 the phone yet? Not yet. Mark Bear will be joining us we believe perhaps that's him and our staff Marla Keane are planning and zoning administrative staff Marla Keane and Marty Gillies and so just so you know this meeting is being recorded and thank you all for attending. There's a couple of ways to participate in this meeting. One is to participate. There's Mark. Hi Mark, welcome. I just introduced you and by the way Dan Albrecht who has been on the board for several years has resigned from the board so he will no longer be sitting here with us and we will be filling that position at some point soon. A couple of ways to participate. You can participate by attending in person. If you do so please make sure you sign up on the attendance list and provide your contact information in case you later want to take any action. You need to be considered a participant so sign in please. Similarly if you're joining us remotely please send us your contact information in the chat section so we can record that you're a participant in this hearing and if you're calling in you can send your contact information to Marla Keane. It's M-K-E-E-N-E at SouthBurlingtonVermont.gov. Actually SouthBurlingtonVT.gov. Did I not say that? You said Vermont. Oh sorry. It's not SouthBurlingtonVT.gov. Thank you Marla. Okay looking at the at the agenda emergency evacuation evacuation procedures. There are doors in the back of each side of the auditorium. In the event of an emergency please exit those doors and either go left or right to get outside of the building. Item number two and we have a long agenda tonight so we're going to move right ahead. Are there any additions deletions or changes in the order of agenda items? Nope. Are there any announcements or reminders? I guess I made an announcement already about Dan Albrecht leaving the board. I think I've covered most of those. Are there any comments or questions from the public that aren't related to the agenda? Hearing none we'll move on to agenda item number five election of a vice chair. So you can preside over this if you'd like. Okay. You remain chair. Normally I take over when we're doing election of officers but there's no election of chair. You still the chair. So what do I do? So we have a vacancy as Dan has stepped down. I need a vice chair to fill the someone role of vice chair. Vice chair's responsibility is to step in as chair when the chair isn't able to attend either not here or recused might also need to sign some decisions or my lars if the chair is not available. So you ended up doing it anyways thank you. No problem. So first I would suggest you entertain nominations and people who were nominated ask them if they would accept and then we'll if there's more than one person we can have a little discussion and if there's no discussion we can just move straight to a vote. Are you willing to accept that? Are there any other nominations for vice chair? We need a second for the nomination. Is it just an initial nomination? No it's just an nomination. Got it. Okay. So I would entertain a motion to you can just take a vote. Okay. All those in favor of voting for thank you. Quinn man to be vice chair say aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. Thank you. Thank you Quinn. Okay. Item number six this is the first application that we'll be reviewing tonight. Let me read this continued site plan application SP 22039 of David Hockey to amend a previously approved site plan for 21,420 square feet of mixed-use building. The amendment consists of constructing a 3,550 square foot third story addition which will be combined with 4,600 square feet of existing building and used at six residential units used as six residential units with 16,605 square feet of commercial space to remain 370 Shelburne Road. I mentioned this earlier but I'm going to remind people we are we have a tight agenda tonight and our goal is always to be done by 10 and we will be if we can't finish reviewing a project in the allocated time that we have on the agenda we'll have to continue it at a later date. So who is here for the applicant please. Thank you. Anyone else here on your team? No. Okay. Mike's on the light should be bright green rather than dull green. And if you could sit fairly close it would be helpful too it's a little hard to hear. Pull it toward you. No I think we got it thanks. I'm gonna swear you in. Raise your right hand please. Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of perjury. Thank you. So we have staff has prepared a what is basically make sure I have I seem to not have the right. Oh yes okay. Staff has prepared what is essentially a draft decision for the board to ultimately vote on and I think it would make sense to go through the decision and focus on any questions that are outstanding. So I will and are there any comments that you want to make before we do this? Yes. Right. Yep the board had some comments on the landscaping specifically the landscaping west of the building. So Mike has prepared a revised landscape plan which is on page I want to say towards the end of the packet. Sorry I didn't zoom. Yeah one more I think. There you go. So this is a little bit of a different view than we're used to because he's consolidated into a couple different viewports but on the top of the page is the west side of the building north is to the left and that's the building itself on the top of the page. Then the viewport below that is sort of between the building and Shelburne Road Shelburne Street and then the right hand side is the north side of the building. Previously the board had said there's not enough landscaping up against the building and Mike had talked about not wanting to put overplant that because it was having some trouble with success being in the shade and being up against salt and drip edge and that sort of thing. So this is what they've come up with. Okay are there any comments or questions from the board? I think this is exactly what we had asked for at the last meeting we just needed to see it in hard copy. Sure. Okay thanks Mark. Any other comments? Okay then we can probably move to closing the hearing. I would entertain a motion oh I'm sorry are there any members of the public who would like to comment? Hearing none. I would entertain a motion to close the hearing of SP 22039 at 370 Shelburne Road. So moved. Thank you. Second. Thanks Mark. Okay all in favor of closing SP 22039 say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Chair votes aye. Okay thank you very much. You will hear from us regarding a decision. Thank you. Okay Item number seven on the agenda sketch plan application SD 2302 of Casey Douglas to subsidize subdivide an existing 1.2 acre lot developed with a single family home and barn located within an existing 5.52 acre planned unit development into two lots of 0.69 acres on lot 6a pardon me and 6.0 I'm sorry 0.6 acres on lot 6b for the purpose of demolishing the existing single family home and barn and constructing a new single family dwelling on each lot. Who is here for the applicant? Dave Marshall from Civil Engineering Associates. Nice to see you again Dave. Thank you. Are you at Casey's online as well? I am here as well. Okay is that it for your team? That is correct. Okay would you both please raise your right hand I'm gonna swear you in do you solemnly swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of perjury? I do. I do. Thank you. Okay any brief opening comments that you'd like to make Casey or Dave before we start moving through the staff comments? I think the staff report did a nice job summarizing the past history and the proposal before the board. In this particular case this is the largest of the lots associated with the original Heal and Subdivision dating back to 2001 and in this particular case it represents a semi-infill redevelopment of that particular parcel and out of all that what's up on your screen right now is actually that we shared with staff recently it's your same proposed condition plan that was in the information package but it actually now includes the orthophoto underneath it so it's a lot a little easier to understand the conditions that exist in the area and right now the the mouse is is generally circling the parcel and issue it it's situated between Dorset Street on the left hand side or the west north being straight up on this particular plan and then there's Folsom Hall of Road which is actually part of the Healed Subdivision previously approved that is cul-de-sac and actually creates or envelops the southern portion of this particular parcel so in this particular case it's kind of hard to see the existing house but it really sits in the middle of the the parcel thank you very much so under the existing editions there's the house it actually is technically currently accessed from Dorset Street there was a condition of approval of the original subdivision that that actually it that the new driveway was coming to come in off of Folsom Hall Road that was never executed by Mr. Healed before he passed away and as such this application seeks to correct that oversight but points of interest as far as things going forward Mr. Healed point planted a number of trees on the far southern end you can see those evergreens primarily I think for Lane screening from for his home to the new Folsom Hall of Road at least to point south there are a number of street tree number of trees that run alongside Dorset Street on the west side existing conditions and then as you get to the north end a number of hedgerows that are very tall some of them as far as 24 feet tall in nature so they've grown up over time immediately to the north of it is actually an application that has been before the board it's currently at the preliminary going to final where there is a number of multifamily home number duplexes I should say proposed on the parcels north of this particular one so in this particular case this application does not seek quite the same density that you see on the right hand side of this particular screen but nonetheless it represents one that that kind of tries to work with the land and not against it in regards to situating the two proposed homes and that's where we can go to the next sheet to actually identify where those two proposed homes would go here you actually show we show a proposed shared driveway this is generally the location of where Mr. Healds driveway was supposed to be placed and now we are seeking to again come in to offer full show model road but actually we're other with rather than with two curb cuts with one shared to basically deal with the topographical elevation change from full show model road up into the plateau up above and then you can see where the driveway splits off in the lighter shaded gray to two proposed homes I think probably the heavy lifting for us today and we'll get the staff report does a nice job of summarizing a number of different issues but as we always get into the discussions when a lot is surrounded by two in this particular case three sides by either existing or proposed public roads it creates the conundrum of well how do we situate the building in a way that satisfies the goals of the LDRs with regard to communication to the streets so that's I won't jump ahead on that one yet we'll give us the opportunity to go through the staff report but I think of the ones that are probably the ones we'll spend the most time on I would like to think it'll be that one okay thank you Dave all right the first staff comment relates to the placement interject so this project is probably way more interesting to me and possibly to Dave than it is to you guys because it's a existing plan to development and normally once a PUD always a PUD and that isn't any different here but they're proposing only subdivision within the PUD so we're not actually proposing to review this as a PUD amendment we're proposing to review it as a nested subdivision within an existing PUD so the staff comments don't talk about the PUD standards the previous approval very much is just reviewing the subdivision standards and we thought that was simplest because the projects that are under the previous PUD standards in this project specifically has just different set of review criteria than would be would then it would be subject to now the other really interesting thing is this project has steep slopes but they're approved man-made steep slopes under an amendment that's currently been warned so if it gets approved it will be retroactively effective approved man-made steep slopes are not subject to regulation if for whatever reason that meant that amendment doesn't go forward this project can't impact the steep slopes as they exist on the site today so hopefully you don't have to worry about any of that but it could get weird if things don't go with council the way we expected them to why do we not regulate man-made steep slopes is there a well approved man-made steep slopes so at some point the DRB in this case in 2001 decided that that was an okay way to deal with the topography okay thank you so it's not a natural resource it's a function of this okay okay good so number one the comment addresses the placement and the orientation of the two homes and I guess the question is is there an alternate configuration that would result in the best compliance with the street orientation purpose in multiple sections of the LDRs and then the two LDRs are summarized and then the rest of the comment is of further relevance is the third sentence of the standard pertaining to maximizing living space and windows to the south east and west so so right now the front is diagonal to the street is that correct so let's start with the with the home on the south side okay so in this particular case the highlight where the proposed lot line is yeah yeah yep Marty's got it by the way I have a quick question about that I'm just puzzled I don't think it's material but 1.29 acres magically subdivided into 0.69 and 0.68 it sounds like a typo in there doesn't that work out no not even close so what should it be I think it was 0.60 and 0.69 adds up to 1.29 so Frank I think that's that's where we're headed but either way if there's a typo that's on me it doesn't raise any kind of minimum lot sizes show anything like that no this project is going to have to use a TDR to get the density that they want and they understand that they have to demonstrate where that TDR is coming from before they can get their final approval okay okay so we're going back to the proposed south lot and the the home depicted on the plan here again on the west side or left of this particular drawing is Dorset Street on the right side is is at least the street portion of the cul-de-sac of Folsom Hollow Road and then on the far south end is again the intersection of Folsom Hollow Road coming in off of Dorset Street what we thought we were going to try did with this particular illustration was provide the opportunity for this particular home its long access to run north south primarily to allow for the opportunity to have communication with Dorset Street on the west side because there's also the recreation path there as well as to the Folsom Hollow cul-de-sac on the east side as well as the driveway so what is actually on the south side are those existing trees where some of them are proposed to be removed simply by the fact that we're showing a proposed building on top of one of those lines of trees but nonetheless it represents if we were to retain the trees you know is there really going to be a communication between the building and the southern suddenly area or the portion of Folsom Hollow to the south so and and then lastly when we're dealing with garage locations and integration with the facades of the building here what we tried to do was actually have it come in off the north end so that we weren't creating a scenario where again a driveway was coming directly off of the street to the garage so we felt that we had we had found a sweet spot here but there's a lot of different ways of thinking of things and our job here is to make sure that you're comfortable with the proposal and if not what is the better way to go thank you do by the way is there a walkway from the driveway I mean where's the where's the front door on this house I think that's still to be determined so I mean right now it could be on the east side could be on the west side I think we'd always been thinking it was on the east side with a porch on the west side as far as communication what I'm getting at is it from where you pull the car and you want some kind of a path to the front yes we do and that's what's not depicted as any of the paths for either of the homes right now it's just very basic in regards to the driveway circulation component and the general layout so the footprint basically correct thank you did you want to say anything about the north lot the north house well in this particular case I think the only thing that that we kind of took the cue off of was just the orientation of the house existing house immediately to the east it does have some communication with the cul-de-sac it's and I think that's pretty much all we have to offer on that it just seemed to fit the lay of the land a little bit better as far as that orientation a lot of things to take into