places. Certainly not where we tested, don't test it, but that's why it's so hard if somebody wants to build here, for example. We got to look at that and make sure it's not what they may need to come up the main. I think that's one of the things that concerns me because I know one of the things a state isn't going to look at everything closely. I think it's Berlin's requirement is to put on a basic buildable land and look at building a capacity of land and whether it should be a condition in the Berlin, if the state has to look at it still there should be a condition in the Berlin approvals to say prior to development of any lots and they may need to be acquired from the Self-Division due to litigations because it's so critical just to have a taste in part of the state where a guy built a house the town said fine he was taken to court by the state for building the wellings because nobody really told him he had no insight system to so I think the town has a responsibility to get the owner in trouble so it's something I don't think the state will look at it closely the other thing is there should be I think our Self-Division regulation has to identify areas that are literally not buildable or not suitable for building and so you could see large portions of this site that you can still put a one acre development on but you get into what that gentleman in St. Albans put trails for it and he filled it in something that he just didn't know and the plat didn't have anything on it so the plat really should have restrictions and it would cementify what he meant saying here's the leverage there's the budget anything in this area needs to go through and demonstrate a state permit before it's built on so I think that's where it's dangerous and lots of nice people in town will develop and put that all in the state down the road here get good information as part of this approval process what is the delegation and again part of the requirement is that you have to define a building site on the plans and also if you define that there are no dwellings in this before a building permit you find those lot of variations I think that was coming from the public and coming down future builders that's why I get started I've seen it 20 times a year and a half down the road somebody says oops we've had loads of work but we just great did it the process of getting the water and wastewater approval we've actually we've been personally involved in putting in site wastewater systems that one of those people just didn't want to come down and look at they don't have to it's not a state law they have to look at them if they're busy or they're understaffed or besides the outside system so I don't know about just me I think in a perfect world that's going to happen the savings the project producing has circulated but it's a hit or miss my estimation my experience thank you thanks for my experience I don't feel it is a hit or miss we're fighting up against this all the time it has to be done we aren't proposing any development we're proposing lots that may down the road require to go to development if we go out and delineate all these lot ones I forget what the length of time that delineation is good for but it's not forever I can't remember if it's six months or two years or what it is if the lot doesn't sell for four years they may have to go over here I do see value though and make sure that the lot is actually viable which is why we dug test pits and why I had the state's regional engineer there in the first place we feel we've done our due diligence I guess to follow up on that does it in your ordinance say that how could we ever then create a lot without a complete development plan you know that's what you're saying that's what you're saying I do too and I'm hoping that any kind of blanket statement that we can put right on the face of the plan even in addition to whatever you put in the condition of your permit the source of this mapping really is apparently it's based on the individual's work what it is from the weapons mapping correct state those who have worked with that understand that it's cruel absolutely let me say you know but it's done broad brush maybe it's kind of cruel anything further with regard to the suitability of the land hearing nothing design and configuration of partial boundaries with some criteria here I'm not sure that any of these are particularly germane I'll ask a question about subsection 6 6 further subdivision on any remaining undivided land lots of further subdivision potentially and already joining undeveloped parcels in a manner that would result in a lot of coordinated development so I guess what the concept they're trying to drive at is that if you take the parcel as a whole and look at what its characteristics are are you developing this in a way that's going to preclude other development or is there any thought to how that would be accomplished and I guess what you're talking about is the land that's back here which is not wetland but it's not developed and the question is how would you get there and is there any thought to how that would be done for future development yeah I know I'm sure you could build a road just about anywhere but it would be hard it's a very steep bank from where the seasonal camp is it drops down to these little I physically having walked there are nice high dry upland areas out in there it's really hard to get to yeah and the number of blocks that could be built would be limited by our bylaws at the time currently our bylaws would include more than three lots off that right away and also in that district there's the conservation subdivision that has to be done if it's more if it's five or more lots five or more lots have to follow the conservation subdivision requirements versus the subdivision requirements if it's within five years so much of the land would have to be conserved so then on seven again I'm just reading this bylaw so that there will be positive drainage away from building sites in a