 I'm going to call this meeting to order of the DRB. What is it? Mace. It's April 17th. Wow. It felt like spring already after last weekend, right? And so at this time, Meredith is going to do a quick overview of the remote meeting procedures. I should call them the hybrid meeting procedures. All right. So I am going to be sharing my screen. This is more for people who are watching, hmm, everybody who, I'm going to just go and mute some people because I have the power to do that, and that was some awesome background music, but not, there we go, all right. So the stuff that you're going to see on your screen is more for people who are watching this meeting via Orca Media, but the things I say are applicable for everybody who's on remotely. So for those viewing tonight's development review board meeting via Orca Media, you can participate in tonight's discussion via the Zoom platform through either video or telephone access options. If you want to join the Zoom meeting with video options, you can type this link into your web browser and it should pop you right up into the Zoom meeting. I will have to let you in, but I will get a notification of that. Alternatively, you can call into this phone number and when prompted, put in this meeting ID, and again, I'll get a prompt and let you into tonight's meeting. If anybody is trying to access the meeting and having problems, please email me at mcrandall at montpillier-vt.org. I will be monitoring my email throughout the meeting. For those attending via Zoom, please make sure that your Zoom name includes both your first and last name, so we know who we're speaking with and to assist us with calling on you as well as the recording secretary making the minutes. Note that turning on your video is optional. For everyone attending remotely, please keep your microphone on mute when you're not speaking to reduce background noise. Note also that the Zoom chat function should be reserved for troubleshooting or logistics questions only. If you have a question or comment about an item on tonight's agenda, please raise your hand either physically or by using the raise hand button on your toolbar. And then when you've been called on, you can unmute yourself. Please make sure to state your full name and address if you're making a comment on a permit application. In the event the public is unable to access this meeting, it will be continued to a time and place certain. I will now hand the meeting back over to the chair. All righty. The agenda. We have a motion. So moved. Motion from Kevin's. Second. All those in favor? The agenda is approved for this evening. Okay. I do have a couple of comments this evening. I just want to thank everyone for filling in while I've been out recusing myself from multiple applications and everything like that. You know, I would love to be here. But, you know, I did do some sort of thinking about this, and I'm happy to keep being the chair and everything like that. Moving forward. But, you know, that VHP. Design, you know, surveying, full service engineering firm. We have other people that are members of boards across the state. And so we've been communicating internally just about that. We have consistency about, you know, if an employee is on the board and we are involved, you know, there will be an recusal just to keep it, you know, simple and consistent. And so that is the case moving forward. You know, and forward. And I am honored to have a vice chair slash co-chair. Maybe we should amend the regs to include that as the name of it. But, yeah, that's the story. And although it's not VCFA specifically, you know, we are still involved in the, you know, permitting of the applications after the Charles Street application this evening. So I will be turning it over to Sharon, you know, after the first application. And I think that's it. Does anyone have any questions on the board about that? All right. So next order of business is the minutes from 3. 20. And I would make a comment. Motion by Sharon. Sweet. We have a second. And how do we vote? Aye. All right. Those are approved. I recuse myself. I was not at that meeting and was not the chair. Okay. It moves us to our first order of business. In the bulk of this meeting, which is 13 Charles Street. Who do we have here? Presenting on the half of this application. Is this Devin? Yes. Remotely. Remotely is Devin. Alrighty. Hi. My name is Devin Green. I'm the owner and resident at 13 Charles Street. And I've submitted an application. To remove a failing retaining wall and a garage. And replace it with a new retaining wall and. A carport. We're not increasing the footprint of the building. And the main reason I think for this permit is the. Hold on one second. Thank you so much. Thank you. My name is Devin Green. I'm the owner and resident at 13 Charles Street. And I've submitted an application to. Remove a failing retaining wall and a garage. Thank you so much. That was a great opening. Great opening summary. You're moving things along quickly, which is. Sorry. So. Anyone else here to speak on the Charles Street application. Other than yourself. That will be providing testimony this evening. Yeah, I know Shayna Casper had a question about the application. Shayna, if you think you might be testifying. Maybe raise your hand or just let us know if you think you might. Speak about this application. I just had never been to meeting and I got the thing in the mail. And I was like really curious about the meeting. So that's why I'm here. Sorry. Thanks. Okay. Okay, Devin, we're just going to swear you in real quickly as a. Witness for your testimony this evening. And would you raise your right hand to be sworn in as a witness. Okay. Great. Do you sell me swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth under the pains and penalties of perjury. I do. Oh, great. Wonderful. And you provided an excellent opening summary and we will now have Meredith provide a brief technical summary of this and then give you the reins back. Okay. So for the board, this as Devin summarized, this involves the demolition of a garage and rebuild a retaining wall and addition of a carport. The reason this is before the board tonight is because it involves steep slopes of greater than or equal to 30%. The actual square footage involving those slopes is pretty minimal and mainly dealing with some exposed ledge and revising the drainage around the footprint of the building to direct water away from the foundation. So the main, the key determination that the board needs to make tonight is whether the application complies with the steep slopes standards and staff has estimated that it does, but it's the board's determination to make. Wonderful. Okay, Devin, I'm going to turn it back over to you. But I think what would be helpful for this, if we can throw the, like one of the site plans up on the screen, probably a good visual for everybody. Yeah. So Devin, I'm going to share my screen if that's okay with you. And if you need me to move somewhere else, you just tell me. That works for me. So you can have Devin start talking while I'm getting to the right page. Yeah. Yeah. So go ahead Devin while she scrolls to it. Yeah. So the, the square footage is about 290 square feet of the 30% grade. But it is next to sort of adjoining other 30% gradient. And that is actually bedrock primarily. So we don't anticipate any movement there and we're not blasting into the bedrock. We're keeping it as is. And so I think that is all I really have there is, you know, I've worked with the contractors in terms of erosion efforts. And so I think we have everything covered there. If you have any questions, I'm happy to answer them. So just so that the public knows if that's okay. The areas here in bluish green, those are the areas where there's 30% or greater slopes that are going to be disturbed in one way or another. This over here is sort of the drainage swale area and a little bit into where they're building a new retaining wall. There's a tiny bit here that's going to get graded. And then this area over here I believe is the area that's mostly the bedrock where I think that what's the quote unquote disturbance is going to be laying down some new soil and some matting to help direct the water away. So changing the grade here by putting some stuff on top of the bedrock. So it's not something that's going to disturb nearby slopes or disrupt them or weaken them. So are those blue areas over 