 Good evening and thank and welcome to the South Burlington Development Review Board meeting of March 19 2024 my name is Don Fillebert. I'm the chair and I'd like to introduce other board members and staff To the far left Stephanie Wyman Frank Cokman Charlie Johnston John Mosquitelli Quinn Mann Mark Bear and to my right Marty Gillis and Marta Keane who are our wonderful staff at the South Burlington City office So we start out pardon me with Informing you that there are a variety of ways to participate in this meeting some people come here and sit in the auditorium Others connect virtually And pardon me others phone pardon me phone in Whether you're here Virtually or on the phone. It's important that you sign in to register your participation There's a sign-up sheet in the back of the auditorium here if you're joining us Virtually, please send your contact information Via the chat room and if you're joining us via a phone, please send your contact information to M-k-e-n-e at South Burlington vt Dot gov to make sure that you are listed as a participant In the case of an emergency there are two Doors in the back corner of the auditorium you would simply exit those doors and had left or right Left would be the quickest way out to get outside of the building Are there any additions deletions or changes in the in the order of agenda items for tonight? Yeah, all right. Perfect. Are there any announcements or reminders? Okay Hearing none. Are there any comments and questions from the public that are not related to the agenda? Okay, we will now take up the part of the agenda that deals with specific proposals The first being Site plan application SP 06, I'm sorry SP 2 4 0 6 of SRT be holdings LLC to modify a previously approved plan for a 10,210 square foot automotive sales service and repair building on an existing 2.07 acre lot the amendment consists of 3980 square foot expansion including in addition to the existing sales and showroom and the construction of a drop of Area the for the vehicle service department at 1650 Shelburne road who was here for the applicant? My name is Tyler Barnard. I'm civil staff engineer for engineering ventures Representing gosh Jeep in the application Tyler Tyler. Thank you Any other members of your team? I think it's just us Mike do salts online He's also manager on the project for my company if he has comments you can chime in, but I think I pretty much have a covered Okay We'll have to swear him in if he does chime in so I'd like to you to raise your right hand Please do you solemnly swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth in Under penalty of perjury. I do. Thank you okay, so We have seen a staff report of This project. I'm just making sure I have it in front of me And Don I'd like to make a quick disclosure sure Tyler and I volunteer together for the society civil engineers But I don't think that that will okay sway my decision anyway. Thank you Stephanie any other Disclosures or So Tyler why don't you I mean I think this is gonna be pretty brief It's really looking at an approved Previously approved plan with a couple of updates and amendments So if you could please give us a very brief overview of what you have in mind that would be great Yeah, so the application went through got approved site plan review wise last year right around this time last year They didn't get the zoning permit in time so elapsed so we're back for the pretty much the same project With just two notes that I'm already has called out in the staff comments that I'll get into but Yeah, so we're here again just to ask approval so they can move forward and get the zoning permit and Go construct the building Okay, so there are primarily two issues We need to be focused on so let's take them one at a time. Okay first issue. I believe is the landscaping issue Just that's the cost of everything has gone up the cost of the building instructions gone up So therefore there's a higher requirement for the landscape budget. I think we're pretty confident that the cost of labor and Materials in the landscape world have also gone up around the same level So it'll be a higher landscape budget, but we don't anticipate that we'll need to do anything to amend the landscape plan to address that Okay, so there were two issues that staff called up to the board one of which involved the amount of glazing and the type of glazing Yeah, so Glazing on the building and I don't know if you've got if you got all of them pulled up the Perspective drawings SD 2 3 and 4 are helpful for this So there's black glazing up top that was the architect has called for now because there's a lot of roof like ceiling mechanical equipment HVAC and all kinds of water line sprinkler systems Everything so if you can see into it, it just doesn't look as appealing looking into all the infrastructure up in the ceiling So they're looking for more of an opaque look And that was just called out that I guess Generally, South Burlington doesn't like a spandrel glass We were asked to point out that according to section 10.05 D2 for glazing for all properties in urban overlay districts a minimum of 75% of the glazing shall be transparent Which they feel that the lower level glazing is well above that threshold so we're asking you to Wave the requirement or just you know approve with this the generally opaque glass, but we're willing to have a discussion about that If I can just jump in on this one Yeah, so I I don't necessarily feel either type away about this But I just remember that on the Bourne project the the opacity of the glass on the second story was a point of Concerned so I just want to make sure that you had the opportunity to have that conversation with Tyler But so I wrote the draft Findings the fact decision with a condition that it be updated to transparent But that could obviously be changed depending on how you guys feel it just wanted to flag it for your discussion here So I thought the staff report said Six Glass panels, but I only see four or the six involve the two on the side Okay, got it. All right, and I also did run the numbers So the the staff report says that 100% of the glazing is transparent That's not true. That was just from the old staff