coordinated stormwater drainage pattern for the subdivision that does not concentrate stormwater drainage from each lot to adjacent lots so is there any, is this wetland is there any flow at all in the wetland or is it just constantly wetland is there anything move anywhere? I'm sure it all moves towards Berlin but I don't know exactly where but definitely which is down over here so is there a culvert right underneath there that goes into Berlin so there's a stream or some sort right? Yeah basically a big marsh out in there there's some open water a lot of alder swamp and stuff like that it's quite nice so the water tends to flow tends to flow this way and if this is a ridge then otherwise it goes down the hill there's a ridge going this way yeah it's all along that way I see hydroland is pretty much just like a foot in here I see was there any distinct drainage pattern there is one stream that cuts off this corner of the property thus the reason that 50 foot right away to lot 1 is where it is basically located the stream kept a 50 foot buffer out for that and then created that 50 foot easement to get back to a lot the stream is between proposed right away and the road correct and it comes onto this side of the road from the other side onto the Crandall's property and then after a short distance goes back across and does that it's been a while since I've driven that road but I don't remember primary drainage being on the southerly side I remember being on the north of the side of the profile road is that right yeah there is a crew there's a swell down the southerly side also but I do agree most of the water is on the north of the east side other questions with regard to the configuration other questions lot conventions this all on the 3504 speed speaks to generally parallel lines and so forth it's terribly applicable what does that mean building envelopes and here I guess I have an issue I think building envelopes first of all these are 5 acre lots and so for lots tweakers lots more than tweakers in size most generally is going to not more than 1 acre area and I think that would be prudent in light of the fact that I'm reading the 3504 c5 in light of the fact that you at least have a preliminary identification of wetlands and based on your own site visit I think I remember what this more realistically of what where a house could be put what is prudent on all these lots ok I agree with that I agree with that that speaks a little bit to what Ron says and he gives a preliminary identification separately subsection 3 in there in fact specifically says must not include any other unbuildable land thumbs up right into the issue of wetlands so finding a building envelope sort of helps if you're marketing this without specifics and just selling lots that the prospective buyer has a better indication of where you could actually look at something the envelope may not be final but at least it's an initial indication and supplemental by your own site visit of the partials obviously you've been out there with a back haul you have a sense of where the water is on top of the ground as opposed to underneath having never done that before just are they polyons, rectangles well there is a fair description of what they must incorporate it's going to refer you to 3504C building envelopes but no I think they just need to obviously to start with setbacks but they go a step further to recognize unbuildable lands that would include slopes wetlands floodplain recently seen that with floodplain he's going to recognize that one acre in size of one principal building or not more than two acres of multiple principal buildings is a principal building does that include a garage or something you can have two homes two homes but here you can't subdivide it and make a separate lot out of it I believe that's what our regulations say one house per five acres if you need ten you can do two correct so there can be two homes on the block one but for some building there's a lot more than five acres and even it does not have to be contiguous apparently you can have more than one envelope correct and that doesn't mean you're going to build two structures I'm referring specifically to the 35L definitely the giant layout of necessary improvements you're not proposing any improvements at this point in time so basically that's for facilities I would say that that's not a good work this time you're not proposing any improvement per se at this time so that's not necessarily indicated by something that's full lots on the initiative differently waterways for facilities we've spoken to that we've looked at it we're going to have to get permits from the state you haven't done any testing for wells it's just a subjective disposal correct we generally don't do testing for wells there's enough room for separation distances pretty big lots it looks like a lot of land is being dedicated to wetlands and other things but the reality is still we're going to go five feet a lot I certainly wouldn't want to mow it all that would be put into the conditions landscaping things that would only happen when the development happened we've sides with the regulations well we don't discuss that why don't you speak it out one of the things we've talked about we have changed the subdivision regulations to where they're generally applicable to all subdivisions and there are certain provisions that wouldn't apply until the development happened and that those things would be made conditional in the subdivision application so like the land saving standards would have to be complied with as a condition of the subdivision certain things that would be done later on would have to become applicable through the permit would each law buyer come back here for review I'm not we haven't really talked this through but I think it would have to probably be part of the application for Tom I'm not sure again I think that provision sort of envisioned a a 50 lot subdivision where you would expect the landscaping road network stone water