30% or all areas of grading? Those are the blue areas of 30% or greater slopes that will be changed in some way or another. I can zoom in a little bit more. There's other areas where the grade will change. So like the solid lines or the new proposed grades and the dotted lines are the existing. But the rest of this, if everything else had been happening and just not the areas in blue-green, this would have never come before the board because it's not enough of a disturbance of steep enough slopes to trigger board review. Right. Okay. So to guide us with some questions here, I guess it's going to move down for those following along to the page four of the staff report, which sort of talks about this project as it's relation to section 3007, which is our steep slopes. And this was one of the most recent updates, right, Meredith? It was actually one of probably the second updates to the zoning regs. The first one, we fixed just the chart about what percentage an area of slopes triggered different reviews. And then the next big change was revising the steep slopes provision and making sure it was clear as to what triggered, what was allowed. Perfect. So section 3007c is what we just discussed. That's what requires an engineered planner report and a hearing for slopes over 30%. As we've seen, that information exists. It was done by DeWolf Engineering. Is that correct? Yeah. That's right. Perfect. And so, you know, here we are. We've satisfied number C and letter C of 3007, unless board members have any concerns or questions related to that. So seeing none, it is our decision and discretion here as the board to decide if this plan and report that was provided and the site conditions are sufficient. And there's a list of criteria that we have. And I think it maybe makes sense to go through them one by one. Pretty straightforward. And so, if we go to letter D of 3007. It's letter D of the report. Section 3007h, just for anybody following along at home. Perfect. Thank you, Meredith. There's only so many options for lettering the section. I never realize how complicated that must be. So we sort of have a charge. The development on steep slopes shall be safe and not have an undue adverse impact on the slope stability. Development therefore shall be designed to limit the amount of disturbance, clearing of existing natural vegetation and impervious surface in order to minimize potential for erosion, stormwater runoff, flooding, water quality and impairment. So I see here you're proposing some drain pipes and catch basins and whatnot to capture things. Devin, you want to just like summarize that real quickly with what's going on and what you're proposing. I think you've sort of summarized it. We have some drainage that will help. You know, right now we do not have those drain pipes to avoid erosion. So it looks like you have the slopes area on the north side of the house draining into catch basin, going into some pipes and then out into the city's, you know, catchment system. And then, you know, on the rear of the garage, you know, it appears that quite pretty small in size. And the drainage will be going on the south side of the, there, I'm looking at the... It goes down. This is like a swale here. A swale there, all right? Yeah. I think this area will still go this way. And then on the southwest corner of the house, looks like we're pretty much just putting it back to the grade at which it is right now. Is that correct? That's correct. Right. All right. So I don't see any issues there. I think a well thought out plan. And no new slopes will be, you know, created greater than 30%. That seems to be correct with your plan here. That's right. And that seems to be staff's finding also. And, you know, preserve distinctive natural features. You know, I don't, I think this is pretty minimal. You're working with the buildings that are there. And it's a very typical situation in Montpelier. So I think, you know, we're good, we're good there. And then, you know, the next one's about maintain the preexisting rate and retain the pattern of stormwater leaving the property. It does seem like this is a much more engineered and thought out plan than what previously existed. And I think I'd note the applicant is, you know, taking strides to make things as conforming as possible with that regard. Yes. And then, you know, produce a final grade that's compatible with the surrounding natural terrain. It seems appropriate. Does any board members have any comments or questions thus far? Looks like a pretty solid project. I think so too. I think. Renovation and replacement and upgrading. Wonderful. Excellent. Wonderful. And the preparation is well done. Absolutely. All right. Let's make sure we're not missing anything. We'll skip down maybe to page six of the staff report. So staff has suggested that we find this project has minimal disturbance with steep slopes and complies with three thousand seven. I think I would agree. I'm sensing the same from the board as we just discussed. And that appears to be the issue that it Meredith. I had no questions for you. It's just I can't officially make the determination. No, I get it. So yeah, all the all the things in red in here are just the here's the standard you have to look at. But I had flagged no issues for finding that it was actually in compliance. A lot of those steep slope standards actually don't appear to apply to this project because nothing new is being built. There's no rework really of what's there now on any grand scale. Absolutely. And yeah, as Kevin said, I think well documented great plan by the engineer, I think going above and beyond in this instance to create a great project. So I would accept a motion if that's the direction the board wants to go. Failing retaining wall and garage construct a new retaining wall and build a new carport on land involving slopes of 30% at 13 Charles Street as presented in application number Z dash twenty twenty three dash zero zero three zero and supporting and supplemental materials. Motion by Jean second second by Kevin. I guess we'll do a roll call vote here. Jean, how do you vote? Yes. Kevin. Yes. Sharon. Yes. Yes. Kevin. Yes. And then Joe. Yes. Is that it? Michael. Yes. I'm here. Michael. Yes. Perfect. And Rob myself votes yes. So that is unanimously approved. Thank you. Meredith, do you have any final parting words for applicant here? So Devin, this is your verbal approval for it to be official. We need to do a written decision because there's no conditions that go along with that. Once the written decision gets pulled together and signed by Rob as the chair, we'll be able to issue that and the zoning permit at the same time. And so we'll be in touch with you when that's ready. And you can either once, once you get that, you'll be able to either come and pick it up at the planning office or we'll mail it to you via certified mail. So you'll have that option once we get it all pulled together. Great. Thank you so much. We'll get it to you as soon as we can. Just note that I am out of the office at training for the rest of the week. So I won't be crafting many decisions this week. Well, I hope you have fun. Thanks. Thank you, Devin. Thanks. Bye. At this point, I will turn the meeting over to Sharon for the duration. I am going to scooch over just so I can see the zoom participants. If there are any. Yep. Okay. So our next application that we're looking at tonight is the 35 college street. Do we want to have the applicants come up to the table? Feel free to grab some more chairs. I wasn't sure how many of you were going to be coming to speak at the table, but everybody who's going to talk is going to be able to talk into that microphone. Which moves around pretty easily. It does move around fairly easily, but try not to disconnect anything. This is a multi-tiered system. You can also flex back and forth if you need to. Yeah, just slide it over. Don't disconnect that microphone. Okay. Should we swear people in first? Yeah, I think we'll swear people in first. So everybody who's going to testify, which looks like there's a table full here, and then anybody in the audience who's interested in giving testimony on this project or anybody who is on the zoom. If you would raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth under the pains and penalty of perjury? I do. Excellent. Meredith, do you want to give us a brief? Yes. I'll do it. Well, maybe I'll have the applicant give