 If you have not, if you would, make sure yours is legible. No, no, I'm Turner. What was that? You're being funny. Why could you say hi to Mr. Watson? They get big. Yeah. These chairs are low. Right there. Okay, that was the first big part of the body. Armrest. Agenda, somewhere. I don't know where it is. All right, you guys ready? Ready as we're going to be. Okay. Welcome everybody to Town of Wallaston's Development Review Board for Tuesday, March 13th. We are going to bring the order, to bring the meeting to order at 7.05. Again, as I just mentioned a minute ago, if you have not signed in, please do so. There are two items on the agenda for tonight. We are going to start off with DP-15, Peter. I'm not going to attempt that. Where's Peter? Michael. Michael? Yep. Okay. I would have gotten close. So come on up. It's a discretionary permit for a building addition at 174 Avenue C. Have a seat. And we are going to open the hearing up at 7.05. So Peter, if you would state your name and your address for the record, please. It's Peter Smakow. And the address is 12 Oak Creek Drive, South Burlington, Vermont. Thank you and welcome. Matt, is this you? Yes. Okay, great. This is a request for a discretionary permit. It covers the construction of a 990 square foot and a 2490 square foot addition to an existing industrial building and permits existing outdoor storage at 174 Avenue C in the industrial zoning district West. The property is currently developed as a warehouse with offices. The use of the property is not proposed to change. Transportation and warehousing uses are allowed in the industrial. This is the first time this proposal is to be reviewed by the DRB. There was not a pre application review for this project due to the scale of the project. The 990 square foot addition to smaller one was permitted administratively in 2017, but is included in the submitted plan along with the proposed future East Edition and designation of the outdoor storage area just to show the overall final plan for the site. As I said, there's no proposed change in use. You can see the additions proposed on the side and rear of the building. Both additions extend over existing paved areas on the site and everything in the side and rear is enclosed by a fence which is the area proposed to be designated on the site plan for outdoor storage. There's no proposed change to outdoor lighting. No proposed changes to site landscaping or setbacks here. Everything's happening over existing pavement. The outdoor storage use has existed on the property since at least 2003. That dates back to a time before the adoption of the current Williston Development bylaws in 2009 under the 2009 bylaws and since then outdoor storage is permitted in certain zoning districts including this one as long as it's in a side and rear yard and is on a quote-unquote approved site plan and staff has always interpreted approved site plan to be approved site plan by the Development Review Board as part of a discretionary permit. So having that area designated on the site plan is an important part of the final plans going forward. There are no proposed changes to parking on the site. The site has 23 parking spaces. These are all outside of the fenced outdoor storage area. They're primarily to the front and side of the building. If you look at the total building plus proposed additions, that total building would not exceed 14,000 square feet where one parking space per thousand square feet would be the baseline parking generation for an industrial building. So a minimum of 14 parking spaces, the site currently has 23 and that's not proposed to change. Staff would recommend that seems to be a reasonable amount of parking to keep on the site going forward. There are some offices within the building that might generate parking at a higher rate than the remainder of it. The applicant has shown solid waste management, trash and recycling containers on the plan. Those are inside of the fenced area and enclosed conforming to the standards in the bylaw. We did receive review of the project from Police Fire and Public Works with no comments from the police department. Public Works commented only to say that they had no concerns about the proposal and the fire department commented to reference a few of their relevant plan review guidelines that should be kept in mind or with a final plan. Staff has looked at this and prepared recommended findings of fact, conclusions of law and conditions of approval including reference to the Public Works and fire memos for the consideration of the DOV and for now I will leave it there. Great, thank you. Mr. Smakle, what would you like to add to that? That's it all pretty much. Presently all that storage area which is in the back of the building it's screened off and it's with this north addition there will be almost no view to the back area and I have obviously construction materials I'm a contractor so I have construction materials and equipment and trailers and stuff in the back and also my dumpsters are in the back which unlike some other neighbors they're all visible from the street so I would just because they have them even on the front of the building I would put it in the enclosure that enclosure doesn't exist either I have a dumpster in the back so that would be the change there. Okay, any questions from the ward? Sure. Outdoor storage area there's nothing, you're not storing anything hazardous so I will plan on that. That's all I need to know. When we purchased the building in 2003 we had an environmental study done and everything was tested so I'll send all because it was a body shot before and everything was clean and you know we keep it clean that way. Any questions from the audience? Anything else you want to add? Thank you for coming. That's it? That's it, thank you. Okay, we're going to close DP18-15174 Avenue C addition at 712. Next up is DP17-01 Northridge Residential Submarination I did see a number of people walk in while we were in the middle of the very brief last hearing if you have not signed in if you would that would be great if we sign in legibly if possible. Let everybody sign in and give them a minute. Welcome everybody. We have the Northridge development here if the applicant would state their names and their addresses please. Paul O'Leary, O'Leary Berksill Associates 13 corporate drive, Essex Junction, Vermont. Ben Avery with BlackRock Construction 68 Randall Street South Burlington, Vermont. Great, welcome gentlemen. Ken's issue. All right. So this is a request for a discretionary permit for Phase 1 of a 40-unit residential development in the residential zoning district. What's included in Phase 1 is a combination of 8 single family dwelling unit lots and 15 attached units. There's a network of streets a bike path landscaping etc that's also requested as part of this permit application. By way of history so this this project came before the board initially September 2016 for pre-application it went through growth management review in March of 2017 on page 2 I've recited the allocation schedule that was approved by the DRB and it came for its first public hearing for this permit on January the 9th it was continued to February the 13th and that was for the applicant to submit revised plans staff was also going to obtain a legal opinion on March or before we got to February 13th we were informed by Public Works that the plan set submitted didn't address all of their concerns and so this hearing was continued to tonight so that's how we got to hear so the applicants have submitted a revised set of plans there's been a lot of back and forth between Public Works and the applicants consultants I did not get a revised set of comments from Public Works I know they were some of their concerns had to do with things like the depths of water lines and utility lines and things like that my understanding is their concerns have largely been resolved we did obtain a legal opinion and the legal opinion was specifically to address there's a provision in the Covenants for the Southridge Homers Association having to do with subdivisions part of this application involves a boundary line adjustment for one of the lots that's part of the Southridge subdivision in order for the applicants to have enough right away for the proposed road the legal opinion from Paul Gillies is there in your packets the legal opinion is that it's based on our regulations it's not considered to be a subdivision some of the members of the board had asked about the provisions of growth management and so we provided for you in your packet what was submitted by the applicant as well as the score sheet that staff worked up as part of growth management last year in March of 2017 so that information is provided as well a couple of additional things one of the things that I noted in my review of the plan is that on the west side of the it's not a circle it's a rectangle but the road that kind of makes a complete a complete loop the lots over there on the west side three of those lots have when you look on when you look on so the west side on that map would be to the top so north is pointing kind of towards us so you can't see it on that sheet but if you were looking the plan set constraints page which is deep within the plan set I am looking for sheet number 20 so when you look on the constraints page which has north pointing to the top of the page you'll see that there are class 2 wetlands and class 2 wetland buffers and two of those lots now that's unusual we typically don't see that because we don't see a lot of subdivisions in this zoning district where there are individual lots that are created if we're in the in the ARZD which is where we typically see development like this the requirements of that zoning district would have to be in the open space that's not a provision of this zoning district so the concern is that class 2 wetlands are protected and there's a required 50 foot buffer around a class 2 wetland there is a requirement that there be some kind of fencing or a woody buffer around the edges of that wetland buffer and that's something that is called for in our bylaw and that we would recommend and the concern is that if you have a constrained area like that that's on an individual lot somebody goes and buys the lot they weren't here as part of this hearing none of that means anything to them and they get a brand new shiny lawn mower and they just decide that they're going to cut everything down so you want to have some kind of a barrier that for them to do that the other thing is there should be a designated building envelope on those lots that