management system would all be part of the application as opposed to right except that there are certain things like the stormwater management we do say would have to apply to the development the utilized green stormwater infrastructure practices is a requirement and we haven't figured out how we're going to treat that but ideally it is a requirement of the subdivision of our bylaws period so it's not really something we add on it's there but the question is will an applicant at a future date be aware of that or would we need to make a spirit of reference to that it would be required and so the zoning administrator would point it out at such time as it happens or it's a part of this condition so I think we should deliberate that so that's a little bit like sort of like half 22 in the subdivision the way these are written if you come in even with like four lots subdivision and you say well we just want conceptual approval of these lots without getting the detail of those in this then that's fine and then you sell this lot and the lot goes back in and then you say okay now you want to build something now we got to look at all these subdivision regulations and see what's what is some need for consistency but the regulations are drafted in a way to think of the project as a whole the development as a whole but when you come back to a person the person's coming back is only talking about lot one or lot two or lot three and how do you have anything to do with the other lots you'd have to be in a situation where you say well this is fine, what you're doing but we want to see trees over here on the lot six and the person says I don't know a lot six what am I going to do that so but the problem is when we approve the subdivision it assumes we've approved all the elements so I think we have to acknowledge what's there in the permit so that the buyer does know what potential issues could come up with when they're actually developing maybe then what the buyer does is then says okay if I'm serious about this before we close on purchasing this lot I'm going to come back here because I need to have the owner present for that discussion because there may be some things that have to happen that the owner, the seller is going to have to take care of if I was a buyer I wouldn't buy until all permits are in place, stay local because you never know what could happen okay I think we're delivering here a lot about how do we apply new regulations that we have worked with to situations to make them reasonable for the applicants but also to make sure that the applications themselves meet the standards but I would suggest that on the plat that's filed and that there'd be some sort of as you were saying before just the reference that you have to come back that it's on here someone's going to title search they look at these things and there's a note here clearly saying that lots 2, 3 and 4 subject to sections whatever of the zoning regulations that need to be addressed before development at the state level there is some specific language that if these lots were sold without going to get in the wastewater permit that needs to be in the D itself we talked about it it's called subject to development restrictions language I wish I had it with me but it's a rule of the deferral now I see but that you I agree should be on the plan so we can maybe work on language we need to work on language we need to work on language not in the Surrey going on because for example with the landscape I wouldn't anticipate that wire of lot 2 would have to consider the other 2 lots but to the extent that it affects their lot they would have to consider it so I would look at it but I agree because if it's not done comprehensively they might not have the same impact as it would if it was done comprehensively on the 3 lots together but anyway we have to again talking out loud we on the other hand with a large number of lots you've got to cooperate right from day 1 with a small number of lots I don't know what it's called small versus large and with time lapse for instance what is in our bylaws now may not be in our bylaws what we're used to now and so it almost the reference always has to be general I think that's a set of conversations because we recognize the fact that bylaws change and bylaws time will be available and that will go for the erosion control storm water management it is possible that the new half acre thing that's coming will kick in before these lots get developed is that maybe another permit triggered by the state they're talking right now the threshold for needing a storm water management permit is one acre of hard surface rooftops and drivelies there I don't know if it's hyper 2022 back and forth about dropping that all the way down to half acre at which point when I just may get mandatory for any development half acre pretty hard to have a roof roof and barn and having a half acre yeah it's less than 8,000 square feet per lot for those three lots if you're budgeting it out and that's pretty hard to do yeah so I sort of moved on I skipped over public and private utilities and it looked to me on the aerial mapping I looked at that there is a right-of-way through here for power line or something am I correct no parallel to there's no there are there is right here yeah is that what you're depicting there it's not indicated on your plan it's in the legend as overhead utility line okay I can't read the letter overhead utility yeah there is that utility line coming out through you didn't mention an easement for the utility presumably there is easements that's not really this is just to remind me I saw that line on pretty clear it's all lined up on google map it never fails it doesn't matter how many times you've reviewed a set point it's true but you're not providing any utility services per se there's lots they'll be provided individually sometimes so I'm just going to breeze over to road control again those are applicable just how are we going to call those out I don't know