the... Whichever you want. Six one. Let's have the applicant go and just give us a brief description of the 35 College Street, and then we'll get the tech from Mary. Okay. Hello, I'm Casey Ellison. I live in Middlesex, and we're here to apply for some conditional uses to be shifted to permanent uses on 35 College Street, which is the Gary Library. Would you like me to say more or is that a good start? Maybe what... What the uses are. So, yeah, the ones that we're applying for our restaurant and theater performance and exhibition convention or conference structure. Okay. That actually brings to mind something that I wanted the board to discuss before we got further into the applications. If you read the staff report, Meredith talked about her interpretations as the planning administrator that I guess I can pull the question up here exactly, that personal and professional services uses to find that's the establishment that sells specialized skills and knowledge, and that she is basically incorporating these. Do you want to just state that? Yeah. So it's going to be part of my technical overview. Okay. You got it. Because it's a point that's applicable in both applications, I think if we can reach agreement on that, whether we're either going to agree with her interpretation or not, then that would save some time doing that ahead of time. Yeah. So if it's okay, Casey, I'm going to rephrase something that you said there. Yeah, go ahead. So the only... We're not... There's no asking for conditional use to become a permitted use with this kind of application. The request is for actual conditional use approval for these uses to be implemented at 35 College Street. And as I have been interpreting things for the last five years under these zoning regs, the restaurant use, the exhibition conference center, the ones that Casey mentioned, those are clearly conditional uses. They're easy to define. One of the other aspects of the business is more of the offices for the health and wellness practitioners, which is a whole variety of different types of people. And as I have been interpreting things the last five years, all of those have been fitting into the personal and professional services use, which is a permitted use in mixed use residential, the zoning district we're dealing with. Because the personal and professional services definition covers a whole variety of things, including a quote-unquote spa. There's no definition of a spa anywhere in there. But the other possible use that I found that might apply to something like this that I have rolled out in numerous situations so far over the last five years is a medical clinic. And medical clinic in mixed use residential would be a conditional use, not permitted, like personal and professional services. But medical clinic is listed in the use table under not commercial uses, but this other category of uses that is more like a hospital, a big thing with lots more public access where you don't necessarily have by appointment. So it's a matter of scale. I look at it as a matter of scale. That's how I've been interpreting it. So I have issued administrative permits for acupuncture clinics, massage therapist offices, shifting of optometrist offices under the personal and professional services use, because that's where it seems to fit the best. A medical clinic in my mind is something that's bigger. It's something where you don't necessarily have appointments, maybe more like an urgent care clinic where people just show up or maybe something that runs vaccine clinics where you suddenly have a bunch of people show up, not a strictly by appointment certain office hours situation. And that's how I've been doing it. But since it is now before the board, you guys have to sort of relook at that interpretation. So maybe let's just do that right now. Yeah. I think it because if depending on what your determination is there, other aspects of the application may need to be amended. The other items can still be discussed, but that particular issue. Thoughts? Do people have thoughts about this? Okay. I mean, I think that logic holds for me. Could you just restate it again? I know that, but I'm trying to wrestle this. So this application is all set up and I did the analysis as the offices for the various health and wellness aspects of 150 Main Street's project fall in the personal and professional services category, which includes in the examples a spa. So things like for me and I think of a spa, sauna, massage, you might get a room of therapy. Maybe you'll meet with a nutritionist, right? There's all these aspects. But some people might say, you might have a psychologist there or what if it's a naturopath? So where does it veer off into a medical service? And because the definition of medical clinic specifically is the use of a structure or part of a structure to provide health care services to people primarily as outpatients. That is immensely broad. All right. Participants, patients. But a spa is specifically listed as an example in personal and professional services. A spa is a specific item as an example of what can be a personal or professional service. That's pretty clear. Right. Exactly. And that's why I've been going that way. So I guess the other thing that I wanted to add to that just in, you know, thinking about that issue is that if you drive through literally any neighborhood in Montpelier, there are a variety of personal and professional services that are available that seem very similar to what this is offering. And I think that your interpretation of scale is important and it seems consistent with what you've been doing and it seems like it would not be a hard thing to be consistent with going forward. So I don't live. And as an administrative note, the lack of clear definitions of how you distinguish this type of wellness clinic from, say, a doctor's office from an urgent care clinic from a 24-7 place is something that I've talked to the planning director about and is high on the list of clarifications to make in the zoning so that there are bright line tests going forward. Well over the last five, four or five years, I mean there's been a sea of change in this area, you know, particularly with the home-based systems. So I don't have any problem moving forward on that. Gene, I need to hear from the applicant a little more as to, I'm a little confused with, so with the project's description as far as also holding spaces for entertainment or performing arts or community versus just, I just wanted to hear from the applicant as far as possible. So that's a separate part. Is it? So I just wanted, because this particular thing about personal and professional services was in both applications and it was sort of up in the air and it would mean that we had to kind of readdress everything. If we didn't agree with Meredith, I thought we should just get it on the record that we did. Okay. And I'll jump in to also agree with your interpretation in that you're looking at scale and trip generation as opposed to a personal interpretation of the nutrient services and agreed that should be clarified. And you've got a long list of things that need to be clarified, so let's get this on the list too. Okay. Awesome. Thank you. Cute. I haven't been necessarily doing it wrong for the last five years. Okay. So do you want to maybe like do a little quick technical wrap up on the rest of it? Yes. And then we'll turn it back over to Gene's question. Awesome. Now that that's dealt with and I already summarized about the change of views. So the reason now this is before the board is because some of the uses that are being proposed in the flex space at 35 college are conditional uses. And this is a little different from some applications because there isn't one specific use with a specific number of square feet that is happening on the first floor of which is the upper floor but the first floor of 35 college street. It's a flex space so that for some type of events it might all be a pop-up restaurant for almost all of the 4,000 square feet is a restaurant for that evening or two evenings. But then other times it may be that the restaurant part isn't in use at all and you've got some leftover maybe aspect of the academic library going on in there in a corner that during a restaurant period would just sort of be nice ambiance in the background and then you've got you know some other event where you've got people showing up. So what I