specifically excludes those wetlands and those wetland buffers and that's so that there aren't any ambitions to get a permit to build a structure in those wetlands or in those wetland buffers for the class 2's, correct? not the class 3's class 3 wetlands under our bylaw what our bylaw says is class 3 wetlands may be protected so they are not protected under state law which class 2 are class 3 may be protected or not if you fill class 3 wetlands typically you have to get a permit from the army corps of engineer and they have provisions related to that as well that are sacred site and you've got to stay out of them so the point about these lots that I see were class 3 wetland to be filled they've got permits from we don't have a permit yet but we've met with the wetlands folks from the state of Vermont and they've cleared us to fill us what do you know off top of your head what lot numbers those two are I did not see any designated lot numbers we don't have the lots aren't numbered there's also lots on the other side of that circle that are like half the lots of buffer so those are not part of this permit this phase of the permit so that's a good piece of information to point out to the applicant that would need to be addressed during the permitting for subsequent phases but this is phase one so this permit is only covering phase one so the lots that have the heavier black line as well as those attached units down near the southern portion of the development and the road infrastructure associated with it that is what is part of this permit application 2 59 hard circle will they be building all that infrastructure the road with this initial rollout so the permit covers what's called phase one which includes there's a total of 21 dwelling units and the road and other infrastructure water sewer lines etc that would be served that portion of the development so the the other roads that would serve the remaining of the development that's not covered as part of this permit so really the road just goes goes in all the way to the last square makes a left and then dead ends up at the top correct light gray is phase two correct phase two and three however however it gets divided up we also received some additional public input there was a document that we received there was multi pages and that should have been included in your packet for you taking the consideration okay I think with that I'm going to stop okay all right so gentlemen questions to go over with you I'm sure the board does two why don't you give us a rundown on where we are now where we were at the last hearing so if you look on the board as Kenneth said north is to the top this is Metcalf on the left side of the page this would be the coyote run development on the top so we are proposing to come in off of Metcalf on a 60 foot wide strip of land that the town currently owns there's a boundary line adjustment with the lot next door 1,423 square feet I think is being transferred from the lot to the roadway piece and the reason is that you have an ordinance that requires a 50 foot setback from the seasonal stream across this Metcalf right here so in order to fit it in we did the boundary line adjustment slid the road over as far as we could to maintain the 50 feet we actually have a little 5 feet of green space left in there to give us a little bit of space to work so the biggest thing here the first time has to do with the multifamily portion of the project with this portion here some of the neighbors expressed concerns about the fact that we might have duplexes or triplexes that were backing up to a predominantly single family neighborhood so what we've done is we've changed the first 8 units on this side of the loop that would somewhat face Metcalf some of the coyote run and we've changed those so they're all carriage style units in other words a single stroy single family units with expectations that's probably all walk out towards the back we have a duplex unit here and a triplex unit here so the only multifamily units are actually on this side or the inside of the development we had some conversations with the neighbors we've relocated the extension of the bike path that comes across originally the easement was going to run across the back of the property line similar to where the bike path goes today in Southridge so we've basically slid it a little bit further to the north we've provided some extensive landscaping along that bike path is detailed in the landscaping plan I think there's a sixth sheet set of landscaping plans that was done by a DJ Boyle the landscaping plans we also call out 23 additional trees that aren't shown on the landscape plan to be feel located in conjunction with the neighbors to pick the best spots for where they would provide the maximum amount of screening or protection for the existing houses so those could go on our property they could go on the individual lots will be up to those neighbors to decide just where the 23 trees go it's a mix of spruce, pine or I believe they're all evergreen that's not shown but it's called out clearly in two or three places on the landscape plan you'll see there's a call out for additional 23 spaces 23 trees excuse me 3 trees TBD so as Ken had talked about the first meeting that we clearly need to show phase 1 and phase 2 so that's what the plans do future phases are grayed out the first phase would be the existing road that comes up and this west inside of the loop and there would be the complete loop that serves the carriage homes and the multi-family homes landscape plans show all the required type 1 and type 2, type 3 buffers that go around the property that's shown on sheet L104 and L105 quite a bit of landscaping calls out all of the different species the trees and the different shrubs that go in we did quite a bit of stormwater work in conjunction with trying to work out details with public works without getting too carried away and at the initial patterns drainage patterns on the existing 44-acre lot we had a section of the property that went to the west towards Coyote Run we had a section of the property that went south towards Metcalf and the majority of the parcel drained to the seasonal drainage courts that roughly bisects the project and crosses Metcalf as part of the storm drain the fact that we're collecting most all this area and taking it into our storm drain system we've actually decreased the flow that goes to Metcalf and we've actually decreased the flow that goes towards Coyote Run so most of the flow now is redirected into we have a gravel wetland here and then a conventional detention pond here there was also a concern about the stormwater on Metcalf apparently there's been some issues in the past about some wet basements so the stormwater system backing up and public works and their consultants had a number of questions about the stormwater system on Metcalf so we changed our plan so instead of connecting to that storm drain system whatsoever we basically come down and connect directly to the seasonal stream and divert our stormwater flows through the existing culvert that goes on the Metcalf so we've completely disconnected from the Metcalf stormwater system to get rid of any of those issues that public works so I did read that through that you're putting in five additional catch basins is that the number yes I think we have two catch basins at the bottom and two a portion of the way down that's all to keep the runoff from reduce the runoff from running into the neighbors property correct so we had to meet with the state wetlands stormwater folks to make sure they were okay with us disconnecting that from the Metcalf system and putting it directly in and we've worked through some of the issues we to mediate that impact we agreed to install a gravel wetland you know in this area and I would expect that phase 2 or phase 3 will see a similar gravel wetland that will go in part of that permit so in terms of public work we really don't have any issues left with them I think the only thing we didn't get a comment back on was the town stormwater person was reviewing our stormwater application we didn't get any comments back from that the town's consultant has finished his review and basically said he was good with all the changes that we had made so I'm not aware that there's really any outstanding issues whatsoever with public works let me just interrupt you for one second and just check back in with Ken here there's a quite a bit obviously in here from DPW we don't have anything we did not get, you said earlier we did not get anything inviting there was a bunch of email exchanges going back and forth between the consultants and public works and I think with the state that they're satisfied Fire department we met with he has some conditions that we're fine with we talked to him about hydrant spacing and spacing between the units and he wants numbers he wants some other things done and we're good with all of that conservation committee we met with early on we're good with all their suggested comments we read Ken's revised staff notes we're fine with the proposed conditions we don't have any issues whatsoever with providing building envelopes for those lots that have class 2 wetlands on the back we've already agreed and it's already noted on the plans that we're going to fence split rail fencing all of the wetland buffers so any place there's a you know back the wetland buffer on this wetland the wetland buffer through here the wetland buffer in the future phases the wetland buffer on the pond all of that we've agreed to fence right at front to do that does that notation get put into the deed we'd be glad to put it in the deed sure should be it should be should be in the deed well the deed should have clear language that they're not allowed to impact and what row fences I get at they do rot and they're gone and got 10 years and and Mr. Bellovo shiny the lawnmower comes out oh no so just a couple comments on the staff notes just to make sure all on the same page so there's 21 units proposed as part of phase one there's eight single family dwellings and then there's 13 dwellings located in 10 structures in the multifamily section portion of the property as a bounty line adjustment that's involved again 1,423 square feet being transferred from that existing lot to the road right away it reduces that lot from 20,592 down to 19,169 which is still larger than the two lots next to it there's a 25 foot set the new road creates new frontage on that lot so there's 25 foot front yard setback existing structure is about 26.5 feet back up just for the lot that's having the