the lots and corner markers are requirements bylaws they are your survey standards also I apologize we are getting familiar with the bylaw even though many of us have been involved with the writing of it so we don't remember how it applies every afternoon so I'm going to have to re-read it Carla I look to you for the help of the guidance here it is applicable but I don't see any anything specific here same as soil preservation it's probably applicable but I don't see any issues here again it will be dependent upon individuals specific actions now so are there any other questions those are the criteria I guess the issues that remain for us are going to be the wetland radiation sometimes it's necessary and obviously individual storm water and what to supply approvals from the state as well as approvals for access from building envelopes I do think we need building envelopes to be reflective of what you know at least at this point in time so that I have a sense of what it would look like at this point in time but I think it ought to be right on the subject there's only change out of time building envelopes and then you have in order to put on saying that disturbance in wetlands requires in the conditions of the flat disturbance in the wetlands buffering in the wetlands that's the lineage of what would require state approval prior to getting a building permit basically that's really just critical in telling people that they're buying a lot that they may have an unbuildable lot or they may have half a lot that they literally can't do anything with are you suggesting to be on the plow? I think it's smart for the developer to put it in both the flat as part of the flat in the conditions it's just really due diligence to say here's what you can do with half of your lot I agree with Bron on that one I honestly don't disagree with you on that it protects me too yeah it's just good it protects yourself that along with the building base purchase pretty good idea he's buying three developable lagers instead of five possibly well again this could get so prouder that you don't even see it yeah if it's I think we'll wrestle with that a little bit could you do two flats? could you do this and then have another one like this depicting wetlands and locations on that? no we're only filing a flat so I think the reference to regulations has to be on a file flat I think the question is how much you could do literally because the regulations change so I don't know that you cite chapter and verse my own feeling is that you call out what you understand the issues in class two wetlands that issue is not going away at the state level it's going to be dealt with at the federal level as well but again could you have page one of two on a flat? yeah if you give it to Broglie there's something to see about all the time we're going to have all these notes on it and we have six pages if they need it for a hard development it's I think it's helped spell out Craig did you see that before the pages? yeah some of them are just text the whole page if you just notes and this plan is what we will be using four lot one does require a waste water bottle of water by the time the sun is on the land you have to prove that you identify your replacement area which we have so this will be going to the state actually both of them though but this is the one that has the information they really want replacement area for the lot one yeah you're concerned that if you don't file something that people don't know that these these are said wetlands there if you see that what the heck is that there's a note saying it's a wetland there could be a notation just on this or in the permit that we're granting a visual society and I think seeing something like that it paints a different picture than seeing something written like that that definitely does on the other hand the building on looks kind of defined the concern already there's sounds to me like there's an ambiguity about how accurate we know it's wet but we just don't know exactly exactly well in the building envelope circuit tenant on that yeah at least the subdivision permit will hopefully address the issues that will need to be addressed by any developer yeah you know I understand that a buyer doesn't always necessarily look at the subdivision permit but that's really how much you can hit him over the head the buyer needs to read the stuff yes or his lawyer does or his lawyer does that's correct and when the lawyer does the time of search he would identify these issues presumably yeah I think we need to deliberate this I don't know that we need to tie this is there any further questions specific to that application that we need to address can I move to close here I'll second that the motion has been made and the second is to close the hearing is a discussion on that motion are you done I was afraid of that motion can you see me by my saying aye the hearing of this application is closed thank you thank you see you Evan good to see you oh that's good why am I nice to see you Ron I was thinking about you yesterday I forgot to call you you didn't go by your horse yeah well yeah I'll call you thank you thanks Ron alright our next application is by my member person block Mark Nicholson for the site plans this will use review well this will use a 2.06 acre parcel speaking for the applicant is why don't you give us a quick overview what you propose here I didn't find the narrative necessary what's going on and what's proposed to be going on we're attempting to seek approval to move a Pinsky rental location to an existing building out of an existing lot that's utilizing the building and opening a truck round which we have now it's Pinsky truck round Pinsky truck round and what's the current use of that one I meant to drive by there today and I didn't get a chance to go right now Mark is using it for overflow as night contracts and equipment well look at my google map you know there's a lot of vehicles parked there there seems to be a lot of activity