directed the applicant to do is to say okay here is the most intensive possible use for the 4,000 square feet to then look through for conditional use review. So that is the big question for the board. Do note that the staff report does not incorporate any of the public comments that I sent around to you all that came in after the staff report was published. Some of those comments have some suggestions or questions that might be amenable to conditions and then there's a couple minor questions in here outside of the conditional use review criteria one about a whether or not a specified loading area is needed and then a landscaping determination but those are the big question is does this application meet the conditional use criteria and are there any conditions that the board wants to add into any potential approval to deal with some of the public comments? So let's make you go back to the applicant and hear more about your project. So whoever's talking needs to have the microphone right there so that it can be recorded for minutes and everybody remotely can hear. So what would you like to hear right now? You are proposing a flex space maybe a little bit more about that yes so basically what we're proposing is to understand whether we'll be able to have a space that includes food service and drink service so alcohol served food served we'd like to have a space for events to occur so theater space cab array space small concert venue space and basically what would be happening would be kind of a variety of things overlaying during business hours so we've kind of outlined that there would potentially be business hours all day long so 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. on the weekdays and potentially later on the weekends so basically you know things would be happening at different times during the day so in the morning we would you know imagine kind of like more of a juice and coffee bar situation with some food served and potentially kind of a co-working space in the main room and kind of going into the evening these are just examples for example the co-working isn't something we've settled on but it's something we're discussing going into the evening with more kind of food service happening all day long and when I say food service we're not talking about like a full restaurant we're talking about more of a cafe without a hood sort of a less intensive food service situation with potentially some take out or grab and go kind of things as well and into the evening where we would have kind of varying arts events, concert events, theater events occurring sort of like a multimedia situation with the food service and drink service serving that as well and this is all kind of the upstairs space we've also talked about having potentially some office spaces we have a there's a couple smaller spaces in the room that would potentially be rented out or use as part of co-working what we're envisioning is sort of like a multi-layered multi-dimensional thing that would bring kind of life into the space at all all hours am I forgetting anything we're just talking about the upstairs right now yeah yeah we've talked about a food incubator space as well so what that would mean to us in this space would be potentially having local smaller food businesses that maybe don't want to start their own restaurant have like a space to start out in and we've talked about featuring kind of pop-ups of different foods the one that I keep latching on to personally is I don't know if anyone is familiar with me so hungry at Bolton they serve like Japanese rice ball sandwiches with nori wrapped around them and me so soup so things like that where you don't need a really big prep space but you can make kind of a nice fun product and have kind of the towns folk get like a little more variety with foods that we don't have and all that kind of stuff and also serve the help people have a little bit easier time starting up and sharing space with others sharing space and expenses okay questions from the board about the content of their flex space you received all the comments that have been given out do you want to try to maybe address some of those sure which one would you like to start with I was I had two questions that I thought were interesting was reversal of the direction of the one way traffic you know just thinking about that space I was like well that kind of makes more sense that's what we had wanted have you spoken with the college about that possibility I mean that would be their decision correct that's unclear we had been told that maybe it was DPW's decision they seemed right so if you were to make it two lanes that would be a potential issue I think I forwarded Cory Line from Department of Public Works he's our traffic guy he said that reversing traffic there would not be an issue from DPW's standpoint great it would be a part of a probably in conjunction with this approval an amendment to that site plan to have the traffic flow change a little bit but technically once you start changing traffic flow you have to kind of look at where your parking is and so it might mean having to do more formalized striping of parking spaces as part of the approval but I mean I think that's even if it's just a formalizing where those parking spaces are and making it consistent with what was on the site plan potentially be a condition of approval or it could be something where they just have to come back but that would be doable I think so that was one thing that I thought when I was looking at the application I know that there were some neighbor concerns about noise can I just real quickly speak back to that driveway thing just to make it clear that that is something that we had been really interested in and so we would love to work with that and we would love to reverse the direction and we would be willing we'd love to hear what that would take it just traffic wise it really seemed to make more sense people do drive in it that way anyway I do it all the time so I think to get that as a full one way or another probably what it would entail is having a more detailed site plan of the parking and the traffic flow with clarity on where signs would be changing sure and it would be something that would apply not just to you guys but to the whole parcel so probably something to bring all the players in since you're going to do it anyway if you want to change where some of the parking spaces are to memorialize them that could be part of it without necessarily adding any parking spaces great you would need to shift like do not enter signs to the back of college hall so that you didn't get people going down that direction and signs that indicated like where the exit was which way you're supposed to go to get out that kind of thing would need to be taken care of probably because everybody's used to that being an exit having there be some sort of little entrance sign so people start understanding where the traffic flow is different and something to check with probably the college about reaching out to some of the larger service providers like trash and everything who maybe have been used to not having to turn around and be able to just go out that way I don't know if they do or not because that's narrow but the coordination parcel wide with how traffic flow is so that there's new directional signage everywhere to make clear to everybody so that's going to be part of our the shared agreements we're going to be working on with the college and the other purchasers so the signage will be part of that as well so signage and then restriping for clarification on where people are I think is something that could be all worked in so on the noise in terms of have you done any kind of like testing or measuring of noise not at this moment in time but we do have a lot of anecdotal evidence from the past use of the space that it's been used that way quite a bit quite frequently with some pretty loud concerts and there haven't been any formal complaints filed by the neighbors so that's the evidence that we have at this point Auditorium you've got to be near the microphone or nobody can see it concerts in the auditorium and in the library as well and college hall yeah so have there been concerts in the library as far as I know there have been events in the large events there correct that we've heard about but yeah more concerts I guess in the gym and the other thing yeah but in terms of Katie