boundary line the proposed boundary line adjustment on it does that have a house on it right now? it does, correct the location of the existing house is shown and from the new right away line it's 26.5 feet back from the line the regulations require that it be a minimum of 20 that doesn't violate any setbacks that is the requirement but the boundary line adjustment goes to the 25 foot line it's 26 feet 26.5 so it exceeds the minimum which is it's a minimum so it's all we needed there wasn't any reason to go to 25 feet we just alright again as I noted the required landscape buffers are shown on sheet L104 and L105 and that's about it we are fine with the conditions of approval as drafted by staff Scott one thing that I would add and I put it in the staff notes is that it's where the bike path is proposed to be extended from the existing bike path so if you look at the geometry of what's proposed just imagine you're a cyclist and you're coming from Coyote that's requiring you to take a hard left and then requiring you to take a hard right which I don't think makes any sense where the extension of the bike path ties into the existing system it should be as close to where that L shaped turn is down on the left, upper left it should be as close to that corner there as possible because that geometry just it's not going to make sense to anybody in the field somebody that's on a bike so you'd want it to be kind of a graceful an easy graceful maneuver just like if you were in a car on a road you'd want it to be an easy graceful maneuver now I think there was language in the staff notes what was it the conservation commission I forget which saying that the bike path should pick up from the southern Lee most corner that's what I'm talking about that's the eastern and then the southern is along with a new road this would be the southwest corner here that's north is over here right so this is this is the one right here what about down in here well is that phase 2 this right here this double line this is all this would all be for future permit all right long term for an extension of the bike path across it's not clear that that's going to be possible because of the wetlands because of the wetlands and then there may not be a way to get over to old stage road but this is what's called out in the staff notes this should just imagine you're on a bike well that was kind of I just I get it, yep so if we might add we would be open to modifying the trajectory of that corner on the bike path if you will but the reason for his positioning is after extensive discussions with the neighbors you know we want to be a good neighbor and a lot of their concerns surround privacy from a public space and screening and the reason the bike path is landed there is it really keeps any cutting of existing forest area to a minimum and it preserves the existing screening so it really when you add that to the extra trees really does everything possible to mitigate that visual impact and it doesn't invite folks off a public way sort of coming back yard so you know my response to that would be perhaps some sort of a wide intersection with an easier turning radius but we're certainly want to be again good neighbors and supportive of the neighbors concerns so this seems like a small price to pay that was kind of the sparsis place along that tree line to what was that that was the place that had the least number of existing trees I think that's what they said right least amount of cutting right yes okay go on anything else no that's it that's it that's a lot of new information do you have a questions from the board at this point which which of the proposed buildings of the affordable houses indeterminate so so nine of them will be we don't have any specific nine year mark with a certain housing authority we will likely work with Champlain housing it's a for sale product not a for rent product we don't envision those to stand out or look any different in the neighborhood than any other homes and any adjustment in cost necessarily would be addressed in interior finishes so it's we aren't earmarking specific units for my benefit trace with your laser light the primitive trail that was described in here I wasn't able to quite follow that verbally so the primitive trail would it begins up here but it comes down it comes down the back of these future lots and then swings through here you know swings outside the storm water pond area and then it continues along our property line basically heading east so it runs like this is that plan to be a future development piece of this project or is that part of pavement you know that's not that's just the easement but that's open space so and the town also owns a fairly good size strip that goes across the top that runs ends somewhere in here but if you look at some of the plans that calls that out as town open space and future bike path so I think at some point in time someone envisioned that bike path would continue up and then turn somehow and then come across the top of this parcel has there been any further discussion just out of curiosity of the secondary connection via back half of your no there has not been any further discussion Ken in the first set of staff notes that we received there was a note from staff recommending stating that we did not have a designated type of landscaping buffer that had been identified and that was just I hadn't deleted that from that was from before I hadn't deleted it out when I was reviewing my notes so the plans that we have here now showing the landscaping they satisfy that statement well the plan here is complete based on their own statement he said there's more trees coming well I think that these we have a call out for instance if you look at L104 on that side there's a call out there that says additional plants to be field located and it lists the four different species and there's a total of 23 additional trees to be determined that's correct to be field determined with the homeowners I'm terrified for the record here on this front sheet that we have here this drawing it shows it may also show on that drawing there it shows some buildings here but those are not part of the 21 units that's correct they are not part of the 21 units they are a future phase so the 21 units there's four single family lots on this side there's a four single family lots here and then there's this section on the inside so when you go up this street we'll be building on both sides of the street the four on the inside of the square and then the four on the outside W did have concerns about access to your storm water pond did you amend that? yes get into their trucks yes public work is going to take over maintenance when this is constructed it's not until sometime in the future when there's a connection through to another road it becomes a loop it's being built to public work standards but public works have stated they will not be taking the road over I believe it's the same with the storm I haven't asked that specifically but that was my assumption that conservation commission there was an original note there was an original note I think it's been taken care of the lot lines were adjusted so as not to encroach on the class 2 buffer that was done right? yes that's the first single family lot in the left you can see there's a little jog is that what that is? and you did have a functional assessment of the class 3 wetlands confirming they were not connected to the class 2s that's correct Tina Heath from the state visited with us last summer Errol Briggs did the original Errol Ann Art did the original delineation other questions from the board? the fire department realizes that your lot your road is going to dead end nothing so there's no circle no method for them to turn around at the far end all the way into the project correct? I don't know that they're aware of that when we met with the fire department originally we showed them the full set of plans I'm not sure that they're aware that it's going to be phased I'm guessing they're not based on what we've seen from other applicants well they should have gotten a resubmittal whether Ken had a chance to flip through them or not I don't know we submitted the plans we distributed to the other departments fairly clear when you open the plans that were being built and was not being built I think but to be fair we did not tell him that it was going to dead end have clarified because they seem to get excited about not being able to turn their equipment on we would certainly gladly construct a turnaround for them that's not an issue whatsoever other questions from the board? so what we have the applicants do for final plans is before they submit their final plans to the planning office they have to get a sign off from both the public works department and the fire department before we will touch the final plans I realize that but I didn't want them to have a sudden surprise when they suddenly do and Ken says hey I can't turn around the power truck as always I was bringing it up should be at least checked because it might be as simple as just extending gravel gravel where part of there so they can do a t-term there that's all I'm saying good call we can let the fire department figure that one out in our last meeting we discussed the full roadways were going to be built so how is it that phase one is moving into this back section I don't know lots were part of the phase one over here so I was a little confused as to why the road isn't going to be built when we were here back in January as I recall the way the plan set was drawn wasn't clear were the boundaries of phase one were what was going to be phase two and that was one of our comments for what needed to be included in a revised set of plans but it's not unusual in fact it's the norm when you have a phase development the phasing not only includes the development that the developer wants the dwelling units but the infrastructure to support it so those things would come together so you wouldn't necessarily expect all of the infrastructure for the entire project to be built when part of that infrastructure would only be serving that other future development so you would get the infrastructure that's necessary to serve the development that's being proposed that's that is standard for how that is done and so our comments back in January were it wasn't clear what was the limits of phase one and what was proposed to be phase two and we wanted that to be clear because the infrastructure is constructed so it's not just the road it's the roads, water, sewer, utilities all that other stuff that you can't