consideration here it's not an open field yeah comments mark do you have any thoughts yeah I mean I think that the blocks the north seems pretty straight you know in terms of placement configuration at orient you know to again to the house to the to the east pretty well so it's going to fit in with that sort of pattern language of the development the house to the south I think you know I'm not as I'm not too concerned about the fact that it's sort of currently placed on top of that one line of trees because you know if you go out there and you look you know that the other plump of trees just south of that it's pretty dense as well you know so you're really kind of you know it's not going to be like oh by getting rid of those that couple of those trees you're not going to be opening it up to full some hollow I guess my only real concern is that the way that topography has been altered you know to get a house pad on it a I'd be concerned about the the regrading of it with the actual existing clump of trees to the south how you're sort of it looks like you're grading into those those trunks and I'd be concerned that you wouldn't be able to salvage them that they would eventually die and also the fact that right now the house feels like it's sitting up sort of like up on a hill so that you know to the east and to the south you come out of the house and you basically have a steep you know grass or yard sloping away from it to the west it's a little flatter but it's that's orienting toward Dorset Street and I think this house sort of kind of wants to orient more towards Falsham Hollow in terms of working with the rest of the houses in the in the cul-de-sac so I'm just wondering about moving the house a little bit further to the north and you know which would you know it would get it out of getting rid of that clump of trees that line of trees but that's not as much of a concern but it would give you an opportunity to get more of like a you know a little bit more of a flatter area from the driveway to the front of the house and maybe you end up with like a corner or the south end of the house as like a walkout basement or some sort of topography but pushing it too far to the south you know I think ends up with too dramatic of you know grade change and the house will feel like it's sitting up on a hill that's a good suggestion Mark and so my question is why was it not planned further south I mean further north so it's a combination of topography as far as elevation change you can see the shared portion of the driveway and the contour lines there that we're trying to make up elevation change coming out of Falsham Hollow Road up to the upper plateau and once we've gotten to that particular point then there is the opportunity to easily move make movements as far as vehicles in and out we also wanted to try to respect a little bit more of the yard area for the north lot I don't know if we can move that up a little bit so it just started to get pinched off a little bit there with with the features so those were just the thoughts in regards to that I think there's always a lot of different ways to skin the cat as far as you know the goals and I think Mark's brought forward a number of valuable ones in regards to grading and how we can try to work with a land better so I think that's the homework that we need to go back with in order to figure out how to better situate the proposed building with the landform yeah I think that you know if you look at the other houses in that subdivision on the cul-de-sac some of them have the driveway with the little you know little offshoot parking area and some of them are straight shot in and I think you could almost keep the driveway into that house to the south and keep little offshoot lot you know driveway area and just move the house up into that so you don't have four parking spaces in asphalt with the two-car garage you end up with the two parking spaces for the left and then two cars in the garage or parked in front of it not using the little you know the turnaround I think you know you could keep the driveway not be pushing it further towards the house to the north and just lose a little bit of your asphalt driveway area so mark what I think the low-hanging fruit on this particular one is you can see a white rectangle that's between the kind of the turnaround portion as you back out of the garage and need to turn around we could basically move that particular feature further to the north on top of that rectangle and gain some additional distance that we could basically move that to the north without having to change the intersection driveway location right yeah yeah any other comments thank you mark so can I just get this temperature of the board on projects along this corridor the board in the past has been interested in sort of having homes have a facade that while not necessarily looking like a front doesn't look strictly like a back along Dorset Street and I was wondering this is a little bit different and that this is just a two two lot subdivision it's not you know 16 homes like we saw on metal lister like we're seeing it a lot immediately north of it but does the board want to offer any feedback in that regard yeah it doesn't it doesn't have at least for the moment a particularly pleasant west exposure you're just looking at a wall so far right well I think Dave you mentioned possibly having like a back porch facing Dorset I mean being sketch plan there's not a lot of detail right but there's the but I would say yes I would say yes we would want it to have some orientation not your typical subdivision rear of the house where the only people that really see it are the house behind it that you know the you know the that the lot backs up to and the homeowners you're going to see this from Dorset Street I'm least a lot to the south so I think you know you do need to sort of have some sort of architectural feature that presents a far more pleasing than just the street back of the house a lot to the north I'm not too worried about it because a that existing shrub line and b it's a garage you know that's sort of on that location so even if that shrub line gets demolished you're not going to be seeing the back of the house other comments questions I just realized this is sketch and I put you through swearing in I'm sorry about that I'm still telling the truth one way the other okay we would expect nothing less okay are we and you'll be coming back to us at some point so are we ready to move on okay number two lot a I'm going to read this lot 6a is shown to be somewhat diagonal to the street staff recommends the board discuss whether they consider this proposed configuration to be an acceptable approximation of fronting on the street staff considers a home whose front more closely paralleled the street would be possible have we kind of covered that in the discussion I think we have okay let's move on and that's it I did notice on the very last paragraph was kind of what I mentioned at the beginning and I failed to make this spread but I just wanted concurrence of the board the board has to actually make the determine determination under on whether it will require master plan review or PUD review or subdivision review so any concerns with what I had proposed about doing this is a simple subdivision I don't anyone else well the question is whether it requires an amendment to the PUD right and that's being resolved elsewhere well they're they haven't proposed anything that would require an amendment to the PUD right so Frank the the PUD approval back in 2001 was as staff indicates was fairly minimal as far as the the flesh to the bone so it's all things that the applicant is easily complying with so we have no issue with having to amend any of the features that were identified as far as components of that particular PUD approval other than the fact that the Paul Heald lot lot six is proposing to be two yeah I don't okay I mean I don't think there's a big enough issue to make an issue of but it's a little awkward to have a subdivision that is not also an amendment to the PUD I mean the PUD has an approved configuration right and this is not it so the I'm just just the logic of the situation how big a deal is it to amend the to amend the PUD um under the current standards it's a lot more hoops to jump through and I don't know that this project would be able to jump through those hoops well if I have a concern it's not it's not even specific to this one I mean this is this is sort of easy peasy but I hate I hate the precedent for you know a major PUD and we find people coming in saying well you know we want to do now we want to do a five lot subdivision you know with all three lot lines you follow what I'm saying that's that's the awkward part and I don't like ad hoc relaxations that's that precedent that that's the concern sorry yeah I was just gonna remind myself of the exact it was a two page decision on that PUD I think Dave there was some sort of um court involvement or something that no we just ended up oh this was oh I remember Paul told me the history of this this was when there was like a staffing issue and it um got kind of caught in between staff and it ended up being a two not that that matters but ended up being a two-page decision for a six-lot PUD um and I'm just pulling it up but I think there was really nothing the only waiver was about minimum lot frontage which is no longer a requirement so if they were they wouldn't they're not proposing to be below for these lots anyway um and the rules have changed such that it wouldn't be an issue even if they were may I ask um the way this is worded to be a simple subdivision let's say it were five homes it's no longer simple so that kind of avoids setting a precedent right um this is sort of the maximum potential change to this PUD because they wouldn't be able to subdivide any of these lots further but that's not you understand that's not what I'm talking about I understand that if there weren't anything else to be concerned about it would just be a shrug and do it but I am concerned about precedent I don't know how to distinguish this from um the larger argument you know letting the camel's nose under the tent for messing around without going through process I guess because the I would argue that the it meets all the criteria of the LDR and the criteria of the previously approved PUD so if if someone were to come in for a PUD amendment it would be to do something that wasn't allowed in the previous PUD right no it would just be to change to change something for example we're changing the lot lines within a PUD you know so so where do we go with this do other people have opinions I believe I express mind it's been deemed by staff to be a simple subdivision by looking at it I fail to see that it's not I think I'm still wrapping my head around it but I tend to kind of tend towards what Frank has presented I'm wondering if since this is sketch is this something that we can loop back to I guess maybe in deliberative session or um yeah we could have some discussion of it and provide some feedback can I ask a question and I guess it's more of a I guess it's a question from Marla what is the difference in the process between the two and you know how does it affect what both Dave has to do and how we review the project between the two different you know paths forward it's a pretty significantly different set of review criteria for PUDs versus subdivisions now though okay you know a year ago it wasn't okay does the project other than the more extensive review meet the standard for either path forward I am just checking I do not believe it would I do not believe it could meet the PUD standards as they exist today and the reason for that is there are now three PUD types the general PUD which is most similar to what used to exist is not allowed in this zoning district though actually it says except as described in 15 C07 so let me check that quickly for minor amendments existing PUDs amendment it could be general amendment shall be considered minor if it does not significantly alter the overall intent or scale of the PUD or the relationship of the approved PUDs to its surroundings or the relationship of what of the approved PUDs to its surroundings so I guess this could be a minor amendment and then it would look a lot like a previous the old PUD standards I'd be easier I would roll over for that one yeah and I would acquiesce to the more strict standard for that one also so should the minor amendment possibly even administrative no good try so it's still under the general PUD it still requires an analysis of the development context and meeting all the standards that we would have had previously I think it requires a minimum civic space which I'm not sure this project could ever create because the land has sort of been used though no wait in minor amendments we would only be reviewing the portions of the project that have changed yeah so we'd have to spend some time thinking about it if that's the direction that we're ahead um but why don't we think about it and see if there's any major hiccups I guess okay so we're going to continue this Dave Casey can you live with that I'd like to spend a little time thinking about it I mean it doesn't prevent you from moving forward with your design but it would prevent you from moving forward with your next application package well here's a question do we need to continue it if it's just sketch plan and you can work with we can deliberate on it and then you could convey that to Dave about what what guidance or what path he's going to have to take I'm not really sure what the process is for feedback on a sketch after the sketch is concluded right it feels kind of wrong okay then I think continue it even if it's just to the meeting in the future we just let them know what are we discussed I guess well if we're I'm not sure what you're saying while I mean if we're if we're at sketch stage I would want to do more analysis to make sure that there aren't going to be any major problems and if there are major problems see if we can find a way to consider this as a subdivision so it sounds like we need to but I'm kind of leaning toward the minor amendment right and I just want to look at that even covers our covers our behinds you know for the future so based on that I would entertain a motion to continue the hearing to what date and what would be the date Marla just a second um yeah we think you can do it for March 7th if you'd like I think that's that's probably the best balance that we can have we want to make sure the board's comfortable we want to make sure we know what the rules are and as as they have changed a lot you know we're all learning as far as what the LDR is now ask us to do and that being the background we feel that the project is has been designed in a practical way and the next question is is how do the LDRs as they're newly written where they envision an undeveloped property and basically laying down the law how does that really apply to this particular type of situation so that's the dynamic that we're all trying to work within and staff has been great as far as trying to provide us guidance on how to best move through the process and at this point in time we also know that there is the steep slope component that's set before the city council that ultimately is going to be heard March 20th so we can be still be working on a number of things in the meantime so let's let's proceed with a continuance to the next available here the first available next year next hearing meeting I should say and that of all that hopefully we'll we'll be able to quickly come to a conclusion as far as what makes the most sense for this project within the LDRs okay so do I have a motion to continue sketch plan SD 2302 to March 7th so will a second thank you all in favor any discussion before we take a vote all in favor of the motion say aye okay we'll see you back here thank you for your time okay agenda item number eight master plan sketch plan application SD 2304 of john larkin ink to establish a master plan for an approximately 39 acre existing PUD consisting of 270 residential units in eight multifamily buildings $20,000 square foot movie theater a 22,500 square foot restaurant and medical office building and a 3,500 square foot restaurant with drive-through the master plan includes six phases and consists of adding 28,660 square feet of commercial space a 93 room hotel and 183 homes in three mixed-use buildings 111 homes in two multifamily buildings and six homes in two family buildings an open space for passive recreation at 1185 and 1195 shellburn road who is here for the applicant please um jeff hodson wagner hodson landscape architecture skip mclellan for crubs and lansing thank you this is a sketch plan so i don't need to uh swear you in uh we do hope you'll tell the truth but and marty is the staff person who is who did this analysis so um before we move ahead with any of the staff comments i wonder if you could just give us a brief overview of the property and what's going where yeah um well this is a project or a master plan that we started developing pre-covid and the um the first building um was constructed and finished in 2019 at 1185 shellburn road is that where bliss be