there but that activity is going to change as Mark continues to store vehicles there I believe he is they're going to share you understand me so Pinsky will have that building and you know major portion of parts of that building so it's a new business basically joining an existing business and Mark doesn't use it for rental he uses it for his own equipment what's new here is it's a rental which is why you classified as conditional use is that correct? oh good I'm getting a picture well it's because of the business use not the rental of the property right it's because it's a rental leasing business that's because of conditional use that's what I saw I thought you meant because he was renting the space so we're doing a site plan review and conditional use review of this application and so there's anything else more you'd like to explain in general help me with the site plan a little bit you did not give us a flat so I don't know where the boundaries are this parcel and so I'm not sure I assume that the building behind you is a separate somebody else's property is that correct? yeah correct you gotta forgive me I haven't been in one of these for about 30 years I don't know what a flat is I don't know what an envelope is so that's a map a map you have a map it's not the scale a flat would be something that is in the scale tells the action to meet some bounds for the property line so what I was trying to understand is what is the property you're involved here could you show us where the lines are as best you understand them on this drawing you have this is the existing building right here this is the airport road this would be the the entrance the entrance here this area right here this is grass area does it look grass on that photograph? well this right now it is it's grass now and that's a concrete slab I guess it was a garage or something if you look at the sketch that was submitted along this compared to the photograph that looks like they're completely different I wasn't very good at it I didn't have a photograph it shows proposed parking area and it's right out in this direction actually what we're looking at is parking here in this area we don't know that we would need any of this we've got these church now but we've got a couple here parking down along this is what we're anticipating using there's time the truck flow comes and goes anywhere from 6 to 10 trucks is an average on a lot sometimes we have more, sometimes we have more trucks then a day or two it's all gone so right now it would be this area right in here and potentially a couple spots over here and he has the rest this is a common area here and this is where we can be parking the rest of it Tom just printed this out it's from the tax map so it may or may not be accurate but it's what our tax department understands to be the boundaries so it's rectangular a lot and you propose to use that existing parking area dedicated to Penske are you expanding the parking lot? no how many spaces do you propose over there? we would expect 6 to 10 trucks at most and we anticipated just this area right in here but again, potentially if we have more more trucks a couple spots where these are right here we're marked as this stuff now is this currently a dumpster there or something really he has someone that has fat metal dump in there he said he would move that further down so really this is a contractor's yard at this point in time that's how it ought to be defined you used to be trailer storage was out there before, in the past Mark bought it, trailers are gone and he's been storing some of his fleet out there it was a carpet business right? this was Steve Park's property? yeah he owned two pieces, this piece and this piece so his house was the first down in there so now there are two separate properties which explains why that one access point has been removed I thought he had all of his trailers on registered trailers that's like this now you've visualized it okay it helps me a little bit maybe we have some questions what is going on I think your comment is I think it would be good to have a little bit more defined not in the lot size but just the view it looks sort of like it's so flexible maybe that's fine but it's just hard to get a handle on are you asking for that now before we do this put something to the rest of the discuss it I suggest we go through it by the criteria and if there's something I feel that needs to be for the definition I look through the standards nothing that says a plot has to maybe a shortcoming in the bylaw we can always say you need it there's nothing that says you've got to have a surveyed plot let's say you need a surveyed plot for a while I thought the building and the property behind it was also part of the project yeah yeah alright let's go through the second plan criteria it'll help us to verify that parking and loading areas you just spoke to that a moment ago you're proposing parking an existing parking area sub 6 to 10 knots we would expect that's the average we have no way of knowing from day to day but you have to designate you have to designate spaces as far as we know we can get 10 10 trucks parked like these are parked right here and I presume here we're not about a large of trucks so we're not talking 9 by 18 some of them are actually smaller than that the shortest truck is a 12 foot truck the largest truck is a 26 foot truck and that's 32 feet not your standard parking space but unless you build the trucks where the parking and loading goes on some length anticipating people using the property would you have other than having your own trucks for rent there would you have other vehicles there the only other vehicles that we would have there would be employees how many employees do you have just one people that come to rent trucks do they leave their personal vehicles occasionally they ask if it's convenient sometimes we let them do it sometimes it's not where we are now we don't let them park because of the snow and so on there's times