necessarily see but it's below the surface we'll open the questioning up for the audience at this point and I will give you my standard speech we are here to take testimony if you have a question we'd like you to ask it if you could limit your question so that we don't go over the same thing two, three, four times that would be great in the meantime, ma'am and if you would state your name and your address that would be great I have a few questions you mentioned that you're changing the storm water runoff and there's these catch basins I'm not familiar with that but who maintains those because the only reason I ask is we just have to clean out our storm water so someone's going to have to maintain these things otherwise our yards are going to get backed up who does that? this association will be required to maintain it and there's five of them there's more than five there's a number of catch basins throughout throughout the project but there'll be just like any association it's a private road catch basins, piping gravel wetland, detention pond and speaking to Ken you mentioned that you haven't heard back from D.P.W. to like answer all the back and forths will that be a public document once they do because I want to know as the neighbor that they ticked all the boxes will that be a public document? you can check with Public Works so it won't be there is an email chain we can provide I'm not so expecting to get a memo so a document I'm not going to have anything to put up on our website or whatever you can check with Public Works to see if where they are relative to that can I interrupt for one second Susan you are it's an open hearing it's an open process you might have to go to Public Works and ask to see to see the correspondence going back and forth and they will show it to you I just don't know how to be assured that they did all I've got to tell you that's a good question I don't think we've had anybody ask that question before in recent memory but I think that's how you would go about doing it and if you give D.P.W. your heads up that you're going to ask for this it makes it easier for them to read the file to make shirts available for you rather than having to suddenly you ask them and they go like oh man they've got to go find all the e-mails this is not a closed process you have every right to go read whatever is going on in the public domain then thank you to BlackRock for adjusting I do appreciate that it was moved and I just and I see what you're saying Ken or the board or whoever the bike path but it already is an existing hard left it's a 90 degree hard left so like you said maybe a wire maybe something that softens it but you know the further we can get it away from our property lines the better just saying and the back to what Courtney Doherty was saying I've been reassured by people from BlackRock but Matt I've talked with him multiple times the worst part of the development is the road and going in and everything and once that is blah blah blah but now the road isn't all going in because I kind of thought what Courtney did that the whole road was going in I think you heard you did hear Ken's response it is as a rule it's not economically feasible to put all the infrastructure in for the entire project is phased so you build it as you go along and I think Ken is absolutely right that's the norm so you build it for what you're going to use and then you add some more and you fill in that and then you add some more I don't think that's out of the ordinary if the board wanted to grant us all our phasing we would definitely consider putting all the road in proper venue for that is in front of the select board DRB those were my questions thank you great baits I'm at 685 and I've capped rod I just wanted some clarification on the 23 trees that were talked about to be spread out it was a little vague to me it just said amongst the butters when I talked to Ben earlier I just led to believe there was a circle well let's see if they can fill that in because it was a little vague to us too I guess I'm looking for so essentially what we're talking about is meeting with the property owners on these three lots so that would be Lord Lord Porter and Bates so can it be written in in such a way that it specifies those three butters who are fine with that sure yes we can and the second question related to that is is there any scope of the size of the trees because there's a huge difference you know if you're talking about do you have a plan caliber getting screened or type size caliber type yes he has he has four different species that he's called out standard size for a tree in our landscaping requirements in our bylaws two and a half inch caliber so that's what we'd be providing likely so how tall is that well so it's it's basically it's telling you what that is that you know put a caliber on the trunk of the tree and it's a certain distance from the ground I don't know if it's 24 inches or something like that so if you were to go to Gardner supply or some other similar nursery you could see what a two and a half inch caliber tree would be like the height of a tree like that would typically be I don't know 10 feet something like that and it would depending on prom what kind of tree it was you know it's not going to be a tiny stick with nothing so it would have foliage depending you know whether it's a fir tree or it's a a wintertime it's going to look like a tiny stick right so it's are these softwoods or hardwoods softwoods so they're not going to be twigs in the winter yeah so just please they're not huge trees I just want to echo the sentiment on the bike path being moved and really appreciate BlackRock working with us on making that adjustment with the butters we're going to be dealing with noise from construction for who knows how long and to have an existing buffer in place where we don't have to deal with new plantings and something that's going to give us some privacy from the bike path and construction is so are you asking to have the trees put in ahead of time at the start of the construction season that would no I think I'm asking for the bike path to go in as proposed on this so that we can maintain as much of the existing buffer as we have so we can do less tree cuts I would assume what those trees do towards the end once we see the site once these are vertical it's hard to know where to place the trees if we don't know well again there was a so the bike path has been moved away from the property line to about kind of equidistant between your property line and the new houses back into the new houses based on this drawing and then there is so there's three lots there's 23 trees quite a bit of trees going on over three lots which I heard the applicant say that it could go on the development property or it could go on your property so I think at some level at some level there's going to have to be a discussion amongst the three owners that you work out a deal and the conditions of approval are going to say something like that it's going to be a little nebulous okay assuming this goes assuming this gets passed but that's that's the staff report on the bike path to its original connection point which would then maybe we have to cut down right and I think that I think the board's hearing you on that should just clarify the 23 extra trees are in addition to the landscaping that's shown on the plan so there's quite a bit of landscaping shown and called out to boot and then there's the 23 trees on top of that so there's a lot of plantings going on that side one thing I would add about the extra plantings is that so typically what happens under development is the landscaping is one of the last things to go in because that's the best way to ensure the health of the trees in the case of the supplemental trees that Paul just mentioned that those trees are being called for far away from where all the development is going on so it doesn't much matter to us whether they go in first or whether they go in last but something that you may want to consider is if those trees go in first that will give you that much additional buffering from site and sound of any construction activity that might be going on since it's you know just something to think about and add on to my original comment back to you about when you know do you want to put it ahead of time because it because they are so far away from the construction area so you might want to think about that we're open to putting them in ma'am I'm Kristen Porter I'm the third of the Metcalfe Butters 703 my question is related to this plan for phase one as it's presented here tonight assuming this is a plan that passes my question is once a permit is issued if there was a what's the process for changes in other words if something like the bike path needs to be shifted or they're going to make a change to the siting of the multifamily versus what they're currently calling out is what's going to be flooding us with the single family carriage or whatever they're calling it let me answer that they would need they would need to come back in front of the board and have another hearing such as this and it would have to be properly warned and you would be notified so nothing would be sprung on you once the permit is issued once the site plans are approved that's what gets built other questions from the audience sir you guys are going to get trees over there and that's a good idea what about getting some additional trees over on this side I know that it's very thin right here the way these trees are you guys are going to be cutting significant amount of trees on each side I think it wasn't it drawn that way because that was the least amount of cutting correct but we'll answer your question go ahead Paul it was drawn that way his property as you can see in the photo if you have one has a fairly big head that goes around it it's pretty thin Adam what's your address 80 coyote 80 coyote is that the property with the head he's got the big head that goes all the way around the back of his property now so the movers are right here it's on the edge of my property and directly in the back of their property I can tell you because I walked here quite often that this is actually fairly thin there's hardly any you can kind of see through there I just know that if you're right there's a hedge line on here that's on our side of the property so the leaders have it and I have it myself that there's a nice hedge line right here you can still see through that hedge line you can see people on the bike path now they're going to see that way in the backyard I already have concerns about