can tell us more do you want to come up to the microphone talk to it come talk to the microphone and just identify yourself we're at Vermont College of Fine Arts so we've regularly held board dinners there that have gone late into the evening there have been concerts our music composition program has had concerts in that space the natural place we normally have that in alumnus hall or in college hall but it's certainly a place that we've frequently used in a multi-purpose fashion we're also just thinking of proximity in terms of if it's alumnus hall it's potentially even closer to the neighbors who would be worried about noise so Gary being a little more removed and being kind of right in the same vicinity that's had very loud conferences or concerts we were thinking very loud very aggressive conferences that's horrible we're thinking that it's probably going to be a similar scenario hopefully do other people have questions I have a couple more but I don't need to do all the talking here Ellen I'm sorry Ellen Sardell and I used to be a member of the Green Mountain Film Festival we had events at the library and also the big space in the VCFA building and they went late at the library and we never had any issue or complaint filed against us and this is years ago I just thought I'd put that out great public with noise do we want to just bring in the public since we got a comment or not do we have people who have questions you're sticking to noise right now first since that's what opened it up let's stick with noise for right now anybody remotely have something they want to say about noise concerns I know there was Paul just as a reminder that in the written comments one of those was a concern about hours of operation and whether things could go later than 10 or not just because of the flex and the noise ordinance it has a drop the city noise ordinance has a drop of allowable noise after a certain hour but there's no like set hours of operation or anything like that right I guess I guess my understanding is it sounds it sounds like they have had things there and the noise ordinances have been in place and there has been a complaint so seems to work for me um the other question that I had and I think it was Paul Carnahan that brought up the locations of the dumpsters that is a long walk at night you know for bringing trash out when you're done with your restaurant shift I just uh I don't know if there's I see Katie getting right up to talk about that I read through the comments earlier today and talked to my director of facilities and he said it would be really easy to put some um smaller bins much closer to the building just you know that dumpster is there so that if we need it it's available but we certainly can make adjustment so that it's more convenient for for folks okay I thought that was a legitimate concern um Meredith? if that's the solution on that just a note that it would be part of the amended site plan that would include the parking situation the location of them needs to be identified and they would probably need to have depending on where they are they might need some kind of screening or something um you know if they're viewable from the street if they're really tucked in behind the building we probably don't need to worry about screening um though you might want to comment think about whatever those bins are having some sort of bear proofing on them because there is a pretty big area of woods and wilderness back behind there so I guess there have been bear problems so that would be part of an amended a site plan that would need to be filed okay so the site plan needs to be amended to show a new location a bear proof dumpsters and if they have to do yeah bear proof dumpsters yes um perfect how do we flow them about 15 feet in the air the pulley system magic I guess I just if that's going to be an actual condition of the permit um I would request that it's not that specific yeah I don't know bear proof dumpsters are a thing that seems like a little bit out of no that's fine that is not a dumpster with a lid a dumpster a screened a screened dumpsters not bear proof that's on you guys and you'll be dealing with it right oh no we're not we're not asking for super fancy just something closer to your back door there was also a question about loading docs Meredith that you identified yeah so it's just it's a determination I think the board needs to make I based on the attestations in the application it doesn't look like there's going to be anything bigger than like single unit trucks coming there for deliveries there appears to be adequate space behind the existing building without having to adjust um the parking areas or designate a designated loading area like these are single unit trucks are going to pull up find a place to spark park out of those 38 spaces you know reload but the board needs to just confirm that they agree with that that it doesn't look like they need a designated loading pull up area any thoughts by board members we don't believe so no let me ask out of the 113 parking spaces behind the buildings is it all accessible at any given time during an event for some percent all the parking spaces the 113 parking spaces behind the buildings are they all accessible to say you had an evening event yeah no we're looking at a smaller number of those spaces being designated for us is that what you were thinking of designated for the Gary library they don't necessarily need to have specific ones under the zoning because all of the parking in the back is within the distance for having parking associated with a space and looking at their buildings under the minimum parking space requirements that we have in the zoning rigs if they're using the first floor of the Gary library at its max level for minimum parking needs as well as at the same time using all of the wellness center offices all the whatever treatment spaces they have they have enough out of the parking spaces that they have been agreed to on the parcel and probably your biggest the way I looked at it probably their biggest events would probably be more evening events or weekend events when maybe the treatment spaces wouldn't need parking so within the preview of what zoning can require my review is they have more than sufficient parking and then there's some public concerns regarding the parking on street parking residential versus non-residential I thought we got a very nice comment in the mail regarding that I really appreciated her take on that sort of semi-exclusionary unnecessary step to take do you want me to read any of that out on the record? I don't have to necessarily read it all so there was a comment from someone concerned about the potential for events using up on street parking especially the more residential streets versus say college street and there was a follow-up to that from Christine Zakai that made several points including that one the city zoning already calls for off street parking for residences in this neighborhood so residents are largely already parking on their own private property there was also a comment on if suddenly those side streets were resident only parking on the street isn't that going to cause problems when you have people visiting from town and they can't park on the street do you have to suddenly have special parking permits including when you have a service call there was also issues about once you start doing that to figure out some form of enforcement and then as Sharon noted I'm going to read this one verbatim resident only parking sends a clear message that non-residents are not welcome in an era where carefully cultivated culture wars seek to sow divisiveness between people of different economic circumstances different races people of different countries of origin etc I'd like to encourage your city to choose to be welcoming let's commit to having public goods like public streets so I thought that was great you're welcome and thank you for members of the public for raising all sorts of questions and thoughts yeah and generating some really good feedback let me see what else do we need to do here okay draft motion transportation impacts I'm sorry transportation impacts we're moving into the conditional use review analysis of the parts traffic alright so the section that we're going to be looking at next this is in front of me section 3303 traffic and I feel like the first part of this was handled primarily in the staff