when it's convenient but not for anyone at the time parking would not seem to be an issue from my perspective anybody think it's an issue I mean obviously it has to be addressed but there's no loading there's no loading there's no loading there's no loading and loading here on site just to come and get the truck to go where are those day use or are those longer there's a convenient long term what kind of surface is the parking lot going to be right now I mean it's nice as it would be to have a page it's just when we'd call a gravel or a statement and I presume the space is not marked so I'll fit it where you can it says applicant must surface parking in for more than 20 vehicles 3202H but I don't think this necessarily falls in that category you're not proposing 20 more vehicles I don't think we're going to have 20 vehicles you know just has to be firm and level the surface not necessarily paving right saying that would be correct there is a prison in here for paving parking but it was not I think well I've seen it surface already which A says the applicant must surface parking with asphalt or concrete well 20 more 20 more vehicles right so you're not proposing to have 20 more vehicles no less than perfect also snow storage would be where snow storage I'm not sure where it falls it now but it wouldn't change okay because it's basically you just take over parking or not even that I assume it falls at that I don't know I don't know that the rest of that is terribly applicable is it must landscape any parking area with more than 10 spaces over 10 I think yeah section 6 okay have you seen that portion of our subdivision let me have a site plan review of this landscaping it must landscape any parking area with more than 10 spaces and I guess the question I would ask is parking there now and there's more than 10 spaces total I would guess it appears to me that there is some landscaping there now is that correct there's grass and I'm not sure about the trees I mean where it comes down over here I haven't really looked to see what that is because we weren't concerned with that area you have a hedge road here it looks like a hedge road in front of airport airport road and it also looks like one is over on mortar road now if you look at this the section we just mentioned that subsection 6 the applicant must landscape any parking area with more than 10 spaces as required by subsection 3204 I then go to 3204 I mentioned 20 but it also says yeah so about a typo in subsection I that that was a thing we're really talking about is if you have 20 lots and you have to do some landscape that's what it seems like that said this will not include converting existing impervious surfaces to parking that's yeah I would certainly Josh I'd certainly read that as if you have 10 or more spaces then look at that section but the section says you only have to landscape it with 20 or more you okay with that those being me that there is some landscape in there but you're not really changing the use per se building this kind of rental as opposed to not a lot you have coming in out of there of course with that an average transactions per week working 25 to 35 transactions a week 35 being on the very high side a week yeah and sometimes less than that which one transaction is basically one truck coming and going maybe a car a customer coming in so snow storage is as it is being done now landscaping is not applicable right I think so okay we'll be right along vehicle access access and circulation I'm on 3203 and you were already applied for a letter of intent and you have received a letter of intent from the state for a modified access that will be the only access to your property there is no other access besides this drive off the airport road and it has to be modified to reduce some to state standards basically the level tips down a little bit down to the property and the state has said it must meet B71 standards so the grade at the point where it meets the standard yes they already checked out I was both up there that's fine just narrow it just narrow it would you narrow that maybe you could put some landscaping in they said we'd have to put some grass maybe you could get a little more some bushes no bushes trees become a problem start walking is there any intended traffic flow in here or is it just you pull in if you're returning a truck you pull in and just pull it over next to another truck and get out and go talk to somebody and then when you leave you just get in and you back out or you mean not back out into the throat you turn this way there isn't enough from there to turn the biggest trucks around because you won't be stored right simply mark those parking trucks down at this end but they'll be all this will be all so beautiful access that would be to this upon receiving fine state of purple in accordance with the LOI a lot of intent is access on both state highway even though it's a town road sort of state road I guess public transit public transit in the area it may in fact be but it's not necessarily relevant bicycle access I'm not sure that's strongly relevant either probably not a lot of people drive their bicycles 26 quits oh why not I think one legislator from Chittenden County he probably was yeah without mentioning so I don't see necessarily for sidewalks turnovers sidewalks and so forth landscape and screening I think we've discussed that already this is a separate section very 204 do you think that this is applicable if there's more significant change the citizens property then maybe because it's pretty vulnerable in the landscape at the moment but again as they narrow up this entrance that might be nice there's some landscaping in that area along the street airport advice would you object to some plantings in the new green space area you being asked to put in there that's what I don't want to do I recall I would state it for a runover you have to maintain it we have the landscaping we expect it to be maintained we're not saying we have to find oak trees