last trees going there's going to be a larger concern I think sheet 2 of your plan set shows his property through off that will be the sheet that has the other photo so we're talking about the Uber and the Smith properties on the corner you can see there's quite a substantial hedge that protects those properties now from that bike path that's in their backyard well it looks like there's a fair amount of topography there on the other side of the current bike path is that going down or up going down so you go up as you go towards the new houses so the existing houses are lower lower so the view into their yard is going to be down below from the that's correct I've got some questions Adam anything else what about getting trees I guess that's my additional trees you're going to cut a path in there obviously you have to cut a path to put that bike path in what can we do if we're getting 23 trees over here what can we do about getting some additional trees over here I know you said there's a row over here it's a pile tree so they're called trees some trees there's a few trees okay so you would like to see some more trees in that area on your property or their property do I want to see either work or probably on the side this is better than it looks is what I'm saying these trees that are here right now if you look at the aerial photo if you look at it right now in the winter you can see right through there there's a lot of hard ones in there how much do you need on each side of a bike path what's the normal width of a bike path typically the paved section probably 8 to 10 feet maximum with 4 on a side after something like 4 feet 16 feet wide 16 foot right away or something along those lines 18 foot somewhere in there I don't know that we have any 10 I don't think the existing bike path is 10 feet wide I think it's it's probably closer to 8 it's probably 8 feet and I wouldn't be surprised if it's only like a 2 or 3 foot drainage section on each side be my guess so let's say we're 3 feet on each side that's 3 plus 3 is 6 6 plus 8 is 14 Adam the board has made a note of your concerns if you look on sheet L105 we are proposing some additional landscaping right with that new bike path would come in so where we obviously can't have landscaping in the middle of the bike path it is proposed just on the eastern side of the path that's detail 2 on that sheet that's correct that's this right here there's the end of the bike path so Adam if you want to come up here one second approach the bench then there's a call out this is the bike path and this is the bike path this is the bike path and this is where it heads in and this is what they're proposing every circle is what they're proposing to put in as it is right now okay you're just individual trees here yep and each one has a call out on what it is and they're all listed out like that little checked area there again we've made a note of your concern okay I'd like to see more trees around yeah right in the end of this here okay sir Brad charwin 147 heart circle so not around the bike path I guess I have a question I don't live obviously in that area but I don't know why we're building this never-mild stretch of bike path original they're talking about going north of the property eventually the bike path built behind the people and currently it's at ground level with the rest of those properties so I don't know why we're building this little section just leave alone let it go down like we have for the last 16 years why are you making them build this little section it's such a big contentious point we've already got a section built that goes nowhere that eventually is supposed to lead all the way and go over to old stage leave alone don't make them build it don't put it behind these people's houses let them go down the farm of the road just like it has it's a plan eventually to have to go up their little road to meet up with the other connector that's going to go to old stage well then you're going to be on their road leave alone why are we working all these extra things around putting trees in where they don't need to be necessarily for a bike path of bait man when we don't really even it seems like we're creating a problem that it doesn't need to be I think ultimately I'm going to go out when I probably shouldn't but I'm going to do it anyways the town plan looks for connectivity first and foremost the town plan wants bike paths so when we have a development going in we're going to get a bike path that's what the town wants and that's it that's what it comes down to the road's already there and you're absolutely right and we want the kids and the people not on the road and we want to have them we want to have them we I'm speaking as the town in this case but that's it you're still going to go by my house which is part of the bike path which is also on the road so you're talking about a baiting like literally a quarter mile of people that are not you go on this bike path then you go back on the road and get back on that calf road and then you go to Southridge and then you go along you're only moving a small amount of people riding on the road and we'll do it one small amount at a time it seems like a waste of money to build that there at this point if the original plan was to go north I think future generations will disagree with you other questions from the audience Mr. Watson first one and you'll have to help me here Ben can I just map a little so I can talk to the audience hey Pete I'd like to be able to see that plan the first time I've had an opportunity to see it get it back a little bit more this way would you my eyes aren't that good maybe on the hallway we'll get it all I'm out Pete you need to address to the board I'm sorry I'm just trying to help these folks no problem we're hearing this Pete the flow of water coming out of these retention ponds where is that going it goes into the seasonal stream the existing seasonal stream that crosses on that culvert right there where does that go right now that seasonal stream does that dump immediately into the Allenbrook well it no it flows down through the open space in Southridge it eventually crosses Metcalf again and then it eventually flows into Allenbrook it does not go through their detention ponds one of the reasons I'm talking to that is because I've seen it over the years and it again happened with this recent thought a lot of surface water and I'm not sure if this is being sized properly right now there's an ongoing flow that happens here and I think is this a class 2 stream it's not a stream it's a class 2 wetland and it flows in two directions there's a high point here this side flows in this direction and this side flows back towards Coyote Rock because this is an active stream it's a wetland it's not a stream actually so I've got it on video it kind of shows differently because it backs up that's how I'm kind of aware of it so the Craves property and the smiths another smith is where it runs into and that flows over quite a lot OP let me interrupt you for one second Paula you did this earlier I'd like you to do it again and that is run through water flow that you've done that the changes that have been made run through the flow patterns toward the site so in general water flows in three directions off the site you have a hill here and the backside of the hill flows towards the wetland and some of this area flows towards this wetland and this wetland flows towards Coyote Rock okay we will be reducing into your house so we're reducing the flow because we're basically taking this side of the hill that flows there now and we're going to capture that and we're going to divert that and take that into a detention pond then the second wave of water comes this side of the hill flows in this direction towards Metcalf she flows off eventually gets into the Metcalf storm drain system so we'll be capturing all this flow and taking it into a detention pond so the storm water model shows that we're actually sending less water to Coyote Rock in this direction less water to Metcalf in this direction and we're taking that and putting it through this gravel wetland all that ends up going through the detention pond and then the detention pond discharges to the seasonal stream which crosses Metcalf and then we have a portion of the road here that we collect in catch basins and that also discharges directly into the seasonal stream and then goes across the culvert now the total flow from our property is less in the post-development phase than it is in pre-development so if the culvert handles the water today we're going to be putting less water through that culvert in the future and that is the law that is the law so we don't anticipate needing to change or increase the size of the culvert on the Metcalf because that culvert doesn't flow through any of the south ridge detention areas and won't put any additional burden on the south ridge association to maintain their stormwater facilities that they have next during the January meeting I requested 150-foot buffer off of this back line from the bike path sorry I don't have a better picture basically the aerial overview shows that buffer and I think that gets into some of the conversation around the density of the higher density population being proposed in here in that this be maintained but many people may not realize so I went out to the laser and I kind of went out to I don't know about 80 feet off the bike path that's over by the loop to my household it's over my second floor bedroom and that's at ground level but I literally took a laser maybe I should submit that to the board but I took a laser and laid a line and that goes above my second floor windows almost to my bridge so that was the reason why I requested this be pushed back and I don't think it looks like that this is a pretty significant drop that's probably about a 25 foot drop so like I said that was about a 80 foot point off the bike path so my question is how do we get this or how do we keep the existing tree one which is 150 foot buffer kind of already exists and beef it up some and that's really because of the altitude change I'm not talking just density but it's just clearly houses now looking down into your house they're existing I don't think that's appropriate for this design the town has published setbacks within their unified bylaw they're meeting them are there more trees maybe it is throughout your development throughout the entire development there are houses built on hillsides there are elevation changes there are people that are higher we hear this on a regular basis it's pretty tight