is yes yes okay right there on the corner and um i think you know covid kind of put a big pause on on the planning process for the applicant and um i think during covid um realized they wanted to make some some tweaks to it and so really pretty minor minor tweaks and defining the phasing a little bit more clearly so there is um you know on the western part of the pud there is a big apartment complex um and then there is also the palace nine uh movie theater uh right there and and that's existing is the is the apartment complex existing yes okay yep and then the recently built apartment mixed use um building um and then um you know the rest is kind of infill and trying to kind of organize it in a compact and walkable um manner okay thanks do you want to introduce sort of the natural resources constraints on the property pardon me natural resources constraints uh there's a brook a stream that runs down along fae at you see from the top of the screen to the bottom left it's uh it's a drainage way mostly an intermittent stream and it has a river corridor constraint over it by the city there's a pond right where the cursor is right down there that it's a frog pond and there's a wetland delineation that was done many years ago around that and then above right behind low it's just south of lows it's a big white building there at the top to the right of those apartment buildings is a wetland delineation that was just done recently by dory barton so those are those are the the obvious places that to stay out of and and we've stayed out of all we intend to stay out of them in the future and actually that um that phase which is phase it's four or no five uh we scaled back quite a bit because of that wetland delineation okay so um we are going to walk through the staff report but i'm wondering does anyone have any comments from the get-go he's uh he's curious i've been so shut in because of covid is palace nine still functioning yes and it's does it expect to continue to function yeah i think who knows you know it's unsure but there are no plans to demolish it at this point not right now but i know in the staff report it did point out that we're below the you know maximum density and that could open possibility for an amendment to add more more housing there so okay thank you let's um jump but you are not the owners or controllers of that piece of the property though right yep it's all the larkin's on it but it's leased to maryl jarvis okay which presumably has an endpoint presumably does but for right now it's going to continue yeah i can't seem to find my comments okay number one staff considers that the board may require a detailed explanation in order to make a determination on whether to grant this request and the request is a front setback waiver to allow phase two to be constructed with the same relationship to shelbin road as the adjacent phase one phase one is the bliss b building yes i know it's not called that but yeah okay thanks yeah i think you know it was kind of our intention to have that building have the a similar relationship to shelbin road for the building to the south yes it's proposed to be a hotel okay right so board do we um do we need more information in order to make a determination as to whether to grant this request what kind of hotel it's a residence in but the entrance is around back from the courtyard right presumably yes it's actually kind of facing um bliss b right it would be on the north side it's underneath that note that would be the main entrance to the hotel i think we had the setback discussion when bliss b when this was up the first time around for bliss b and we allowed it and i think everyone can i i i mean i'm by there all the time i don't see any adverse consequence from having allowed this the setback waiver so i would not object to it in this case now now it'll occur again on real road assuming real road is going to be a city street that same setback situation is going to occur there we're showing the buildings closer to the street than the setback that's required so that same request would be for a long fae and a long real road there'll be setback adjustments in there yeah and i apologize the notes kind of obliterated part of the building outline it's it's transparent a little bit when you zoom in but so all four buildings all three the three additional buildings will all have similar relationship to the public street that the bliss b building that that's what we are okay yep i i don't have an issue with that okay anyone else comment number two this is in regard to the waiver this is a waiver request regarding the landscaping can i back up a minute i you know i'm burdened with some history here and the subject to a little confusion that land of Fayette can we look at Fayette a minute yes the uh the crimson lancing drawing might be a little bit clearer it doesn't have those notes over the top of it all right so that's that's k1.01 larla i don't know what page it is in here yeah floating sorry we were doing okay with the last one i sort of was looking at what i wanted to see which was the sorry the proposed building i can go back can we yeah you could get back to where you're aware of that big white blob that's it right that's what you're proposing to build can you move it over so i can see it a little better are you talking about phase four of the micro apartments right and that's where you want to decrease the setback no no sir below that south of that right right in there right where that that note is move it up just a little bit marla yeah so the street in front of the theater is real road and it's being extended but not in front of the but not in front of the of the new residential building the phase what you're calling phase four there right um that probably phase phase four is what we call the micro yeah that's a tiny that was previously approved thing that's that's not what we're talking about here real road is the vertical road that you you can see it's colored gray yeah i got a collector street that street is will be a city street someday so there'll be setbacks from the right and the left of that street so we're just and you you want them as narrow as a setback exactly and there'll be a building underneath that note right there that says phase three along faet road so there'll be a setback from faet road also yeah now we're not sure we need waivers on all of these but we're just making everybody aware that there may be you know waiver requests similar to the one that's on shelter note um so just for everybody's awareness um one skip said that these micro apartments were previously approved that approval has long since expired yeah so that's completely on the table again here here's the reason i'm easy on the shelban road one and maybe raising a question about the interior ones uh it's evident to me from observation that the the narrower walkways on shelban road are harmless because no one uses them anyway you know if we're talking about i mean that's a slight exaggeration but you know what i mean uh on the interior streets you know a promenade may sound a little exalted but perhaps we're a little more concerned about making them pedestrian friendly making it nice a nice place to walk around you know there'll be pedestrian paths on both sides of real road on the left hand side you see that orange dashed line that jeff put on there is a recreation path the 10 foot or 12 foot recreation path on the right hand side will be a concrete sidewalk so none of that will be changed that the street itself will won't be affected by the setback discussion yeah and the buildings are not as big as the the white box that the note is on right the that we should have done a version without the notes do we need to rule on that now as part of this the sketch plan no no just provide feedback in terms of where you're thinking where your head's at so that they can make an informed decision when they go to propose their master plan finally i like to reserve my views on that okay understood yeah so i've traced the property line okay yeah there you go so the building wouldn't be anywhere near that it would still be five six eight ten twelve whatever feet off of that line yeah so there'll still be a sidewalk and there'll still be a landscape strip between the sidewalk and the building there may be a sidewalk into the building an entrance along there you know these are big buildings they should be generous sidewalks right they are there it's it's it's 10 feet on one side and five feet on the other five feet ain't much that's your standard sidewalk we make a six if you'd like sorry for being just a little confused there's a line there that we're saying is um properly you're saying there's a building but i see like a drive area are you going to be building over the drive area yep that's a autocourt for that building where's the building oh it's kind of under the note it's kind of at an angle along it's this l upside down l yeah i got you yeah sorry okay any other comments before we move on comment number three addresses the bike and pedestrian needs and north south i think we're still on two i think sorry i think we're still on comment oh yeah are we still on two well we're just finished one okay sorry thank you marty um this is the request for waiver for the landscaping what are thoughts about that yeah we're i know when we did 1185 we ended up having to use a lot of the plant material down in the area we're now calling a neighborhood park because there just wasn't enough area to put plant material and so we were hoping that there would be some flexibility i don't know that we could fit all of the required landscape in plant material in the pud if we're not allowed to maybe use it on other things maybe the playground or something that you know one of the amenity spaces so well i think we have provision i'm not sure exactly where and that's sort of it would have to be specific before we decide whether we would allow it i guess yeah these so it's it's an it's an open issue is that right marlin in the case by case basis yeah i believe that's the case um i think it's uh if the board feels that the site is adequately landscaped already um then they can but don't we have features that we have specifically allowed as substitutes for lands for biological landscape hardscape kind of thing yeah yeah there's like uh there's a couple examples provided in the ldrs but i don't think it's like an exhaustive list it's just so it's not foreclosed i think that's the best we can say today okay yeah i would say we've done hardscape before the one that you listed that i'm not sure we've done before is like playground equipment and such i don't i don't know if we've seen that yeah i mean i would raise but yeah we would have to entertain it but that's the one that's sticking out to me sure that's probably not okay can we move on our do we have enough information board to marty are you good yeah the only thing is um so the i think in the landscaping budget that you guys talked about a pedestrian footbridge potentially and we'll probably discuss that later in the staff comments but if if the board were to require the pedestrian footbridge in the name of connectivity or something like that as a requirement i'm wondering you know at that point maybe landscaping budget doesn't go to cover that because it's no longer landscaping it's required as a connectivity feature and not as a aesthetic feature um so that's just something to keep in mind okay thanks marty i was actually going to ask about that is there a sense of where this bridge goes already we're not proposing a bridge at this point we don't have that in the sketch plan it's not part of this sketch plan okay so the answer is no we don't have any proposal for that thank you it's been talked about in the past but it would be a pretty involved state permitting um thing to do it it was really to connect the large existing apartment complex to this this neighborhood park and the rest of the development but jeff could i ask you to pull your mic closer please it's any harder and harder to hear you yeah okay thanks okay go ahead frank and you got the bright green not the not the light green on on on the mic yes push the right oh yeah yeah that's on okay good let's move on to number three this is addressing bike and pedestrian needs and north south connectivity staff staff recommends the board ask the applicant to discuss what they consider may address pedestrian and cyclist needs in this pud and how the applicant may address north south connectivity yeah if you go back to the the color plan um there is a rec path on the west side of real road that we're proposing that's why i added the dashed orange line and i know there's another comment about um trying to connect phases four and five more to this um to the core area and so you know we could see extending that rec path down um fiat road either as you know striped lanes in the road because fiat is quite wide up near shelvin road it gets narrower when it gets near uh home depot or it could be you know an expansion of what's now a sidewalk into a rec path on the west side did you mean lows yeah i'm sorry what did i say home depot oh low sorry okay so um you know we're totally open to to that idea can i just suggest something um and this is sketch that exit um into the other part i think there's a mcdonnell's over there or something right yep yeah those two streets those those two exits with that curve that comes around i've noticed it's extremely dangerous people don't often anticipate the traffic coming from um what is that fiat road yeah and there's no mirrors there's no safety fee there's no way to really see what's coming so i don't know what the recommendation would be but if we're gonna you know if we're gonna put a lot more traffic traffic in there we should really consider the safety issues that that presents even today that's not a bad idea you know i mean you're talking about the intersection with the one that goes into mcdonnell's you're talking about yeah well the both sides there's something well another thing that we were talking about before was a crossing across there a pedestrian crossing across there that's come up before so that we could work that in with it also you know that would slow people down some sort of a traffic calming device okay something like that maybe that's where the crossing occurs okay good good suggestion you're done good when i wonder about that being the optimal and i'm not a traffic engineer but um i am a pedestrian and i wonder based on solely on what john just said is that people can't really see too well all the way around this corner would the crossing be better um when you can see both directions farther and i i'm asking that as a genuine question for you know the people who are professionals in this we're going to get more traffic people involved eventually yeah we can discuss it with them as to the the ideal spot to put it but you know if then again we can try to make it serve two purposes we did talk about it as part of the micro apartments i think um across um fayette near the movie theater but yeah i think it makes sense to get more professional advice somewhere that okay is all that parking out there by the way for the for the micro apartments is that what that big lot is for the apartment no to the left of that there's parking underneath that building yeah right the the big building is all parking underneath it the the existing building the one with the uh with the the care facility and zen garden and so forth that's all parking underneath it yeah right okay let's move on to number four staff recommends the applicant discuss the impacts of these existing conditions with a specific focus on how the adjacent uses will be delineated or incorporated into the function of the proposed pud what are your thoughts about that so this kind of gets into how master plans are now different than they used to be right so marty starts to talk about the different elements of master plan approval this will come master plan final you'll have to do an existing conditions report kind of laying out you know the general area and how the pud fits into that and one thing that marl and i noticed is just maybe this park almost invites you to walk down towards the railroad track into this this private estate and so you know maybe that you know maybe that's a little bit of a design hiccup if you're inviting people to walk down towards or onto tracks um and also just in terms of well there's a barrier there's a there's a vegetated barrier there and there'll be a crossing barrier okay perfect and i think that's that's what we're looking to hear in the context report wide open just walk across the track there's a there's a visible and yeah it really is yeah okay board are we ready to move on number five staff recommends that the board discuss with the applicant the impact of in road on the function and safety of the proposed open space can you show us on the map what we're talking about please that is the drive that goes down through the neighborhood park and across the railroad is called in road it leads to the parcel on the lake and we've been researching i know there's an easement and the deed for that parcel it's not clear to us um joe was under the impression that it was for