it'll be hard to discuss outdoor lighting is 3205 and what is there for outdoor lighting in the site now I believe there's a streetlight there I haven't really looked myself in we wouldn't be adding to that the only thing we would want to add to is on the corner of the building a floodlight or an emotion light so people are turning their trucks after dark that you have access to a lockbox drop keys would that be just a light illuminating where the lockbox is no it would basically be out into the parking lot but not that far out in the parking lot just we have very strict lighting standards so if you've looked at our bylaws with regard to that but it's several pages long basically to light up the sidewalk or the access to the lockbox which would be the corner of the building okay you're talking about motion activated okay and something that's probably aimed directly down toward the parking area a little bit and shall be aimed no higher than 45 degrees you and I risk we need to do more here yeah well it should be do I dare use the word police shielded well but if it's 45 degrees it's not police shielded but you should make if it's going to be 45 from its location then that's kind of they have enough space there that probably you won't see it from beyond the perimeter of the boundaries you wouldn't see the light how high is the the light would be what elevation I can imagine a building that's much more than 10 or 12 feet up yeah so it's a flat roof it's 10 feet tall and 45 degree angle it's 10 feet I don't imagine it's going to go up very far so it's just for safety reasons we wouldn't want any of the truck getting into the door is that 24-7 light would be on all the time no I would be I would take more on activations I think there's a streetlight in there now yeah so would be if that's been on power it's probably switched it over to police shielded but there is a little confusion here from the general standards it says here the applicants must use fully shielded outdoor light fixtures as specified in 305 okay but then also in subsection 5 of that it does seem to allow for spotlights aiming no higher than 45 degrees and a spotlight aiming no higher than 45 degrees is not fully shielded yeah so I don't quite understand that as a definition if it's not aimed straight down it is not fully shielded so to me that's almost as if they're giving a definition but then 5A I agree it would indicate some bust yeah so this would seem to allow for a spotlight but it does have to meet the standards of 305 right and zone 2 is that the zone that's class 2 everything is fully shielded that's the definition of it fully shielded shielded one of the definitions here is pointing straight down pointing straight down it's like street light street lights which the new ones are literally cut off you know I mean besides the level would the light you're at the same height you're at the same height as the light and you're looking at it sideways you shouldn't be able to see the light itself because you see where it hits the ground you shouldn't be able to see the light inside the fixture because the light can't go horizontal the bulb doesn't come down below the size of the light of the fixture well if you look up but the size of the fixture should cover the bulb if you're at the level of the light if you're at the level of the light well 30205G security lighting which this is for security purposes yep does allow the board to wave a modified lighting stand up against the strong news how many lumens would this fixture be I realize that's a good question you may find it you knew that 20 years ago before the zoning board that wasn't even lumens whatever's required again that's probably what it's going to be not new seed X number lumens I just have to find it in here anybody have anything you just want to light the key is it's not going to be 24-7 it's going to be only on when it's dark and when it's motion activated when I have it when it's motion activated and sensitive sensitive to the darkness there I'm having trouble with that word for a moment you said you might apply for a sign but I'd be a future date no sign we're talking lumens so no sign right now 3.05 yeah so we're talking about less than 2000 lumens because if you remember why when it was less than 2000 lumens the original version of this it could have been partially shielded but then we changed it to everything fully shielded and so it's really moot because everything is fully shielded yeah but still if we're going to allow for a partially shielded which is what a 45 degree light is defined as in the definitions it ought to be less than 2000 lumens but still a lot less than 2000 lumens even those delay points will tell you that yeah educated so signs are not applicable at this time you're going to apply for a future date you'll be right on you get sort of a lot of pages right now a lot of signs yeah there's a lot of signs well you have any directional signs or anything like that telling people the parts pretty much speak for themselves you're not proposing any outdoor use area I think you said that in your narrative no there's going to be any outdoor storage there is outdoor storage there now by Mark though is there not there's no containers there's no containers that I've seen okay I just drove right up to that actually I wasn't by one of those containers but they won't disappear real fast like you know where you can get them careful we'll tax those things this is where I get my hands and I haven't read their bylaw yet do they have zoning in there? oh yeah we used to know the zoning administrator when you died I don't think there's anything else there's nothing like control it's not proposing any it's not proposing any activity it's not applicable I mean the performance standards but how long does the player order something that applies you know what is happening with stormwater management on this site where the runoff don't you're not making any changes to the runoff it is what it is how large is the launch weekers? 