that's a pretty tight geographical change and there is a fairly significant elevation change off the back end of this development there's about a 15 16 foot difference between the elevation of our new road and where his house sits so that's what the contour line shows because we're knocking quite a bit off the top of the hill to make a flatter spot but again going back to the landscape set sheet 105 that you looked at before about closing the gap it does show landscaping all along that back line and it should be noted that although schedules didn't allow for us to get together with Pete we took the liberty of reducing those units to single story just based on comments from the last meeting we heard those concerns loud and clear and felt that that would certainly be putting our best foot forward to try to mitigate the concern so is it identified right now which are two story and which are single story again I haven't seen which of these units are actually single these are all single these first eight all across here and then across the back and then the only multi there's a duplex here and a triplex next to it those are the only multi in this whole block of housing single level they'll likely have either garden style basement or walkout basement in the back so Paul you're saying there's a 15 foot and there's a 15 foot elevation change from where from what from the ground floor from the ground floor to where to the height of coyote what's the what's the change if you look at sheet three which is the contra map you can see that this gentleman's house is about elevation the ground elevation there's a man about 252 yes absolutely this is that's the 250 contra that goes through those 350 no 450 450 contra is right here so your house sits here so your house sits about 452 and if you look at the plans for the new road the loop road you can see that these contours are 475 so it's about it's 25 feet yes not 16 feet it's 25 feet different and then these are these are walkouts so the back the back are around 268 268 268 feet 468 feet where you're about 452 so the backs are about 15 16 feet well again I would like to make the request an additional trees be put along these you know similar to the same scenario down at Metcalf that additional trees be planted right and if you look at if you look at the landscape plan the 105 so this is this is the proposed landscaping like this is your property I think here so we are showing additional landscaping you know along the back with the units you can see where the back of some of the units are and this is additional landscaping that we're doing in the back individual trees individual trees and some low shrubs there's a call-out for all the landscaping on the plan right so what's this distance where's the bike path right bike path would be right here that's the centerline these are the two edge lines that's an edge line so what's this distance taking a recess the bike path is roughly 5 so you're probably talking about the edge of the bike path to the back of the unit is probably 60 feet this makes no sense starting to stick these are one inch equals 20 feet is this plan see it's got it right here it's a mirror back property line to the back of this unit we're talking 4 inches 5 inches maybe so it's 100 feet from your property line to the back of that unit sometimes so we have a hearing and normally I would say in circumstances like that please address the board and the board will direct the question sometimes it's easier to let the applicants and the homeowners talk it out I did look at all those plans online they're just without context no question about it rather than me thumping my fist on the table and demanding everybody's attention we don't do this a lot but in this case it seems to make sense to let everybody look in and get the explanation they need and maybe they can answer your questions and you can lay any fears you might have or concerns or what have you or maybe not maybe it makes it worse but it's a good thing to do occasionally we appreciate that Scott he still has the floor and then we'll get to you Pete you got as much time as you want almost so one thing I did put together um I had to spend some time at the habitat to stir up this assessment it really bothered me because I felt I was really inaccurate and the only reason I said it was because I lived at Coyote Lane now for 19 years almost and what they assessed where there were two days during the summer two days during the winter really was not what's going on and so I had submitted and I don't know if there was any feedback to be provided I did ask during a January meeting what is the purpose of that and it was kind of like favored the project to go forward whereas I had submitted in pictures of the types of wildlife you know bobcat or the other day I saw a fisher cat you know it's like they're not even talked to in the assessment but the answer is almost every one of these animals has been observed not probable they've actually been observed do these all come off your game cam? no I could I could collect them from the neighbors too so you know there's several of us that like to watch the animals now I'm not saying I'm a tree-hugger here but I am saying nobody can speak up to the animals the reports that they're transient well they don't have a home address they are transient by nature because the fact is this is where they feed this is where they reproduce this is where they live they stay and so I shared those pictures of those kinds of things because the habitat report doesn't say that but then what do we do with it you know that's the thing that kind of bothered me is let's have an accurate report of what's going on and more importantly should this project be going forward when we know it's a sensitive or critical habitat area because that flow to north-south animals is not just getting cut down that much more so I don't know what we do with it but I at least wanted it to be on record that this is the and I did it with photos to say this stuff is real we've got a wood turtle population there and actually that's a breed of animal that is I won't say on the engagement list but it is on the watch list so anyway what do we do with it now this information you know does it go to the conservation commission I didn't hear anything back from them I don't know what do we do do we get a better what habitat assessment made I don't have an answer for you because the way it's written today is inaccurate so I'm not a habitat specialist by far but you know I will I will defend the report they visited the site on four different days they acknowledged that they didn't see any of the animals they also acknowledged that that wasn't unexpected and if you look at the report it does list it says the table below list species that might utilize habitats on this parcel and it has you know under mammals shrews, shrews, moles, rabbits, chipmunks, gray squirrels, red squirrels, deer mice, meadow voles, meadow jumping mouths porcupines, coyotes, red fox, raccoons, stripes, gunks, bobcats white tailed eel some of them it says it's probable some they label as transient but the report certainly acknowledges that that parcel gets quite a bit of use but more importantly the parcel talks about some of the other assessments that were done for instance the state the town maps I believe were done by UDN is that correct Matt I think originally the town's the town had some of the did their assessment and then you have the state modification wildlife assessment which the report acknowledges so this is this is the state maps so it shows that there is you know a potential area located on the parcel and this is a large scale plan you got a copy from Pete Watson I'm curious to be have you guys lost any cats in your neighborhood yes there's been reports of it you know the front porch farm people do report you know because if you got coyotes and fisher cats and bobcats you're going to be losing cats so the state the fish and wildlife identified habitat blocks so this is off the ANRL this is the habitat block now they grade the habitat blocks they're 1 through 10 you know this this block is a 4 you know relatively low and as you get towards the greener areas you know they go high like these are probably 8 and 10s and you can see when you get south of the interstate there's a lot more habitat blocks as we would expect in Wilson it's off the interstate so what's important to note is that the habitat block existed on the parcel and it's almost entirely in the wetland area and it's almost entirely the section of the parcel that's not being developed and the assessment basically said look the open field is where most of the development is going and the open field is valuable as to the wetlands and the wetlands you have you have shrub, you have cover, you have food it's easy for the animals to move up and down through the quarter and all this was explained by the conservation there this is what they do the conservation committee came back and agreed with the gentleman who did it and said that they felt it wasn't having a significant impact on the habitat so we've got the habitat maps in the town I think we're created by UBN doesn't show there's that name but you'll have that you've got state maps that we have that much agree with the assessment that was done and we protect everything that's shown on that habitat so I don't have any other insights to offer other than that about 60% of the parcel remains open and that 60% is where this habitat block is so some of what Paul just said is included in the memo that was in your packet from the conservation commission and so as part of the conservation commission's review for a project like this as they would review things related to natural resources and you know Paul has pointed out some of the maps that were developed for the town we used some consultants from UVM I forget five, six years ago something like that so there is that information that is included in our regulations and that the conservation commission looks at and that their comments were included in your packets for you to take a look at yep okay so I haven't seen any impact on the conservation commission as the DRB your report was submitted for consideration by the DRB the project had already gone to the conservation commission it was not sent back to the conservation commission for additional review and comment so in light of again I said I'm trying to share that with animals and that's not what the report talks to the habitat assessment so again I think it's inaccurate on my location of this plot are these pictures taken they're all over