emergency or secondary egress for that lot not primary but we're going to look into that more into the wording and so it's existing it is it's a driveway right now basically it comes all the way from shelbin road yeah and is it called in road because there's an in that's going to be there there was there was all kinds of different things there's a huge building mansion down there but yeah presumably i mean it it's a right of way that belongs to the owner of the private state yes and he wants it maintained so it's going to be maintained for his access so there's nothing so i'm not quite sure what the comment is directed at i mean that that's a given that thing right a legal given right so there's a comment was more just asking you guys to reflect on if there's a maintained road running through the middle of your neighborhood park is you know how does that affect the function quality of that park amenity if there's a road that just for legal reasons even if it never gets trafficked you have to plow it or you know like it has to be a central feature of that space so it's kind of maybe takes away from them yes the approach is more of it's a driveway yeah because there's there's not going to be a lot of development down there and there's a lot of access points for that property there from Bartlett Bay Road and from the north and so forth so this is not the only access point to that huge parcel understood but i don't think our concern was about the vehicle traffic but just more about you know most parks don't have no pedestrian you know 12 foot 15 foot wide asphalt space running through the middle so signage maybe yeah tell people that there may be a car driving down through there occasionally i think that it's you know at the areas where we're proposing the most intensive use it's all the way to the north so it's not really dividing it at that point it does swing to the south to go around the existing pond but i think for most of the park it it won't be an issue how long is it um it's roughly 800 feet i mean well right now it goes all the way to Shelburne Road so it's probably 1600 feet so to access it you would go past the movie theater so you can see it right there right now it it doesn't connect to real road it just goes out to Shelburne Road and how do you okay all right so in in our proposal real road will be extended to the property to the south and in road will intersect with real road and it won't come off Shelburne Road it'll come off a real road okay still a drivelay access or a secondary emergency access or is it paved yes yep i never noticed did i roll a plate on it or what i mean it used to years ago in Shelburne Road had two big stone pillars on each side of it and it was always had a gate across it it was never ever open oh right before sport style yeah okay those pillars are still there i think one of them well yeah we moved them down there actually the the owners feral wanted us move them down there they're on the other end now right against the railroad track so that oh again a barrier to the railroad tracks pick them up physically move them down there okay interesting okay good thank you does the owner have an issue with people in the park using the road for recreational purposes not that we heard there's no objection that we've heard about but if you'd like us to get some sort of a statement or something from what i think maybe where i'm coming from is like if our apparent living in this development i might have a problem with my kids using the road for recreational purposes as it's a road you know yeah that's just where the pushback is going to come from it's it's a driveway and i guess it really depends on what happens to the the property on the lake and whether they have you know how many other access points they have right but we'll have it defined as as what it is when we come in with a with our our real proposal yeah we'll know more about what's going to happen in that property of the to the west and so when real road gets connected to it it's it can be a possibility for folks to use real road and then in road to get onto shelburn road i'm just no no there won't be any connection the the only connection between real road which goes all the way to the south is something we've labeled slip road on some of the other because we had to name it something because we got a a permit from the aot to connect up to shelburn road right there right so that's a private road right there that would be a connection to shelburn road but it would not be a regular connection because it's a one-way out yeah only yeah yeah yeah i mean i would just echo uh the points that staff have made of um given that this is sketch master plan think about how that road interacts with the space and and how that just works whether you guys mentioned signage i don't know what the creative solutions are but i would just emphasize looking into that oh so slip road would not be an ingress point no not at all interesting only fea is the only yeah and the other end of fea both ends of fea you're going to find us all out there tomorrow driving your maybe not tomorrow i just got no that's right yeah it's going to be kind of snowy out there yeah tomorrow i mean cross-country snow right away it's fascinating to me i was never conscious of okay so if i can just muddy the waters even more um the folks who own the ferrule estate which is the property on the other side of our tracks which is eric ferrule and family um are three to six months behind this project in terms of developing their own master plan master plan for um what they're going to do with the parts of the land over here so um that i think that they are ready to have this conversation because they're you know lagging you but not by a ton yeah and what what plot are they going to be developing uh the land let me switch back to well it's the land over here i can't see all the way to the last it goes from the rear attracts all the way to the left that's a big parcel oh sure that's one where we had major discussions about the drainage and rerouting of the yes yes yes i do yep yep um yeah you know and development couldn't mean anything well don't don't get too worked up it might not be what you think um you know this land is pretty encumbered by uh resources so the development i think will be relatively modest okay but they haven't brought anything to us yet no no it's it's um i just mentioned it because it's you know anything could change obviously but i mentioned it because i think it's the right time to have the conversation okay good wow okay uh number number six um this is the integration of phases four and five and a question of interconnectivity yeah so i think that we were hoping to deal with um with the recreation path well the mic in please we need to hear you um i was thinking that the recreation path was addressing that um concern because four and five are the micro apartments and the townhouses that are you know more down Fayette road so do we feel like that's been addressed board feel like it will be addressed as the idea right okay i think maybe that one kind of hinges on where and whether the pedestrian crosswalk against across fit gets installed as well but there'll be what will propose is a is a separate path of its own that doesn't exist there now today's there's that narrow concrete sidewalk understood will improve that to make it a more pedestrian friendly right path between pieces of our of our master plan right and the micro apartments on the other side of the street from that micro apartments are on the other side of the street which is where i'm saying the crosswalk would be right handy exactly the crosswalk would connect up with that recreation path micro apartments are those like bed sitters um that's no they're just small there's studios in one bedroom apartment they're like we just named a micro because we got to name them something okay they're like hotel room size sure okay thank you okay modest hotel room sizes yeah that's a nice nice thing that we would there's marla probably has a lot of information about that from our previous well there was a a model of them in the quality and i think some years ago and i want to look at it was very ingenious but a little reminiscent of a submarine okay let's move on number seven this is uh about inclusionary units and um integrating rental units yep we will intend to fully comply with that okay um we will look forward to that okay do you plan to do them all in one building or the spread amount is as required basically and you know work up the open space is required and so forth as each development or each portion is developed okay um number eight this is regarding the civic space um yeah what are your what's your response to that comment so um we identified there's if you zoom into the center of the plan um we've identified kind of a pocket park kind of in the center by the jeff you're going to need to speak up please that's weird um yeah so right in the center there there's a pocket park that provides kind of ADA access down this there's kind of a big hillside there from larkin terrace to real road and so we were thinking of a pocket park there and then the um we're thinking of a playground and community garden there and then the remainder of that would be a neighborhood park with uh possibly a dog park in it and i think that that would satisfy the square footage requirements we haven't done the final calculations on that but okay and we're open to you know suggestions for for those spaces today we were talking about pickleball maybe as you know minimal um active recreation in the park did you say pickleball yep it's everywhere is um neighborhood park type i don't know if you know off the top of your head jeff i can look it up quickly is that uh required to be a public public street no um deeded to the public oh um it doesn't say that i didn't see that but um the reason i mentioned no it does not say that if you were intending to deed space to the public the city's only willing to accept things that are you know consistent with city standards um i would encourage you to have a conversation with the um recreation director and potentially the recreation and parks committee if you intended to have it be be public okay so we have the choice it could be privately owned but open to the public or it could be deeded it doesn't seem to be required to make it deeded okay yeah i haven't had that conversation with joe so and the choice will be open to the city's decision to accept it or not as a public right and then they would say what they thought was appropriate for the being in the park or yeah but if you wanted to go that route you should go that route from the beginning okay yeah okay phasing of the plan staff recommends the board and applicant discuss the phasing plan as it pertains to the development of the site infrastructure and site amenities yeah so this one um the applicant identified seven phases um one of which was already built so six additional um and i guess in staff discussions we kind of thought that in the same way that in obrion each house is not a phase you know each construction here is not necessarily a phase and the phasing really comes in from the infrastructure investments um so one of the roads done one of the parks and one of the amenities in so kind of having that conversation you know not tonight but maybe at a later date about when it's appropriate for you know the dog park to be finished at at how many units or all that type of stuff yeah absolutely and we already talked about how we might reconfigure the phases and um yeah we're open to that okay any questions moving on number comment number 10 relates to the civic space um oh yeah intense to meet this requirement what are your thoughts about that comment i think that's kind of what i went over with the amenity space okay i think is that right marlon yeah okay okay perfect um number 11 is bike and pad um staff recommends that the board discuss connectivity options including connections shown on the site plan and other potential connections including the pedestrian footbridge bike lanes on fair road and to lake view commas i think we've covered this but do you have anything else to add to that no okay uh number 12 staff recommends the board discuss with the applicant the extent to which this project will require screening between uses and whether the phase will be appropriately phases will be appropriately integrated into the neighborhood area yeah the only places we thought that we might need screening would be up at the townhouses between lows and the townhouses up there and then also maybe down by feral distributing up against the park but i think everything else is pretty either naturally screened or um compatible so both of those areas are vegetated they are yeah the one to the south especially because there's a huge pine and so forth beautiful trees well and we added a bunch of planting down there from the first building the first phase so okay questions on the board okay number 13 um i'm going to read this staff recommends that the board and the applicant discuss the functional objectives of each street in order to finalize design standards applicable to this project and establish a typical street cross section i think yeah because i think now you have street classifications is that right and so much like the amenity space we have to kind of pick a street prototype basically okay a real road was the only one proposed to be a city street i think we we sent an email early in the game asking for a decision on what to call that street we called it a collector from the the list of streets so somewhere is there's an email we've already discussed that yeah the feedback that i got from dpw was um if that street's going to be accepted it's got to be built all the way to the south property line yes it will be yes and and a little history i was part of the original subdivision of this property in the 80s and that street was always the front of the movie theater was always anticipated to be a city street and so it's been built to city standards with all the base the underdrains the the whole thing it's it's built to be a city street right now and we'll continue it that way good so collector's not a type yeah well i'll go back and review the emails but that might have been before they that might have been one of the previous early designations for streets but i had gone back through the the regs and picked out a street and i'd sent off an email so i'll i'll dredge that back up and get it to marty and make sure that we're we're talking about the same thing yeah i think the new classifications are different yes they are and and more about sidewalks and right so i guess what i think marty was getting at with his comment is is there any feedback the board wants to provide about you know should this be a pedestrian street sounds like frank was envisioning it as a pedestrian street you know should it be parking on both sides should it be um you know well and it has the rec path on one side too so any any questions board i mean in general we were trying to put parallel parking to make it kind of a traditional street on as many streets as we could going going on any other questions before we just to that point sorry overall maybe it's been covered there's sufficient parking for the whole yeah so there's quite a bit of underground parking that doesn't show up in the plan there's parking under the existing building there's going to be parking under the hotel and then parking under the one right there with the pool yep and then parking along the streets either in parallel or i think we might even have some angled parking as part of our our master plan our pre-covid master plan we had done rsg had done an analysis of the parking and the traffic requirements and so we have that in our hand now now of course the master plan was slightly different then so the numbers aren't exactly perfect but we do have an analysis of the parking and the traffic in hand and we'll we'll have that as part of our master plan marlo marty would you remind me uh having lost the war uh what what standards apply to commercial parking in this area if any there are no minimums for commercial uses we still have parking minimums for multifamily developments which has been cut back right to like one and a half you get a half a car or i think it's a 0.75 yeah 0.75 no backseat yeah per per unit with every four units an additional 0.75 or maybe every five units an additional 0.75 yeah we assume we that the city council and its wisdom and the planning commission have decided that developers discretion and self-interest can adequately guide the amount of parking that will be supplied is that right i believe that was the consensus thousand from the board yeah yeah a crucial part okay can i ask a question about the underground parking are they connected or is it one parking per building so it's going to be connected between the hotel and phase seven but we couldn't connect north south right because there's major utilities in that underneath that pocket park kind of that's recorded right there up marl is the water sewer storm everything runs right down through that east west line right there so no parking under this there is nothing under there it's just not connected it's the