report in terms of trip generation it didn't seem like it was going to be an impact we review that I mean I'm you mean whether or not a full traffic study was necessary that part? yeah I mean I don't think a full traffic study is necessary and it seemed that the number of trips that you calculated were well within the acceptable range for that area that was the conclusion of Department of Public Works as well so that's good is that based on the on the uses that they're describing or do I explain that? yeah yeah walk us through that so what I asked the applicants to provide and I confirmed this with Cori Line who's our traffic person at the Department of Public Works the project management director analysis is comparing the quote-unquote existing uses so as that was an academic library use for that building and so doing an estimate of how many trips that generated you know it's somewhere between probably a peak library use and something a little less because VCFA was not a full residential institution the entire time but other members of the public also used the library so took a sort of conservative approach to how much traffic that would generate and then looked at the max potential traffic generation of the new uses which would be a high turnover restaurant based on the there's a ITE traffic manual that gives you these numbers this is what any traffic analyst is going to use and so looked at if the conditional use space was a high turnover full 4,000 square foot restaurant how many trips would that generate at the peak hour and then compare so you're looking at the increase in traffic in the neighborhood at nearby intersections and that's even if you look at this max capacity restaurant that increases less than 50 trips at the peak hour even in the evening you're not looking at the kind of new traffic impacts that according to our regulations require a more in-depth traffic study you know and like I said tried to try to use some sort of conservative numbers looking at the potential impact and sort of a medium range what's there existing knowing that it fluctuated with the DCFAs and a high turnover restaurant is more impact than a concert mm-hmm okay yep a high turnover restaurant has more people coming and going within that one hour it's not looking at how many parking spaces you need it's looking at how many trips because it's not about necessarily getting vehicles in it's how many new vehicles are you having going through all the nearby intersections all condensed into that period okay and you know a concert in a 4,000 square foot space isn't actually going to have that many traffic because you've got performance space right and then you have your space to mingle and there's layers in there also of like fire safety decode that we don't deal with but about what the capacity is of that space how many people they're allowed to have inside so that's the IT traffic generation looks at some of those things when they look at how many trips per hour I believe I have a question in the application there's lots of great information about the connectivity with downtown you know how well located this is for access by pedestrians and people cycling so just curious whether there's a plan for the additional bike infrastructure beyond what's already in the vicinity of the site we haven't fully detailed that yet but we have identified some spots that we'd like to put more bike racks and definitely have a lot of bikers in our crew so definitely on the having that facility can also encourage that behavior if people know there's a secure place to park a bike and we're definitely willing to make that a more detailed proposition as soon as that needs to be done that's definitely on our interest maybe include that on the site plan location of bike maybe you could do that or it could be if that's what you want for this one that's doable would that work for you guys within this cycle of having that on there I think that would be easy location and something rough on the volume yep we're having a point made here that it's part of the shared agreements that we need to be making with the condo association so we might have to actually converse with them about that as well but from our end it's very doable but we'll have to chat with the condo association agreements about that so just as a point if that's if the board wants to make a decision tonight something to think about is that there will be future applications for changes of use for these parcels and if the board was amenable to it the actual location of bike racks could be part of a future site plan amendment that's administrative it's a possibility you know in case because if they have to work with the condo association which hasn't been formed because none of the buildings have been sold so there's no actual new owners yet if they're trying to coordinate where those bike racks are so that they can be used by multiple uses then having that be a condition of this actual permit approval if that's where you're going might be a bit much so we could add something that just said that they will get back to us with the location though well but would they come back they might not come back to you right if it's otherwise yes it come back to me totally good with that I'm done yeah that could be that's a reference that we could just add to it we haven't had one we haven't had an application quite like this we have language noting some of the other issues that one would expect would be addressed when the condo use agreement is advanced maybe there's a time limit if by which there's no progress then there's an expectation that there's some site by site decision yeah so you're suggesting there be a condition of approval that the future condo association docs will is that what you're asking that there be something in the condo association documents that just seems out of our purview for this evening we can do that with certain like planned use development subdivisions but in this one that's a little hard um so you could just say that applicant has attested that there will be bike racks and that applicant will return to the zoning administrator for a you know site plan amendment when agreement on where those are has been it works new trips I think we're either other questions about traffic or cars or such the next one talks about the character of the neighborhood and the staff has found that is there is there not making any changes to exterior buildings that seems like that's a given um yeah for that sub part of character of the neighborhood right the architectural right aspect in the arts okay so also character of the neighborhood has architectural compatibility that certainly seems fine don't forget to speak up enough so they can hear you the microphone is for remote but if we have the PA system on it creates some weird echo so character of the neighborhood first deals with architectural and that obviously you're not changing anything so that's fine yards a lot of coverage in landscaping the staff found that it complied with it which also makes sense because there's not changing anything there the next one is the impacts of the use should be consistent with the neighborhood especially with respect to noise, hours of operation other features that define the area's character the existence of one conditional use in a neighborhood should not necessarily be interpreted as justification for similar conditional use to be located in that area so I think that we've talked about the noise um and so noise and performances there are no new lights proposed there's no grill or exhaust hood associated with the restaurant um and just we've talked about waste um other questions comments anywhere okay um I guess I would say that we have determined that the proposal does not have an undue adverse effect on the on the neighborhood and character of the neighborhood and I'm just looking to make sure we still have Mike Michael and Joe we do I'm still here yep nope I just I see you I just I was double checking that there were no hands no no okay and then um the last part I have here is three key determinations needed by the board prior to any motion I think we've dealt with them um confirm applicable uses specifically does the board agree with personal professional services and use determination for the ground floor proposal I think we did say yes to that um does the proposal require a designated loading area or is the current arrangement of the