2.06 so stormwater management is not applicable and then it's a conditional use and so under conditional use standards do we have any input from our municipal officials? we have the state yes we have we haven't even I did not receive anything from Chief Wolf nor Chief Dufresne was it sent to them? yes it was traffic we already talked about that it's a pretty minimal traffic generation here you said 35 transactions a week yes that's it that's hopeful the character of the area impact on natural resources you're not making any changes you're not reducing solar access to adjacent properties and conform to these regulations I don't see anything here okay anything else? do we need anything? Chief Wolf Chief Wolf going back okay so do we need anything? landscaping landscaping is going to landscape the front there where it does the reduction that will be a conditional permit is it applying from here and the state says we have up to a year to do it do what? do you have a driveway? do you have access? we're dissing upon such times access is reconstructed as for plantings that green space for screening that is to be okay because I mean right now we're running out of time here we're not sure that we're going to be able to get in there now before springtime yeah not until you do this access do the landscaping you don't need to do landscaping until you do the oh I mean the access they said we could have up to a year to do that right you can't do the landscaping until you do the landscaping oh no I got that yeah no what do you do with that access when you're in the state we're just saying you must comply with the state when you're right there I think it's good so most have been made and the second is closed hearing is there further discussion there being none I'll take that motion please take it by saying aye aye opposed closed thank you I have one item in open meeting still which is the approval of the minutes of October 1st yeah and two items oh yes two items yeah we have approval of the minutes let's put that one there if that's easy there will be the other one which is on the agenda which is site visit which is the talk about site visits on the Hill Street extension so the minutes of the October 1 I had several comments I shared some of them with everybody some minor stuff I didn't share when we talked about the meeting being recorded by Orca that's correct at the time you write that but probably it should be past tense it was recorded by Orca okay just just tense and then a couple places like under your text under chapters where you're in the going through different sections 320, 3502 you say not comments there's no comments you do that what are two other places just minor and total comments I saw a world of place oh yeah under section B the road foreman had not issues no issues that was I think I said in my text that I thought something was missing from that first sentence on top of page 3 did you there is something else just because from on the previous page it says should me be anyone standard and then you go needs a copy of the permit and we don't need a copy of the permit from the I don't know what you're referring to if you were talking about the wastewater we don't need that because you Tom gets that anyway so we don't need to say that the issue always is they need to obtain it and then you get notified and in fact you get a copy of the permit so something there that didn't quite follow your solution is to eliminate that okay and then I just wanted you to and I was suggested that you could put it right in in the sentence about Mr. Parker I thought it was useful to note that the the building was a residence when he bought it in 1977 yeah would you like to just put it in there I would put it right in basically the the FTA department has been there since 1976 and I put right after that the house was a residence when he bought it in 1977 then the next big part of that same sentence makes sense downstairs until maybe 1981 they just I thought that was important testimony okay and I didn't have when you exited a deliberative session I could not remember which one did anybody else remember when we came out of the session and when we turned was that when we went in to deliver the session 803 based on the I think it was around 845 yeah I was going to say 8045 I think it was too no that sounds better I was trying to think it through I'm pretty sure I go home before 9 yeah a lot of them some deliberations but did not go to 9 o'clock okay so I'll make the motion wait a few minutes with those second was there made a second discussion that was a favorite by saying aye I oh no the second visit 1689 yep you all got I don't know the correspondence that Tom and I were getting which one is 1699 prison the question the issue was with the shielding that was done by Greenmont Power he's sufficient and the actually Chris what was his name he knowledge did yep so it sort of made the discussion move but then this is the issue of the spotlights okay but does anybody feel that they want to do a site visit to see how the shielding worked out no he said he was fine yeah I may go I drive by there every day yeah I appreciate that but I wanted to see sort of what the results of the shielding well that's a thought because this is going to come back to us again with these issues I have no problem I can request a site visit by myself or we can all right why don't I call Chris and find a good time and during your season there really isn't a good time yeah it's dark well as long as it's dark you're right it's dark it's too dark to start and make the same visits that's the time to get I've been writing I know that would work if you let me know when it is I may go I'm going to schedule something out of curiosity and I'll adjust the schedule to meet yours I appreciate it I generally after 7th I'll be after 7th I'll just guarantee that okay I will contact him in the final time I'll make a motion at 8.29 at 8.29 the second is second he's not successful all is very high