same parking it would be even under that plaza that whole thing that a parking lot that you see there now for the movie theater is essentially going to be underneath that development there's potential from the hotel on the corner of the southeast corner to the phase seven there yeah there's potential to put a tunnel under there to connect the two parking lots in case one overflowed into the other but that would that would be the only underground connection between any of these yeah can i just show this other plan from the packet i thought this was really interesting it's going to take a second to load but it was kind of the cross-section of how this relates to shelburn road yeah there's quite a bit of grade change so yeah there there you can see it right the hotel would be the one on the right hand side phase seven would be the one on the left and you can see there'd be a a tunnel no the two the two on the right hand side there right those two those two might be connected or no no no it's it's not shown actually right yeah this is another the word lark and terror right there could be the connection that would be the connection so the finished floor of the hotel would be the same as the finished floor of the that's right yeah and this is uh not the movie theater but the one that's in line north south yes yeah yeah so real road is about eight to ten feet lower than larkin terrace and then the park actually goes down rapidly go ahead frank this is only sketch plan but now that i'm staring at these white blogs it reminds me of something and this is premature for any kind of architectural detail but can i infer i mean bliss b building if we're calling it that turn out to be pretty nice actually can i infer you're going to make an effort to be at least as nice as business for lack of a better term for the moment yeah definitely the more architectural compatibility there well and i think it'll be a different architect yeah i think the goal is to use a different architect for each building so they don't look super homogenized right it shouldn't look like whether it's at this place in virginia it's sort of eerie oh rest in rest in yeah looks like uh something that came out of a game set or something it's not ugly it's just weird i hope they're not listening tonight that was a very famous planning project of its time so yeah okay in a lot of the time i think that we're do we need to vote to conclude no um thank you very much for a public comment thank you yes um i appreciate you coming and um and hopefully our feedback has given you some ideas for the future are there any um participants who would like to make public comments are there any online marty okay thank you hearing none we will um i suggest that we've got still a long stretch ahead i suggest we take a three minute bio break llc for plan unit development on five lots developed with a quarry a mixed commerce building a warehouse a contractor yard and an rv rv sales service and repair facility the master plan includes combining the five lots resulting in one lot of 747.92 acres and consists of 344 thousand square feet of manufacturing an office building a 37800 square foot office and retail building a 15600 square foot commercial building and an 85 000 square foot flight instruction in airport use building on 40.43 acres of the resulting airport lot at 3070 williston road who is here for the applicant please hi our logo made of technologies hi are you that's gendron stand that welcome just realized i haven't been asking for uh disclosures tonight so um thank you for joining us and um good to be back oh you are okay good thanks jeff um don't be shy about pulling your mic right up to your face if the board has trouble hearing you i don't think i can pull it any closer the jeff already has i've been accused of many things but one of them is not being quiet so okay let's that's where you swear all three of you in is anyone else online part of your team we do have other members of the team online it's unlikely that they would provide testimony okay okay sythia ma um sythia well i can't see you i'd like you to raise your hand too got us okay raise your hand right hand do you sound do all solemnly swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of perjury i do thank you yes okay um are there any disclosures or um recusals okay hearing none um you know this is kind of complicated and i had to talk to marlo today trying to figure out where we are with this so would you please give a brief explanation of why we're back here again i will try um i tried to explain it on the first page of the staff report but given that there was still some confusion i will try and phrase it another way the board approved this application in march of 2022 with a condition that the proposed parking um located to the front of the manufacturing building between and behind the mixed commercial building not be constructed until such time as that mixed commercial building was constructed the applicant appealed that decision to the environmental court and um the environmental court issued issued a stipulated motion for stay of appeal which means because the rules have changed and now the board could have approved that parking if the application were reviewed under the current rules so the court said beta go back to the would you like to go back to the drb and see if you can get approval under these new rules and beta said yes so we would like to do that um and the board said go forth and do so and here we are um they are now making their application under the new rules um the you know fun wrinkle of course is you can have all or nothing with the new rules so the new rules have also changed the master plan review criteria as we just saw with the larkin sketch plan in front of us before um and so now we're looking at um the new rules and the there are some subtle differences that are highlighted in the staff report thank you marla does does everyone have that good thanks okay is that fair yeah i would add that there is one more complexity in that is we're under construction because you've proved us under the previous master plan and we're doing all of this in real time we have two projects underway we have the the assembly facility which is also known as a build or the blue phase in the documents and we also have the general aviation hanger that the board approved us to move out on under construction both of those are running nearly parallel in time and are expected to be complete operational on or about the end of june i i think that's what we're going to find out tonight frank i i would say yes because the way that we addressed the parking issue previously um with uh the staff and the board's guidance uh we eliminated the paved surfaces so we could not park in the areas that were designated as parking but the infrastructure the storm water the the base the plantings those things nothing changed and that was approved under the um the previous sd application that we're currently building and have his own apartment see what happens right and the rest of it we'll just see what happens tonight i would just say um as we have done in the past we've got typed versions of the responses to help guide the conversation tonight i have hard copies here this time i did bring a stick that has it digitally if um for whatever reason the board decided they wanted to project it so i'm happy to bring those up um if you'd like if not but you're going to talk to us oh yeah absolutely yeah it's just it it seemed to have been helpful in the past for taking notes and okay and comments so i'm more than happy to bring them up if not we can get rolling i like to um yeah um okay and so as we've done in the past these are organized straight along with staff's comments in the report that you you have there um uh we have as we've done in the past as well highlighted other items that staff has noted that didn't get a one two three four or five those are shown in blue in the text that you have to help guide the conversation and gather input from the board and and try to respond to staff's comments okay it's kind of hard to move us along and read this at the same time but i'll do the best i can so number one um this is regarding the need to modify the submission so um what's interesting about the current master plan standards is that they are relatively brief um but the application requirements are rather lengthy um and the first master plan standard is that the application includes all of the submission requirements it's insufficient detail to provide the framework and standards for future development under the plan so um staff has understood that to mean that if the submission requirements are not what the board wants to see as the framework and standards for future development of the plan the board should be directing the applicant to modify their submission so that we can say it's essentially that the narrative submission is in lieu of a plant an approved plan a map um like an application would normally have so that's all we're really saying here is that um you know if there's things that you have see in their submission that aren't consistent then they should be required to modify them so what decisions do you need from the board around this nothing right now okay all right thanks okay number two um um some of the comments in this staff report refer to something later on and so i'm suggesting we come back to those after we get to what it refers to does that make sense yeah we're completely on board with that and that's the way this is laid out as well okay how to follow staff's guidance there we we did number two though have a question uh staff had referenced comment 13 i think that's an inverting that really staff was trying to reference comment 14 for future discussion oh i tried so hard art you know i know i'm glad you caught that because i i was like scratching my head well and that's why i said pertaining to building design because i knew the numbers were going to change on me even though i tried my best so if that's if 14 is the one pertaining to building design that is the one we meant i was trying to make them line up and i thought oh just go with it okay number three um this is about the traffic impacts by phases yes and so on page two of the document that i just passed out you'll see that the traffic study chris has highlighted the traffic study to represent traffic by phases if you will so the um the colors follow the phasing diagrams that were previously submitted with the application as requested by the comment here is this a new table or is this just a highlighting of an existing table that's a highlighting of an existing table from the master plan traffic study okay number four um this is we're going to return to this one um and five we're going to return to although i you'll see in the note real quick here as we go through this um maybe marla you could highlight just as we go through what the the concern was it was unclear from the comments in reading through the text further in the report what that concern was so we'll look for a little guidance there when we get there okay noted so um it's not in red but on page seven i have a question for you marla um at the top of the page the first paragraph that's not an ldr i found myself getting lost in staff recommends the board wave preliminary and final plat for projects not involving subdivision of land and instead allow site plan review for the described phases with the provision that the sketch plan be required should the site be inconsistent with the findings of this master plan approval i got very lost in that is there an easier way to describe that i share what we think it means from the applicant's perspective then maybe marla you can clarify go ahead um so we we took that to mean that we we have a master plan that's been developed and that should we make no changes to that master plan the phasing as it's been the pieces and parts including phasing if we make no no changes then we're able to move the next project whether it's the child care or the commercial building um or phase two of the general aviation hanger along smartly as guided here that we don't need to go through preliminary and final plat if we make changes to something then it's almost as if we're required to start over again and would have to go back to the beginning of the process that's the way that i read that i'm not sure if that was the the intent yeah okay all right does anyone else have questions about that okay moving on thank you art for okay now i have a question what is meant by vesting i mean i know what it means like an retirement plan or something but what do you mean vest what does vesting mean so um i think i might best explain it with an example an applicant might say in their master plan application um we are proposing all buildings to be purple and then um if they or they maybe they say we're proposing all buildings to be purple or blue um and then if the board says okay you're vested in that if they propose a blue building there's no discussion that it's just approved okay all right um but if you know the board says i don't have sufficient information to determine if purple and blue are going to be acceptable later on we're not going to give you pre approval for purple and blue we're going to consider whether that color is okay later okay so it's kind of checking off the items that have already right we never have to talk about it again we say we're going to do an open space that's a playground okay and if they propose a playground you're automatically approved okay so number six staff recommends the board revisit the section for concurrence after reviewing the remainder of the staff report so we'll have to come back to that yes and just before that in the in the part that you just referenced that's not recommending investing of building heights because building heights have not been proposed while we have not proposed specific building heights for any of the other proposed buildings on the or in the master plan we have requested a five foot waiver as we talked before in that the current ldrs don't accommodate current building technology and in lieu of having to ask for a waiver on a future project since this is master plan and you can provide guidance for the properties and the parcels in question we're merely looking to cap our building height at 40 feet rather than 35 feet so while we're not specifically asking for or specifically communicating to the board what those heights will be we are in effect saying we recognize that the tallest we'd be able to go is 40 feet but it provides some predictability for us as we start to move out in designs on the other projects that would encompass the master plan okay does that work for us board so master plan doesn't allow dimensional waivers any longer i think it's discussed farther along but as a concept that we you know buildings shall generally be within this range you know i think that that's different it's not your pre-approved for buildings being 40 feet but um you know that's the scale of the development proposed great okay yep great thank you number seven um this is regarding the dead end let me read it staff recommends the board consider whether connection to Palmer court be provided as is the applicant is proposing a dead-end civic space area which without a specific destination may not be as successful as a civic space that is connected to other neighborhoods and opportunities so when we hit i guess the top of page or i guess the bottom of page nine we kind of started getting into the submission requirements and so we're now past the standards and these are the things where the applicant is required to submit a whole bunch of stuff to demonstrate what their project will look like and so now we're starting to talk about that they have a rec path and i'm sorry i did not rotate those pages marty okay um well this is about a dead end not a rec path uh sorry rec path probably isn't the right word so it's a recreational space i guess okay and should it be um should there be more connectivity bichin can you zoom out a bit oh i see that's the the circle is the dead end right and so should there be connectivity to either what's to the bottom of the page sort of where marty's cursor is um to make it a network rather than a dead end now is this where the atrium is the outdoor atrium proposed to be um so the outdoor landscape feature which we're calling the great lawn is that landscaped area just to the lower right of the white box of the building so you see if you come back there's a um a ledge line right there where the rec path goes back so if you go up if you marla from your cursor it's part of phase two okay actually actually so the hand is yeah there you go that's the great lawn okay and then as you go past the great lawn so there's some significant grade change right so the edge there of the green to the lower bottom of the page call that zero down at the bottom where the circle is for the viewing area that's minus 20 so that's 20 feet below the entry grade if you will excuse me you call that the viewing area yes viewing area for what uh for planes that are coming and going uh you it's a fantastic place to watch whether you're a fan of the f-35s or any of the aircraft it's it's crazy cool to be down