site sufficient my question I really feel like that's sufficient um and does the application satisfy the conditional use standards particularly that one the proposal won't have an undue adverse effect upon traffic in the area and that the impacts of the use will be consistent with the neighborhood especially with respect to noise hours of operation other features defining the college street use state neighborhood and I feel like we just talked about that yeah um are there questions are there testimony that people want to give anything any hands I see none okay it's a really long motion guys I'm sorry I know I had to be specific on this one because of the overlapping use situation um so we need someone to make a motion I don't make a motion would you like some notes she's added some conditions dang you did but there's really only one added conditioning okay the reverse direction of the road yeah and the recycling because this isn't actually a condition okay right so just an attestation of what's going to happen so that if the if the the right crack stuff doesn't come back at some point it is a violation of the permit because they attested to doing that but it doesn't have to be a condition okay so the only the only thing that would be added Abby yeah is do you want to do you think you can read my handwriting um is it the reverse the reverse access needs to be included on the site plan right uh okay provide all of this to I know what so I kind of feel like yeah sorry I'm wondering if similar to the conversation we had about the bike racks if the reversal of traffic could be part of that conversation that we have with the other potential owners we're certainly open to it we think it makes a lot of sense but it just made I'm just thinking about the new school which is um I want to have conversations about their buses I think they'll be open to it too but I would hate to have you make us do it if for some reason we can't so so does the board feel like sorry I need to go back to the microphone thank you Katie um so here's the question does the board feel like the reversal of traffic is essential to happen to do the approval of the conditional use approval or is it an option I would I would say no I would see it as an option okay but moving the trash is a requirement right having the second trash location so that they don't have to drag the trash across all the way across the parking lot is that a requirement or is that an option I think a requirement for their benefit yeah I think it's a requirement a benefit of the neighbors probably for instance like 11 o'clock dragging trash over so they could do this so so the findings of fact could find that they may come back for a revised site plan or the the parcel might at some point come for a revised site plan that has that reversed change it's an option right basically that the board is open to so it's a finding a fact before that actually happened there would need to be a new zoning permit by somebody some applicant and who's on the parcel would need to do it right it wouldn't necessarily have to be 150 main street it just because it's a property right it's a property change but they would need to come in with a updated site plan showing where their their new trash area is that's designated for the restaurant space or their their space does that right and they can just do that administrative that could just yeah that could be a that could just be a pre-permit condition of here's where we're going to put our trash if later on the parcel as a whole has a site plan that adjusts it because they've coordinated with the rest of the condo association that can be amended okay does that work okay a revised site plan so really it's just this motion here it's this motion here with the subject to the following condition that prior to permit issuance a revised site plan will be filed with the zoning administrator indicating the location of the second trash you know the next receptacle location so there's there's this red yellow highlight that's the option right so oh subject to the following condition of approval right is going to be in there one that prior to permit issuance applicant shall provide the zoning administrator with a revised site plan indicating where the secondary waste receptacle location will be five years of doing this is finally made some of it quick alright okay so I'm ready to make a motion so motion to grant the request for conditional use and minor site plan approval to change the uses in the Gary library building at 35 Collins street to a 4000 square foot of mixed use flex space on the first floor including conditional uses of restaurant eat-in or take-out performance theater and exhibition convention or conference structure conditional uses oh sorry conditional uses there twice that's okay the second conditional uses is a type of and permitted uses of museum gallery or exhibition hall or pavilion plus the existing library and academic institutional uses 286 square feet of personal and professional services uses for health and wellness center on the ground floor as presented in application Z 2023 0029 and supporting and supplemental materials subject to the following condition prior to permit issuance applicant shall provide zoning administrator with revised site plan indicating application of secondary waste separate receptacles the second let's do this by roll call gene yes Kevin yes Michael Joe Catherine yes Abby yes and I vote yes as well that's that thank you for everyone who testified number two I'm just going to pull that application up here that's that's all that one okay okay I just put this here okay awesome alright let's do this one this way you want me to go first on this one yes wait that open we got to re swear everybody in because it's actually a different hearing right we have officially closed that hearing we are now officially opening the 31 college street application all those interested in speaking please raise your right hand you solemnly swear that your testimony is the whole truth nothing but the truth under the pans and penalties of perjury excellent okay summary from Meredith if you would okay so this is a change of use that requires board approval because it includes a plan for off-site parking 31 college street does not have any off-street parking on it it uses parking on the adjacent alumna parcel that we just dealt with that 35 college is on so that is especially now that I mean you're going to sort of reconfirm the determination about the personal and professional services uses officially within this hearing but outside of that the off-site approving the off-site parking is the major ticket item and then just a minor confirming my analysis that the application is exempt from the landscaping provision that's it and this is the whole building will be the personal and professional services aspect is my understanding so maybe we could hear from the applicant about what your ideas are here yeah there is no parking center there are no parking spaces on that separate little tiny parcel and there's really no potential for separate parking spaces on that parcel but there is parking available adjacent in the large parking lot with 113 spaces and I said what was the use of the what's the use of the building I mean I'm just just reiterate for the 31 college health and wellness center under the personal and professional services level of service that's my understanding thank you so two wellness centers I'm sorry Jean I can't hear you go ahead say it again say it again in conjunction with the other wellness center there's actually three buildings the gary has the personal and professional services on the lower level but that's potentially designated for the hydrotherapy facility that we're talking about but the other two Crowley and Martin are designated specifically for small health care practitioner spaces appointment only the kind of thing we were talking about in the beginning correct yeah thank you so just as a note so yeah the personal and professional services is what iron is what the use is it's being approved for the base of the ground floor of gary and both of the other buildings based on what I've heard from all of the discussion so that is all the like by appointment only type stuff okay okay so what we need to do as a board is basically we can allow offsite parking to meet the minimum parking requirements can you just talk a little bit about what the minimum