I can tell you because that's some of the pictures from me right in my backyard this big corner right here there are rabbits in there there's a lot of stuff and they have a camera set up and they're just to see what's out there that's what I'm asking so the bobcat was taken I think right from here I see the the wood turtles the turkeys are all throughout this I think it's fairly evident that the housing out there isn't having a big effect on the wildlife there's a whole bunch of food that are going to cut down right here this is all part of where they live this is another picture this isn't going to be wildlife coming into this area there's all these houses right here right now the animals come in the big thing is there's a lot of apple trees in here and apple trees all throughout here animals come in and even these apple trees they might be bedding over here but these apple trees they're even thriving and they were probably all on your lot before it was cleared and built onto probably we're in the residential district so again with what I feel is an inaccurate habitat assessment I would ask that the conservation commission get a chance to read the value okay photos at least show that it's real I didn't take a picture of every animal so just to give the DRB a quick refresher on how the towns bylaws relate to wildlife habitat and wildlife travel corridors this comes out of chapter 27 of the bylaw which was added to the bylaw in April of 2014 that chapter identifies a number of conservation resource areas including what are called significant wildlife habitat areas the mapped areas that trigger the requirement for the report from a biologist which is called a habitat disturbance assessment or if any of the subject property is in one of those mapped areas either a travel corridor or core habitat so if you were to look at the conservation commission's memo you'll see a discussion under WVB 27.5 significant wildlife habitat areas a large portion of the subject property is mapped as wildlife travel corridor the pond on the property was mapped as core habitat those are the wildlife resource areas that the towns bylaw regulates and protects in terms of a habitat disturbance assessment so when somebody has these kinds of resources mapped on their property the bylaw requires them to retain a wildlife biologist who prepares a habitat disturbance assessment for consideration by the DRB on the advice of the conservation commission so these are the regulatory maps those are the resource areas and resource values that are put under review by the standards of our bylaw so I just want to we talk a lot about I've seen this animal, I've seen that animal we have a travel corridor an area that's been mapped as potentially having animals moving through it we have a core habitat which is the pond itself what the biologist is supposed to comment on and what the conservation commission DRB reviews is whether the proposed development impacts the function of that corridor or that core habitat so what you have in your memo from the conservation commission is their discussion of what they saw in that report and their recommendation to the DRB there are innumerable other ways of mapping what wildlife is where and assessing who thinks what kind of impact might be happening but the bylaw is fairly clear about what kinds of impact on what kinds of resources are under review when it comes to dealing with it through the bylaw so anybody who wants to zoom in on that just look for the discussion of 27.5 in the conservation commission's transmittal to the board the assessment was made but it's got inaccuracies that's where I guess the challenge you can report when you have that challenge you can only back it up with photos I think I'm not a biologist but I sure know a heck of a lot about the woods basically roughen them it's not sniffing right so I'm going to ask that the habitat assessment be moved on and more accurately because a two-day onsite just did not accurately reflect what's going on on the property it's certainly within the scope of this board to decide whether and to what extent they agree with that assessment so Pete we will talk about that when we go into closed door that's fine at least I wanted to bring it up to your attention I appreciate that what else are you are you done okay Robert I just a little clarification when you say everything is dumping into the river did I correctly hear that it's no the dumping due to the retaining pond won't be any more than the war that's currently going into it that's correct the catch basin is on the road so where do they directly dump into the river well it's not a river it's a seasonal water course but the catch basins with the exception of the few catch basins at the bottom of the street all the other catch basins within the development either route through the gravel wetland and then the detention pond or they go through the detention pond first and then they get discharged into the seasonal stream and the ones that don't get caught into those where do they get discharged into they go in the same place into the seasonal stream so directly into the seasonal stream from a road and that's my only question because it eventually does enter into the out of a road or stream so I'm just wondering so Paul maybe you could clarify that does any of the storm water coming off of a paved area go directly by a treatment center yes the lower part of the road gets collected by catch basins and then goes directly into the into the channel and part of trying to mitigate that we've had a discussion with the state storm water folks there's certain areas you can't treat just because where they are there's no place to route them through and this is one of those areas so for additional mitigation we're constructing gravel wetland here and we're likely constructing another gravel wetland to serve phase two with the idea that that will help mitigate the small portion of impervious that doesn't get treated do you explain what a gravel wetland gravel wetland is a constructed wetland that you that you divert some of your smaller flows into the wetland there's wetland vegetation on top and there's usually a couple feet of crushed stone on the bottom with a drainage pipe and it allows that first flow to go in there and slowly perk its way down through that vegetative matter and into that stone then eventually it drains off and goes back into the storm water system does it have an overflow that goes down into the bigger pond everything out of the gravel wetland eventually flows and goes into the larger pond before it gets discharged and this is just a question to you is that normal that some road rainwater would go directly into a stream yes the other question I just have and this is more too one of the thing, one of the meter if you one second just is that this board is this board is a lay board we do have people on here from time to time who are wetlands experts but the majority of us probably don't know a lot more about it than you do not currently not currently but we do we try to do our reading to understand what's going on the only other concern I have is more is that all that water enters into the south ridge recreational area where we have walking trails, dog trails and there's a stream that goes through all of that and I know so let me answer that Paul can back this up I believe he said earlier that they are not allowed to allow more stormwater off their property as it exists right now with the future development I think I said that clear enough but it cannot increase you said that you are decreasing the flow that's correct and the I might also add that we're not approving here the stormwater treatment system that's going in on these plans that's done by the department of environmental conservation I believe that's correct so they will be reviewing these and telling us whether everything he's telling us is true or not the last thing is more towards the lawyer that you had looked at the covenants specifically the subdivisions which was somewhat of a subjective outlook on it but they did not comment on more of the objective aspect which is in violation of our covenants our covenants say that there needs to be 35 foot setbacks that's between you and Superior Court that has nothing to do with this board so could I ask the question then why did we ask for the subdivision and not the setback if we were not supposed to do the relevance the point of the legal opinion is to advise the board on how the board should take into consideration what exists in your covenants in the board making a regulatory decision relative to the town's regulations so at the end of the day you may have some leverage relative to the covenants in your homeowner's association that's completely outside of the realm of the regulatory structure so as I said back in January you may want to go get your own legal opinion to represent your individual interests or the interests of the homeowner's association and you may decide after consulting with your lawyer that you have some recourse against this property owner and you may want to take them to Superior Court but that's a whole separate process than what exists in the regulatory realm so what was being asked of our land use attorney is how should the board take into consideration that information in making a regulatory decision just generally so if we again don't agree you went over this last time and I'm apologizing because I'm asking it again if we don't agree with the decision what is our appeal you have the right to appeal the decision of the development review board to the environmental court there's a 30 day appeal period the clock starts from the date that the decision letter goes out so all of you because you have shown up and you've given us your names and addresses and really legibly we'll get a copy of the minutes and you will get a copy of the letter that will be addressed to the applicant and it will state what those dates are and then if you are interested in filing appeal you may or may not wish to consult with an attorney to help you with that process last but not least so they agreed you know in writing and hopefully making it a little more specific about like the three houses they're affecting and such about trees and such who holds them to that you, them so if they don't plant all the trees that they put on that design or the things who holds them to that so assuming if there's a decision to approve there's there are conditions of approval the applicant from a regulatory standpoint will be required to meet all of what's in the conditions of approval so if the DRB