there and just watch the planes come in and what's what's the gray block behind the white block and next to the green space so that that gray block is the apron and taxiway expansion project the airport is taking on under a separate application it is not part of this application is there a barrier between there and your green space that's yes there's a the site offense which comes up later in the parking and which was what really brings us back tonight that fence line you can see it it's a light black line that runs in there that's the security fence that keeps the public off of the airport property and it's a 10 or 12 foot high fence down here at this so how does someone get there is that is that a walking path the whole gray path it is it's a walking path yep it's part of the path network in the master plan that connects to wilson road and then also connects to the top um at eagle drive so it's and is the idea there'll be benches or tables or something down in that circle yeah we we hadn't really fully baked that yet at one point we had talked about putting potentially a pavilion down there obviously the f a a's got a way in on some of that um and since it's part of phase two we really haven't put much thought into it yet um but we do see it as a fantastic amenity that we've got to scratch and figure out what it's going to be calling well i mean it could be fantastic if you're not just standing around on a piece of concrete no we we prefer to put um pervious pavement down word for that so it if you've been out to our building or seen any of the um art installations that we do things like that it'll be inspiring it's not just going to be a piece of concrete for sure so the question is is it is the board okay with it as proposed or are we thinking there should be kind of a loop right and so there's a second part of of that is if you go back to that diagram there uh that loop if you will then comes back into the what we'll call the the private area or the you know the the beta i don't want to say protected but there are some things that based on some of our technology it's going to some of it will be accessible some of it won't be and so creating a loop is is definitely challenging coming back if you're thinking about doing something beyond the the green area into the gray part of the that network there that would need to work through be worked through with the airport because that's outside of our lease boundaries we don't have any control or any impact on what's happening there there's also a very steep cliff right there a hundred foot drop or so down into the muddy brook and is all of your green just grass i mean what what what does that consist of is it purely open field or what is it uh it's lawn close to the building the kind of lighter green and then the bright green is meadow and there are specific requirements down by the apron that the airport has to minimize any potential wildlife in there there's mowing requirements and all sorts of things that we have to comply with um that's driven by the f a i'll tell you why i ask i mean i didn't see the need for the loop because i thought you know if it's interesting in there you know just walking down and back is a you know a kind of sufficient amenity i'm wondering if you can make it something with a few more features than just meadow that but that are still natural because it's a destination almost yeah i i i don't quite know what i'm thinking about maybe a few random trees or fruit trees or that i don't know what i'm talking about you talk to an arborist you know no fruit trees but i don't think just fruit trees attract birds birds and airplanes kind of don't oh yeah even trees in that area is there is there anything more that you can do with that other than meadow to make it uh yeah i mean we can do shrubs and other plant material but like art said we just haven't gotten into that well that would be my comment and and i also agree that having a nice destination point there to view and see i mean the views are beautiful back there i'm sure um i'm fine with that i don't see the need for connectivity from that point i don't know how other people feel yeah i guess my thought and just it actually being utilized i might be not recalling this correctly because it was a while ago but i think um in previous meetings we've talked about having pretty um informational wayfinding signs so folks know that that's an option down there so just when we get close to that phase you know having kind of what what would be there to help guide people down that way yeah really good memory on that one of the other things we had talked about is similar to the wetlands up above there's an opportunity here to have in engaging installations along the way that speak to the environmental things that are happening the ecological and environmental things so it becomes as much a learning experience as it is a place to go watch airplanes and yeah all that needs to come together it is part of the overall fabric of the master plan and it'll one of those things that'll be rolled out in future phases how are you going to secure that area the security so i'm some guy who walks off the street with a laser in my hand which is all together probable and possible or a weapon of some sort very close to your building and air air traffic yeah how is it going to be secured well the path cameras or there is there's yes there will be security cameras and things like that as part of the building when it's built out but the area the circle the area with a circle is that it's it's just along with a viewing area and a place for people to go hang i would suggest that that's not any different in terms of actually it's further away in proximity from the area up off a curvy road right now where you can literally walk up to the fence right but and this will be my point for you is there's potentially some liability for your company for something that happens there as opposed to that fence that's owned by the airport right your this is your your land i presume it's the air well it's the airport's the green the green lawn is your land or the airport's the airport's oh it's the airport's okay well and i want to make sure we don't start to mince that at all because the airport is the owner and beta is the applicant and nothing that there is no difference in the eyes of the board or in the eyes of this decision you know they are in lockstep for this application okay um had something so we have a video when i said i am somebody who it's not me it was a that wasn't a threat right exactly um a concern noted so we haven't done a full master plan under the current ldr's i imagine that i'm going to need to find a way to incorporate the board's feedback into a condition that as we discussed before um requires the applicant to alter their submission narrative to reflect some of the things that the board suggested so um you know things like wayfinding signs and making it more than just a dead end to concrete we're going to have to find a way to write that in i don't know what that'll look like yet but you know well just don't be surprised all right number seven staff recommends the board consider what we just did oh i'm sorry okay you're right so number eight before we move on to number eight if we may um i'd like to back up a little bit here the staff had a note in here about the pud and approval of the pud um we didn't believe there was and this shows up on page ten bullet item number two from the top in staff's report and the the only allowable type for this area is a general pud we didn't we didn't understand that a pud was necessary here and we don't have any this isn't the document in the master plan as it's laid out is not for pud so the previous approval sd-21-28 was specifically approving a pud that's the that's the that's the site plan but not the master plan that's the pud approval for the first phase of the master plan yep great and um so generally once something's a pud it stays a pud i don't think as we said here that there's any substantial difference between reviewing this project as a pud versus a series of site plans great but ultimately and this is exactly what we were talking about with a small example ultimately this needs to be a little foreshadowing frank right and i think that the advantage here is with the master plan the board can specify necessary levels of review for subsequent applications so since the board can say everything within this master plan pud can be a site plan if it's consistent with the approval then it doesn't have to really affect anything okay all right great thank you the other item there just below that is um the the idea of the when the board needs to make a determination on when we could come in and ask for a master plan extension unlike the previous ldr's and and the board's decision allowed for a 10-year master plan which is what we have in place right now the current ldr's only allow a six-year and the recommendation from staff is that we would not be able to come back for an extension until four years into the master plan and what we're actually asking for is to be able to come back in two years and do that and the reason for that is typically master plans um are not granted extensions for three reasons right lack of progress is only if the master plans approved and they never do anything with it um public input there's a tremendous amount of negative or opposition negative input or opposition to the master plan that warrants the board from taking a more restrictive view and allowing things to kind of play out to see if that opposition holds or whether or not um things are are happening as as they thought they would and lastly it's you're trying to protect against changes in in regulations and more specifically in our case changes in environmental regulations the project that we proposed with the solar on the roof the geothermal wells it is it is hard to imagine as we sit here today that we would be able to do anything different high-performance building envelope you name it the building has it in fact we um we ran a calculation for a separate effort that we have going on and that the solar that's being um produced on the roof will account for 89 percent of the total energy-based building need for phase one of the building well the project's been designed to exceed the current climate what's it it called um the city just passed it on the climate action plan we exceed the climate action plan and anything that may come down the road so what we're looking for much the same way that um Marla proposed how to address the building height and creating predictability is we're creating a bit trying to create predictability here to be able to roll out on the balance of the master plan over the period of time that we had originally approved by the board which is the 10 years we we've already shown that we're moving out on the master plan we have almost all the infrastructure going in plus phase one of the the assembly building we have phase one of the general aviation hangar going on and I'll share with you that we're in planning for the child care right now and anticipate bringing something to the board sometime in the next couple months so those projects are um moving forward very smartly but with all that the request from from our side beta side the applicant side is to move up that ability to ask for an extension to two years and not have to wait four years and I'm sorry I'm not following why that's necessary because it allows us to do the planning that we want to be able to do underneath um a master plan that would have some um defined duration if we have to wait longer to make those decisions and then have to come to the board where the extension could be denied we'd rather know in two years whether the extension is going to be denied than having to wait four years so what are you asking us to do I'm in in the text here that Marla provided she's recommending that the board not allow us to ask for an extension on the master plan from six years to 10 years until we're four years into the master plan okay and what we're asking for is to be able to come back to the board and ask for that extension no sooner than two years right and do we have authority to do that and Marla that would be the only question when I read this this is um the bottom of page eight of the staff of the packet um when I read this standard I thought that the applicant couldn't request an extension it's sort of the bottom of page a in the beginning of page nine um I thought the applicant couldn't request an extension until they were nearly expired um and then I read it Paul suggested I read it more closely and he thought it wasn't specific it didn't say when they could request an extension but it does seem to say it says the duration of an approved master plan may be extended for the DRB if the request and reasons for the extension are submitted in writing prior to the master plan expiration date however in no event shall the duration of an approved master plan exceed 10 years in total to include all authorized extensions and amendments well if that's all it says then I don't understand why there's no minimum waiting period in that language right but staff is recommending a minimum waiting period and that's what I'm asking about why why why there's a need to be a minimum waiting period if they can otherwise the only burden is to show for cause if they can show for cause they could show it next week or you know two days after theoretically you know it's a little absurd but you know so I'm I'm just asking why what's the reasoning behind the minimum waiting period honestly it's because I thought it meant that you had to wait till the whole six years was up and so we said oh they want it sooner I guess maybe four years I don't have a good reason unfortunately okay so I don't I I don't see any reason to impose that I agree we should just let the language speak for itself when you get ready to ask for an extension come in and have a good reason and it gets it gets decided on the basis of whether or not you have good cause I think okay I think that's a important point that you make Frank is that it needs to be extended for cause so that determining for cause will have to be the responsibility of the board when that request is right and it's just got really nothing to do with with with when and as much as I'd like something else in there for cause because it provides the board a tremendous amount of latitude well the board is always the board always exercises the wisest possible discretion I want to assure you so so yes if we could just keep the language as is in the LDRs that would be my thought that would be great all right let's move on to number eight staff recommends the board ask the applicant to clarify the proposed phasing for the geothermal well field gentlemen so in the uh in the graphic on page four of the handout you'll see a small snippet there that represents where the geothermal well field field is and that came off of the submitted drawings and goes back to the original submission that well field that's shown there we don't have it quote unquote phased one of the things that happens with geothermal as you probably know is that you're not really sure what you're going to get out of the ground until you actually drill in the ground and figure out how deep your wells can go so the overall area may change but the amount of wells that we draw or drill during a phase may grow or shrink depending on how deep we can drill so for instance when the geothermal well field was originally designed we hadn't based on some early geologic information geotechnical information we had thought we were going to be able to drill to 650 feet once drilling started we realized we couldn't go to 400 only to 450 feet and some wells as shallow as 250 feet so if you need x amount of water I'm going to let Chris jump in if I kill myself here but you have to create so many BTUs to heat the building and it requires so many length of pipe well to be able to create those BTUs so if you're going shallower you need more wells if you can go deeper you need fewer wells and there's ways of managing all that but to come in and try to give you an exact answer on how much or how big each of the phases will be as beyond my technical expertise and I would even based on what we've been doing the last nine months and trying to get the mechanical equipment right size and the geothermal field right size I would say that I probably couldn't get an engineer to commit to doing something like that Chris you want to I agree with everything you just said so what are you what are you asking us to do so I guess I'm trying to understand a little bit what what it is that staff is looking for in terms of the proposed phasing we've identified the well field where it's going to go it's part of the the permit it was part of the permit we're actively engaged in the well we'll do an as built you'll be able to see how much of the well field was actually constructed at the time and if we need to expand the well field at some point for phase two then we would need to come back to this body and ask for an adjustment expand you mean expand area wise yes and I'm going to I'm going to ask for a piece of education here and betray a lot of ignorance could