parking requirements would be and how they might be met in some other fashion yep so the 31 college street has 3600 square feet of interior space so we look at that and based on the use that's proposed which is by appointment sort of regular appointment times and not nobody's staying there all day except for the people who work there the parking space requires 8 parking spaces the 8 parking spaces can be approved by the board on a adjacent or just nearby parcel as long as it's within a 1000 foot walk of the associated use which 1000 feet would be the other end of the adjacent parcel so no problem there and the from the applicant the attestation is that for all three of these buildings it'll be part of their project one of which isn't really within the board's purview because it doesn't need their okay they're gonna have 38 parking spaces which is more than enough under our zoning regulations to meet the minimum parking requirements for all three buildings at their highest parking need when you say three buildings the other one being the martin house there's no since the board has confirmed that the personal and professional services use is the correct use to apply to the wellness center aspects that have been discussed that there's no need for the permit for that change of use for that building to come here the can I give a little big picture talk about the change of use for a second the parking thing and then I'll step back and do that um sort of clear why five white martin house isn't here even though it's on the same parcel sure go ahead thank you sharing so the a lot of times when we talk about changes of use for zoning permits the board I will look at the whole parcel and here we have to analyze the whole parcel but because the discussion is that these different buildings especially on the bigger parcel are going to be owned as a condo association situation the permits tie yes to the parcel at as a whole but very specifically to specific buildings so for this 150 main streets project that involves three buildings each building needed a separate zoning permit and only those buildings that have aspects that need the board review are here are here so martin house does it has all of its parking on site there's no conditional uses involved that permit is completely separate and administrative so there was no need to roll it in and add to what the board had to look at excellent so and then yet the parking they need eight off-site part off street parking spaces that can be met with the parking that's available to the project as a whole on the alumna okay and still allow for all the other existing and anticipated uses per the chart that's in the application other questions so michael anything on this okay i think i certainly my feeling is that there's ample parking to meet the eight space need that they need to hit with this so and it seems like they're being quite thoughtful about parking on site the alumnus parcel is the farthest um sorry it's all the way down the other end it's a big one that's adjacent yep we're 35 colleges yep so it's just designating eight, four yep and they don't have to pick out like which eight go to that for zoning purposes there's no need for us to do that color coded no they'll work out so any internal signage that's sort of an internal direction between the different businesses and uses as long as it's not signage that is designed to be seen from off the parcel is outside of zoning purview that's all just sort of internal marking um if that one way gets reversed approving how the traffic flow signage is placed is something that needs to be on a site plan but who parks where we don't care as long as it's within that 1000 foot range and the entire parcel parking lot is within that 1000 foot range so if the conduit association says nope 80 your people your employees have to park way at the other end that's not our business this is pretty straightforward yeah this is just a tidy yeah this is just something I can't approve so let's entertain a motion and you guys agree with the exempt from landscaping yes awesome so a motion entertain a motion applicant shall provide the zoning administrator sorry sorry I forgot we have to actually have an agreement I forgot about that part how you want the written agreement there has to be a written agreement for the parking spaces this will reboot the projector just got hot I forgot about that I'm sorry my brain's too full alright applicant so this is the applicant shall provide the zoning administrator with an agreement or deed memorializing the shared parking agreement granting 31 college street the right to use at least eight parking spaces on the alumnus parcel for minimum period of 20 years this was part of the zoning requirement so it's a question of timing right is that something that has to or can happen prior to permit issuance or does the board set a time period after the decision which I think seems to make sense with the coordination with other entities so it could be as somebody who administers any regulations typically you want things as a carrot to hold before you issue the permit but I don't know what the I don't know if the purchase and sale agreement says you have to have the permit in hand or you just have to have the approval like the decision needs to be issued that's a question for them do you just approval okay so if you don't need the permit in hand it could be 30 days 60 days of the decision so within 30 60 somewhere in there days of decision applicant shall provide the zoning administrator with an agreement or deed memorializing the draft shared parking agreement granting blah blah blah 90 days is what we would say okay I think that's fine so within 90 days of this decision applicant shall provide the zoning administrator with and I'm just going to say a signed agreement or deed does that work signed agreement or deed memorializing the shared parking agreement granting 31 College Street blah blah blah and the rest is there motion to grant the request for a change of views and associated minor site plan approval of 31 College Street with off-site parking used to satisfy 3011 minimal parking standard as presented in application number Z-2023-0028 in supporting and supplemental materials subject to the following conditions of approval within 90 days of this decision applicant shall provide the zoning administrator with a signed agreement or deed memorializing the shared parking agreement granting 31 College Street the right to use at least eight parking spaces on the alumnus parcel for a minimum period of 20 years alright second anyone further discussion Jean how do you vote yes Joe yes Michael yes yes thank you very much for the public for attending and thank you applicants thank you okay so a little reality check I've got three decisions to write and I am in training all day for the next four days in a different city so I will do as much as I can but I also then have three staff reports to write for the next DRB meeting that isn't two weeks so I've got like when the 90 day starts from when the decision is signed by Sharon so you've got you're going to have more than 90 days we have maximum we have to get you a decision within 45 days of tonight or you get a no no conditions approval of what you applied for so you will get that decision in less than 45 days but I will get it as soon as I can but there's it's going to have the conditions on it that you heard tonight so at least you don't have to worry about what those are no news what's the training well Audra's retiring in the year so I have to learn all the certified flood plain management stuff so I get four day crash course in that nice they'll actually be really cool do they send you somewhere that floods really easily for that waterberry so our next meeting so our next meeting is when? is Monday May 1st and we do have for board guys we do still have a public meeting going on so so the next meeting is Monday May 1st there are three applications you can see what they are on the pending applications for public hearing page they're linked there's two sketch plan subdivisions and demolition of a portion of a historic structure so we will not have one of our board members for that particular application because he has to precuse himself and it's not Rob this time it's not Rob this time so Joe do you have anything you want to add I just thought it would be him no, not that hi, emotion to adjourn second second hi