says he's got to plant these 23 extra trees then he's got to plant the 23 extra trees if the DRB says you guys got to go work that out amongst yourselves then you guys go and work that out amongst yourselves ultimately it comes down to what the DRB decides so if the DRB makes a regulatory decision then that becomes part of the regulatory structure it's a private agreement if it's a private agreement but if you agree on whatever terms like at the end I don't have it roll into decision making the DRB has a roll in decision making if they approve everything, who holds them to that the staff would be the ones that would be administering the permits the town staff so what would happen so in your case you're asking about a landscaping detail but I'm just going to talk specifically to the landscaping that's what you asked about so what would happen is when the time comes for the permit to be closed out somebody from the planning office would go out there and if there were a specific number of trees they would go out there and count the trees or like moving the bike path or everything in the plans anything like that so public works would look at the roads, there would be inspections for you know, anything that's what's considered to be a required improvement other questions, other comments other questions Pete so we're talking Paul, I'm looking at the map with the trees how do I request that additional trees get put in along that the buffer between the bike path and the houses so that the other smiths Watson, Huber just to make sure that we got enough of a buffer, is there a way to formalize that request I heard 23 trees, okay great we get another 23 trees along that west side 2.3 what I'm hearing is you're requesting additional trees behind your house and your neighbors we're actually if you look at just the ones that just at least come up to the neighbor so it probably is just and those inserities if you look at that landscape plan L-105, an area 2 you know, we've got blueberry, 2 river birch 3 cherry there's 23 of them I think ironically 3 white pines a weeping willow 3 Canadian hemlock so there's quite a few trees already going on along through there I'm just trying to densify it I guess is what I'm asking other questions from the audience we have any questions from the board what's the timeline so what happens after this you guys make a the board is going to discuss it and the board will are we have the board feel about closing this or continuing it have an opinion okay so the board is going to close it tonight and we will discuss pretty much everything we've talked about tonight an issue a decision which the staff will have in the morning and you can call it in the morning and find out which way this went is that answering your question? let's say it gets approved what's the next process please go so once the board makes a decision so if they decide tonight as Scott said you can call us tomorrow we'll tell you verbally what their decision was they will approve their minutes two weeks from tonight that's when the decision gets formalized when they approve their minutes and then there's a decision letter that gets written typically the next day sometimes two days later Wednesday or Thursday that's the formal date of the decision once that letter is written that's when the 30-day appeal period starts and also the applicant is informed that they have one year from the date of that decision letter to file what are called final plans so there may be there's been a number of things that were discussed tonight the precise location the bike path for one whether additional trees might be required where those might be required any of those things those will all have to be incorporated into final plans which are then presented and then final plans get signed so if there's a decision tonight minutes get approved in two weeks and there's a decision letter and then there's a year from that date the applicant has a year to submit final plans they can't get any permits to do anything until they get their final plans approved once they get their final plans approved then they can you know they can engage in construction in keeping with the allocation schedule they got for the building out of the dwelling units the construction start again, they have a year from the date of the decision it's up to them the ball then goes to their court they have to make a decision do they want to move forward how fast do they want to move forward they got to get the final plans once they have the final plans in they have an allocation schedule it's articulated in the staff notes it was part of the growth management decision the developer would have to make a decision for how quick they want to move, so I can't give you an exact answer to that some of that is not known those are some of the deadlines that would take place early sometime in 2019 over a minute eventually earlier when do you want to start they have an outside of filing plans so we're in March let's say they got final plans into us in June from the town's perspective they could conceivably be engaged in construction now, if I were a betting person my guess would be the odds are you won't see construction until 2019 I would not disagree with that there's a number of things that still have that current state that's correct how do I the blasting plan how do I get a you guys are going to be approved for a blasting plan we've got a lot of work to remove what I just heard 16 foot drop or so or more how does that get approved and the surrounding homeowners get any input on that right now I've never had glory in my basement I hope I never do I'm nervous the blasting plan will be a required submittal as part of our act 250 or land use application that will go to the state probably in about three months time because I don't believe that's something that comes before this board no it does not typically so all the butters to the property will get noticed that the act 250 permit was filed and they'll all get an opportunity to participate in the act 250 hearings and at that hearing they'll be able to comment on the wildlife the blasting stormwater aesthetics, traffic all the typical things that the 10 act 250 criteria cover if you know it's Pete if you're not on the butter you can petition the board participate to be at party status as open as this process is the act 250 process is pretty much as open so other questions from the audience anybody else anything else from the board board's good one more time from the audience okay thank you everybody thank you very much okay we are going to close DT 17 act 101 black rock instructions at 8.52 thank you everybody remember it's snowing after it may not all be in precisely today it's just letting you know that's good they're going to be skiing yeah I can add to that collection they have for this okay it is 9.25 and the development review board for Williston Tuesday March 13, 2018 is out of deliberation again two items on the agenda do I have a motion for DT 18-15 Peter Smackel yes as authorized by WDB 6.6.3 I David Turner review board having reviewed the application recommendations of the town staff and the advisory board having heard and do we consider the testimony presented at the public hearing of March 13, 2018 in the findings and facts and conclusions of law proposed by the staff for the review of DT 18-15 and approved the discussion permit subject to conditions of this approval authorizes the applicant to file final plans obtain approval of these plans from staff and then seek administrative permit for the proposed development which must proceed in strict conformance with the plans on which this approval is based okay thank you second all seconds it any further discussion no further discussion all in favor aye five ayes no nays motion carries do I have a motion to approve DP 17-01 Northridge residential subdivision as authorized by WDB 6.6.3 John Hemmelgarn move that the Wilson development review board having reviewed the application submitted and all the materials including the recommendations of the town staff and the advisory boards required to comment on this application by the Wilson development bylaw and having heard and do we consider the testimony presented at the public hearings of January 9 February 13 and March 13 2018 and the findings of fact and conclusions of law proposed by staff for the review of the DP 17-01 and approve this discretionary permit subject to conditions above this approval authorizes the applicant to file final plans obtain approval of these plans from the development review board and then seek an administrative permit for the proposed development which must proceed in strict conformance with the plans on which this approval is based we are going to make a couple of additional conditions the first is that we are going to revise condition number 3 to part a to read the Wilson conservation commission recommendations from the January 3, 2018 meeting and strike items 1, 2 and 3 underneath part a we will change part b of that same condition to read Wilson public works department memo dated December 20, 2017 instead of 18 we will add condition number 16 the applicant will complete their conversations with the Wilson fire department making sure the fire department is aware of the road phasing we will add number 17 the applicant shall identify the building envelopes on all lots that include class 2 wetlands buffers we will add condition number 18 the presence of class 2 wetlands or class 2 wetland buffers shall be identified in the deed for each affected lot condition number 19 the applicant has committed to providing 23 additional trees to be planted on or near the abutting lots of Lord Porter and Bates the location of the 23 extra trees included in the proposal shall be agreed upon between the Lord Porter and Bates abutting property owners and the applicant finally condition number 20 the applicant will ease the transition from the existing bike path to the new bike path second second any further discussion all in favor aye no nays motion carries I have a motion to approve the minutes of February 27th, 2018 I move that we approve the minutes of February 27th, 2018 as written by the second second all seconded any further discussion I'm going to refrain from commenting on them all in favor aye one abstention Courtney Doherty four ayes one abstention motion carries minutes approved anybody else have anything else they want to go over that would be a no do I have a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9.40 so moved very good thanks everybody that was fun rough management two weeks I will not be here