you explain where the thermals coming from and geothermal and help us on help me understand that I think it's good to just describe what it looks like when it's done it's essentially a pipe that goes 350 feet what's the source so here's what happens in the summertime it's hot outside so the ground is basically a constant temperature the water that we're going to take out of the ground is generally between 46 degrees and Alex our actual geotechnical in-house person has been working on this will either smack me upside the head if I go too far straight here but the water generally comes out somewhere between 46 degrees and 55 degrees that's the steady state of the water that we're moving around in the pipe it's a closed-loop system so it doesn't spray in the air or do anything like that it comes out of the ground goes back into the ground comes out of the ground goes back in the ground this is just groundwater right just groundwater and so then you think about when that water comes out of the ground depending on the season that we're using it what you're capturing is the change in temperature between heating and cooling seasonally so sometimes you use it to cool because that water is cooler than the air if you will in the summertime sometimes you'll use it to heat because it'll be warmer than the outside air in the winter time and there the system includes different things to either preheat or pre-cool depending on what's going on but fundamentally as I understand it as not a geotechnical engineer Frank that's the way it works it just works on a change difference in temperature between outside temperature and ground temperature the earth is seasonally almost like an insulator for that for that water source it's an insulator and a generator at all at the same time right because it yeah I just so what I understand staff is recommending here is a question on phasing because it's supposed to be part of the blue phase but it's not part of your building your your zoning permit so what's going on is it part of blue phase it's some other yeah there you know when we submitted the documents we do call out a geothermal field so it may just be some we can clarify that we did try to clarify it in the comments you have in your packet but it's our it's our sense that we did talk about it and we did get it approved under the previous application and it was part of our zoning permit yeah what you're saying is in here yeah yeah it's on page four of eight item number eight right underneath the development plan 15 point b. 0 4 e something's getting installed under our current zoning permit and then someone get installed under the future zoning permit when we do phase two to finalize the geothermal field that he can cool that building thank you so what are we looking for marla in terms of phasing phasing does the comment still stand or i think john's question got the answer that we were looking for okay okay good number nine this is about replacing the sidewalk with a rec path yes and we have jeff and chris here for this i'll just i'll just jump in on this and say we provided in the handout there two small graphics down at the bottom of page four which represent the current state of construction of the vinci drive which is the new driveway that's being created oh shoot i need to interrupt um mark doesn't have this so why don't we why don't we show it on the screen so mark can see it okay cool sorry mark but yeah the handout thing that sorry mark you should have spoken up sooner but keep going while we get that going yes and so in that graphic you'll see there's uh two orange lines and then in between there's a yellow dashed line the two orange lines on either side of the yellow dashed line are constructed already some of it snow covered because it's being used by the the contractor so it's not consistently maintained the balance of it is being used by the tenants in the valley to access their building because we've cut off valley drive during construction to do utility work so that there you go great you can see that that dashed yellow line that's the area that has not been completed but it is under construction for utilities and things like that so in terms of any modifications to this is the kind of the place that i knew we would get to frank you know based on your earlier question is the modifications if they had to happen would impact the entire length of DaVinci drive and with that i'm going to turn it over to chris on what we actually have and how we got here yeah so what we have for our typical section right now is a 28 foot wide road so that includes two 10 foot travel lanes and a fourth and two four foot bike lanes and then along the entire westerly side of that road is a five foot sidewalk that meanders along class view wetland and also meanders along the parking lot and provides access to the building and that's that's really it in a nutshell well it sounds like if you have the on-road bike lanes that's what the staff comment was yeah okay thank you for helping us understand that great okay comment number 10 given the proximity to muddy brook staff recommends the board discuss whether opportunities to access this natural resource should be preserved i wasn't quite sure what that comment meant are there currently opportunities to access the natural resource um not necessarily then how could it be preserved um not not prohibited okay so you know as jeff was talking about it's a meadow because you walk from that viewing area to muddy brook with your fishing pole okay yeah and for our project we you'd be able to walk to a certain point and then beyond that it would have to be something that you work through with the airport or a and r in terms of how you access the muddy brook i'm guessing well and again you know the applicant here is the airport and beta right but we have project limits it's not the entire 750 acres of the airport we're a small we're 40 acres of the airport property so we've got a very defined focus here anything outside of that focus we would need to have the airport address for the balance of the property i would just add it and now that i understand the comment a little better um as far as prohibiting um i would actually say we're further inhibiting because right now to get there is practically impossible i mean it the geography to get down to muddy brook is is significantly steep and i would say treacherous in some some ways we do we've been doing stormwater inspections down there for the airport for quite some time and we always send two people down there just because of that area it's just very steep very what steep steep steep as like almost like a cliff down to the river there are trail maps online for muddy brook i don't know how they relate to your yeah they're farther north than this project the trails in our development right now you could you can consider it i'm not right right now but before our project happened you could have considered that a meadow it's returning to a meadow so now we're adding a path and then there's a meadow okay number 11 i think we're going to return to that one um and number 12 we need to know the size and location for the electrical substation yeah uh we'd like to know too but i'm really sure uh one it's in uh gmp's world to figure out whether there's actually going to be a substation there okay that is undetermined yet um our expectation is that they won't make that determination until after phase one is complete operational and you start metering the loads really start to identify what the demand is on the the system for our building um and then they'll make some determination in the future when we roll out with phase two on whether they're able to satisfy the electrical demand from the current infrastructure or whether they'll need to build something else there there was at one point a little icon or a symbol if you will that showed up for a possible location that was completely you should not have been on any of the submitting drawings because we don't have any planning information for that and anything that we would have would have to come from gmp okay um does that satisfy us board for now i guess well i think that if they were to propose one um it could potentially be a master plan amendment right if it's a substation could mean a lot of things a substation could be 80 feet tall yeah yeah what substations of vague term i mean you know what's it consist of you know great question they genuinely don't know and they have to propose something that's 80 feet tall the board may decide in the future that that's a master plan amendment so be it are you okay with that again we you don't have a choice i don't know okay i can't i can't change it okay all right let's move on time check here okay um 13 uh before you get to 13 there was a request staff rec um under 15 point b point zero four summary statistics staff recommends the board include a condition of approval requiring a table for buildable area um on page six of eight in the handout you'll see at the top of the page we've included that table for you by um phase and by zoning district and if there's any feedback on that when you get a chance to review it let us know if we need to modify it as part of the condition happy to do so okay thank you um number 13 i think we've addressed this anyone disagree okay 14 this is the one this is the comment that some of the other previous comments refer to and this is um regarding building design and the framework let's see here staff recommends the board ask the applicant to present the framework as it informs the board's findings as to which components of the master plan are vested under 58 15 b 06 c 1 above what is your response to that so unlike o'brien farms which is a master plan and i believe they provided house typical housing types right or typical the type of master plan that we have here is much different what we can say and what we shared in in part of the information that came on that stick are image boards of the materials that have been used at the north hanger projects who are research and development center the materials that have been used on um phase one of the assembly facility materials that have been used on the general aviation hanger and they all come from a similar family the intent is to have these knit together knitted together to have a common vocabulary the buildings do have different uses so that vocabulary will vary depending on the use we like to expand the palette based on the uniqueness and the individual needs of those buildings and we're not quite sure what that may be um in in in my time in your seat i and mark has probably heard this before but architecture should be of its time of its place and of its materials so depending on when that building is built it should have a different form it should have different materials because if jefferson was doing architecture today it wouldn't look like it did when he did university of virginia and the rotunda it would be different and and so for us foundationally what you see out there is where we build off of what we do next we want to keep that vocabulary and that opportunity fresh and open and not have something included that's going to be um kind of a a bit of a gate for us if you will we think we've been very sensitive both to the neighborhood uh to the environment we're doing first of the kind of its kind building types again 89 percent of the the electrical need is generated from the solar on top of the building we're doing the things that that need to be done to be a good neighbor and a good member of the community not just you know beyond just creating the jobs and the technology and everything else that is happening here so there are some images again in the electronic piece that was given to you that they'll all look very familiar that's our foundation and then we would only build up from there so on page 46 of the packet um you had in your application narrative had about a page of kind of discussion of you know that development context and i thought it was very good and i just wanted to give you the opportunity to kind of put it in your own words i think you've somewhat done so but some of the things that struck me in that narrative is um you know using a common palette um having the buildings up towards the street have more of a transitional feel compared to the more um functional buildings that are farther from willison road um and then having the more organic shapes of the landscaping areas and the parking areas to complement those um more rectangular forms of the buildings farther back so i just want to give you an opportunity to kind of talk about those things if you wanted to say anything more but i think that you know those are great add-ons to to what we just talked about in terms of the palette of material all those things are are are important planning and i'm going to offend chris here um but i love them um and we've talked about this before unfortunately with all good intentions um land planning shouldn't start with civil engineering civil engineering is a fantastic resource it's required in order to see the vision of a land plan come to fruition and so there was a very intentional move that we made to have our land planning start from a design perspective and then grow into the technical side and that's what's reflected in in this information and the narrative that's provided or was provided in the application and a little bit of what we're we're talking to here it's not that civil engineers aren't important they just have a different view of how you put things together than land planners do and what we believe we have here is a fantastic campus that the community is going to want to come to that the beta team members are going to want to come to that will allow our team members to do their their best and and brightest work for this uh electric or journey into electric aviation that we've started thank you um so uh let's take a break for a minute we are now at the limit of time for this part i said it went fast it went fast what time do you have um i have 9 40 yeah we had we had planned to allocate the last 20 minutes to the next item on the agenda which is beta's site plan which is great however if we don't get through this then what we do on the next one at some level right so would you rather us continue item number 10 and push through this project that we're talking about now yeah what i what i would ask for is to see what it will take to get through 15 and 16 time wise and and some of the ones we got to come back to and if we have time let's at least talk through part of that next application and if we need to continue then we continue but we have to have to we also have to circle back to the yeah okay all right let's let's move on to 15 um this is a question about consolidating the green and red phases right what are your responses to that the the master plan is set up with different layers one layer is the planning that we talked about how the people interact with the the plan how the plan interacts with the environment the other part of it is the the economic plan the sustainability economically and and what we have here is um intentionally not co-mingled those two parcels because they provide separate development opportunities that depending on the economics would allow for a third party to come in where we they may build it on behalf of beta and release it from them as soon as you connect those parcels you're encumbering both of them at the same time and it becomes a less attractive opportunity for a third party to come in and support what it is that beta is doing here on this campus the bulk of the infrastructure is already being put in as part of the blue phase there's very little infrastructure left to be put in other than some some minor features that would be required for each of the individual buildings whether it's the the commercial building um to the left or the what's proposed as a child care building to the right in that green space we're requesting that the parcels be allowed to stand on their own and maintain that economic sustainability that's built into the master plan so you don't want your hands tied in terms of options so this is what we talked about with the previous application as well you know um there is a provision that master plans should account for 20 of the project area obviously there's no way in heck that these are going to account for 20 of the project area because the blue and orange phase accounts for much more than that um that being said the purpose as marty said of phasing is to and i you said it better than i ever could but um is to um established timing for the infrastructure elements of a project not just not the buildings so one of the things that staff caught here is that um valley road is proposed to be closed um and there would be a signal at the project driveway instead and so if that front building that's currently in the red phase never gets built um do we want the board to have the opportunity to say okay uh maybe maybe nothing to do with it not being built do we want the board to have the opportunity when they come in for the building in the green phase to say okay let's look at whether valley road should be closed now or whether you can keep it with the second part of this this phase um if they're kept separate then you know the the valley road change is not really on the table for discussion until such time as they go and come for the the part that's read right now right and so when we talk about economic sustainability on top of that it's important to highlight that 30 60 the mirror bells building which runs parallel to valley road has leases that run through 2031 and that any discussion of removing valley road as is proposed by the master plan could not happen without the landlords signing off on that and having some path for the tenants that are in that building to do to go somewhere like it's not part of the reason that the valley road is tied to that commercial building is because it was anticipated or contemplated that they would happen together there isn't any there hasn't been any discussion isn't any interest and functionally any way to close valley road while the mirror bells building is still there that's just not part of what we're doing here so I hear where where staff is at it's just not what the intent of the master plan is I would just add to if if traffic is the infrastructure that is of concern six is the going to be the least generator of traffic because it's meant for beta staff at this point in time you mean the red phase the green phase will be the least traffic generator green phase out of the group of buildings that we have Marlar what are your thoughts about that um I would I think that there's some confusion about what's being discussed and I think that it might be something if we discuss this at a later date I would like to um come up with a way to make more clear what we're trying to get at here okay so we'll put a pin in this I would like that okay okay last comment until we go back this is um we want to know more about the formal management structure well I guess this is my chance to uh our chance to ask a question in terms of what the concern is around the proposed management structure and I'm going to turn to Marla because she's the one who posed the the comment so who will the city turn to when um the commitments when says as you were mentioning um you have someone building the building up along Wilson road that's not beta and not the airport who can the city turn to and say no no no you must compel them to do what the master plan says because you are the owner of the master plan the permit runs but the permit runs with the land it doesn't run with the owner so if if for instance beta was bought and somebody else wanted to do something or if the airport wanted to do something there because the master plan is in place the findings of fact and the decisions that are part of that master plan flow to the entity that would want to take on that project we can't because we're coming before you and proposing this master plan with these boundaries that does not go away just because a third party comes in and wants to build a building whether it's on behalf of beta on behalf or on behalf of the airport who's the landowner they would have to comply with these no different than if it was beta doing it or the airport doing it themselves for that matter I think that and I don't understand this fully because it never happened in my time but mark may know this a little bit better I think that this is a little bit of a response to um situations where you know the conditions in the master plan like you were talking about talk about um relationships between phases and um if there's different responsible parties for different phases I think that there has been a problem in the past um with those creating those relationships between the phases I don't know if mark that rings a bell for you or not it it doesn't really ring a bell what what it kind of goes to and this is a more of a specific issue but I kind of you know I think I know what you're what you're getting at but it's sort of like you know when a project provides an easement to another adjacent parcel and you know it's for a subdivision of residential homes and suddenly the project gets triggered on the adjacent parcel and people come in and you know put finish the road off and everyone in the neighborhood pissed off because it wasn't envisioned or no one knew that this is going to happen I think what my I think and it's not a direct correlation a direct comparison but you know who do we what happens if down the road no one goes and builds that additional building you know like it's the last phase but it's one of the crucial phases and it never gets built who who do we talk to if it goes with the land well and that's one of the unique things that I would argue about this master plan right the the majority the major portions the most important portions of the infrastructure happen in phase one the blue phase and the orange phase okay almost all of the public infrastructure is in place the artwork is in place the roadways are in place the sidewalks are in place the parking is in place the stormwater management systems are in place the bulk of what needs to happen here is is in place to support what beta needs to do when we roll out on phase two of that plan the pieces that we're talking about the red and the green are really they're supported by all of the work that's being put in place right now they're not contributing to what beta needs to operate the building or what the community would want from a rec path or a bike path or a roadway or a network whether it's somebody for recreation or public services fire ems those sorts of things that infrastructure that backbone if you will is in place in phase one and phase two of the assembly building okay does that I guess the answer to the question is the owner of the affected parcel I don't know how you can break it down any finer than that when you're particularly when you're looking out over a six or presumably what's going to ultimately become a 10-year plan again I mean isn't that your point yeah yeah well his point is that in 10 years it might not be his might not be right well in three years it might not be his yeah but I think that's not that's almost I mean the word I was going to use is not good I don't think that's a valid argument anything can happen but that doesn't matter it's what is now and you're the you're the developers of this you're the owners and so I would think you should be responsible even if you sub it out to somebody you're still responsible well mark is mark was the original idea of this language to specify actual people you're asking me yeah was that to me Frank yeah that's addressed to you because you seem to be the one familiar with where this language comes from I think it's no I'm not a response to what has gone poorly in the past and that's why I asked mark but what are we asking for exactly we asking for an organization chart for who's who with names the buck stops yeah about who's who's responsible well it says to include all principles or entities with direct control over responsibility for the financing permitting construction and completion development under the master plan is it something we ask of all applicants for master plans all applicants under the new ldr's I'm not sure there's been a master plan right it's gone through this yet we're the first so well let's drill real drill down a little so it's possible to do that to create essentially an organization chart with responsibilities attached to the box to the people in the boxes but with the understanding but that's the present organization box without restricting without restricting the the ability to transfer the property later in that hypothetical so you could do that right yeah it's really the plan right now is this understanding that that may change if if if the property chip but there are assigned roles whether you know whatever the individual names are attached to right and those roles were identified on page 31 of 32 in the original submission under section 9 management plan we we acknowledge in there that the land owner is the airport that the developer is beta that the capital assets are divided as we described here and there are no community assets in in the way that they're being deeded to the community there's community assets that are part of them the master plan but they run with the land owner they don't get transferred to the city so that that struck that piece minus the three boxes frank is what's described on page 31 of 32 in the original in the application okay but i think the the requirement is looking for something a little more granular is it not more tomorrow i guess the reason we made this comment is because it talks about direct control and responsibility for completion of development under the master plan and they specifically say in their application that responsibility for future phases is uncertain and so i think that what john's point is is they should say well for right now we're saying beta is responsible or we're saying the airport is responsible for those future phases and we may sub that out we didn't say it was undetermined what we said was development management responsibilities for the balance of the master plan will be determined based on the specific ownership structure of that parcel slash project which is no different than what community drive did um when in that industrial piece right they didn't give you part and parcel for every parcel they those parcels were intended to be sold off and as you said this is a new requirement i don't i think that i think that the point that the board is making is that it doesn't have to represent who will ultimately build it it just needs to be who's responsible for holding the ownership of the master plan until it gets legally handed off to someone else in other words if you're concerned there we would say it runs with the land it's not the entity that holds it is the land the beta and the airport are inconsequential in that we're the ones acting on behalf right now but at the end of the day the permits all the terms and conditions all the decisions facts but all of that runs with the land right but the new requirement seems to be asking to to sign that further under agreed it's just that that requirement is is broad and doesn't provide any specific end goal in terms of what it's trying to do outside of what the city or the purpose of the ldr's already which is to create findings of fact a decision that runs with the land to ensure that what we've brought before you at some point unless it's amended or lapsed that that's what gets built regardless of whether it's the airport beta or a third party yet to be determined okay yeah i guess the the land isn't a principal or an entity though so i think my root of this is based on the discussion is they're looking for a backstop of like if when that if that's not but there's no way to back stop it's a real estate development project i i yeah but there's no backstop the backstop is the permit on the land which then if somebody buys the land or wants to develop it differently they have to come before the board and ask for a change that makes sense to me i i don't know i don't know that we have to be to death all i can speak to is if we if we're not saying the current CEO of beta is responsible for 10 years then all we can say is what they've said i think isn't that right if i could maybe jump in i think i think part of it so if you want to build it differently you got to come back for a master plan amendment but who do we go knock on the door if number seven doesn't get built i think that's that's for for us from a planning zoning site like that's a that's an attractive building it's right on the street i understand it's the last phase it's also maybe the most financially well complex phase maybe the thinnest margins but who do we knock on to talk about south burlington acting in the face of some interaction on the part of a of a permit holder i mean you know presumably the the the the planning department is the planning and zoning is responsible for enforcement however they go about it but who are we directing that enforcement action with the seat to the boss but it's a master plan what's the enforcement action the this is a master plan this is a vision on how we see this campus coming together it's not an absolute it's not intended to be an absolute in fact you go through the regulations and everything that that the LLARs ask for it's a framework for something to be done on a piece of property which happens to be the 40 acres that we're talking about it's much different than what it is that you're asking for that's not the intent of a master plan it's not the intent of what at least as we read the regulations what they're trying to get at there's no it could change in three years it could change in five years it could change in 10 years the goal is to be collaborative in terms of how we responsibly develop that piece of property to the benefit of the community the environment and beta not in other words it can lie fallow look right it can lie fallow until somebody wants to do something and then whenever whoever that person is that wants to do it at that time has to comply with the master plan and they become responsible if what you're looking for though and here's here's where i think the rub is coming if i'm this is confusing but if i if i understand it correctly what you seem to be concerned about if there's some public amenity you want like a piece of infrastructure that's been deferred to a later plan traffic signal is in this project all right but if it's been deferred to a later plan presumably it's not let's look at the logic of it and it may not be correct it may not be what you mean if it can if it's been deferred to a later phase in the plan then presumably we have determined it's not really necessary until that phase is developed and if that phase and is not available then it's not necessary but the minute somebody wants to develop it then they have to provide the amenity you might want the amenity in advance but if you do i mean you got to say so now right okay so for instance and i know we're short on time here so we're not even short we're beyond short on time you know the good example along those lines is the the artwork piece that the installation that i talked to paul about right there is a requirement that prior to beta opening phase two of the building in order for us to use the second part of the building the public art installation has to be complete there is a there is a piece similar to what you were referencing now you could get very technical and talk stormwater and all of those things could fall into exactly what you outlined there frank and that's our view of the master plan process and and those commitments as well not whether or not a building is going to get built but what are the the infrastructure pieces or the the public components that are important to the project at a specific point in time as the project grows yeah if we had it i think i'm getting close to get my mind around but if we have a concern about a specific specific piece of infrastructure absolutely getting built i think we have to locate it up front in a phase that we know is going to get built south village is a classic example of this it's in my backyard i mean they're the roadway network when when the road extensions got built were not should have been determined based on certain housing quantity triggers after you build this house you gotta build that road water under the bridge it's all done now but that's more in line i think frank we're you're trying to get to here in this yeah okay i don't know this is a bit of a red herring for me this this yeah we're not going to resolve i think we need to i think we need to think on this i think we need to just um think on consolidating the red and green phases and then we need to think and then we need to circle back to um some of the ones that we said we were going to circle back to so we're going to need to continue this and we're going to need to vote on continuing um so i was looking at schedule um i have an hour that i can give to stuff this and the other one on the next meeting as long as you're not going to submit anything new beyond what you handed us tonight we would not submit anything new we pick up where we left off just cleaning up and summarizing what was said tonight and that sort of thing yep okay um then it wouldn't be a big lift for staff to put this on the next agenda i think an hour is probably enough to get through this in the site plan feels feels about right okay okay all right so um i'm going to move that of the board continue uh applications mp2102a of beta air and site plan application sp22056 of beta technologies to an upcoming meeting on March 7th second second okay all in favor of the motion say aye aye opposed okay the motion is carried and let's just take a second to see if anyone has any public comments hearing none thank you for your patience and we'll see you back here in a couple weeks likewise this is not an easy thing to do it's complicated that's for sure especially being first out of the gate on on new regs on both sides so thank you thank you um do you want to do minutes at another meeting yes okay i am would you like to officially end the meeting the meeting i am going to officially end the meeting you can okay yes thank you all all right meeting ended at 10 106 thank you