report. I didn't catch that with the The spandrel on the top here the total percentages of glazing 84% is transparent and 60% is opaque. That's the new percentages. That's not reflected in my staff report. Thank you Marty. Yeah Thoughts on the board mark you look like you're grinding your brain Is I know in the Bourne project there was a requirement for I know on the Bourne project it was a requirement that it was a two-story facade, correct Right. Do we have that same requirement here? Yes, okay. All right, so it needs to have a two-story appearance and My personal opinion is that spandrel glass does not create that because at night It's just that you know and even during the day, you know the spandrel glass unless you're Doing it with like a tint or something like that still comes off as just being like, you know You can do a lot of the architectural Panels for buildings have the same look as spandrel glass oftentimes, you know, especially the newer automotive Panels like at heritage and stuff like that. You could you could interchange a practically So it really depends on what the detail would look like, but I guess part of me is wondering I'm almost gonna kick myself for saying something like this But if you're to do like, you know a frosted glass with like a light box behind it because I get that behind there with the You know the probably the trusses and the HVAC and the duct work and stuff like that It's nothing that you want and what we would want to look into Because you know, it's it's not really a second story though. It definitely has that appearance. It's got the scale It's got the you know the windows I'm just I'm just throwing that out there if that would be a potential option to You know if you went to like a like a frosted Spandrel rather than a solid spandrel. I think yeah, we were we discussed this today and we're generally open They just want to get this approved and not willing to dig your heels in too hard on this There was a thought that they if they could make it transparent But then they'd have to put like something that hangs down just behind it inside the building Yeah, I'm certainly done stuff like that thing just upper-story window I don't know if it's putting clear glazing and then a sheet behind it or if literally putting you know Frosting the glass and then putting like you know sort of like an LED light box behind to something like that I hear you a hundred percent. I don't want to step out of line and say that they'll do that I know that that'll have a cost impact and I don't want to sign them up for that specifically I think I don't know if Jay has a any opinion on this. Um, I think it was If they're frosted glass with some sort of lighting behind it I think it's definitely doable as long as it's not required to be like a light box right there Maybe if they could shine lights from somewhere else and hit it I think it's just to give it the appearance of being you know illuminated at night and during the day the frosted You know would have more of a look of a window than spandrel, which is completely opaque I think that is a really good agreement that we can come to it's I mean I'd want to hear what the rest of the board has to say but that's sort of like a fair compromise that I'm looking at Given the reality of the use of the building, but our regulations require two-story, you know appearance Sorry, if you're going to talk you up because I'm using the microphone I'm sorry It's just we have our minutes Please introduce yourself again. I'm sorry Jay Langford The other thing is fears it legitimately is a two-story building. Okay. There is a second floor. They're our offices There is a waiting a conference room. There's a parts area. So it's it's a two-story building So I just think it's clear that we mentioned that Yep We did appreciate the way you allow the company to Change the windows so again we Just want to stop building our building and I think Pardon me. I think we understand that it's a two-story building But we also wanted to have want it to have the appearance of a two-story and I get that So we're not going to argue in any shape or manner. We'll give you guys what you need Providing the lighting pieces isn't crazy Frank has a comment Yeah, I have more of a question on puzzle because it looked to me like it was kind of set up as a two-story building Don't you want to have Windows don't you even have transparent windows for the offices on the second floor? It it it really There's so much light that comes in to that showroom as it sits right now Just from all the first floor places and the heat rises So in the summer it gets really hot up there and in the winter we have trouble cooling it Is the is the showroom full-two story and there's no it's all Because the you know, it's all wide open. That's what I meant. Yeah meaning. It's a vaulted ceiling Yes, so what we're looking at here is actually one one story I mean, it's one high ceiling right the second right two thirds of the building is all second two So what is what is the ceiling of that space that prevents you from just doing Clear glazing for those those windows nothing we have no problem I think it was really just more of an architect's design element to just hide the ceiling infrastructure That was really kind of the only reason the ceiling infrastructure is the finished ceiling of a car showroom which is going to have a pretty finished appearance to it Yeah, I don't want spiral duct exposed spiral duct, which is an architectural detail You might I mean I thought that this was like the You know like a truss space with an unsealing below that you're you wouldn't want to hide the the duct work That was running and stuff like that That's what I was told today by the architect. I'm not a hundred percent sure if there's like some sort of a drop ceiling That's below that that hides that from the actual showroom I don't have the architect plans in front of me for the inside of the building. That's not the testimony. We're getting What's your name again? Jay? Jay saying that clear windows on the front of that building aren't a problem Right, so I just go to clear windows. Let's just give them their clear windows Because it basically sounds like you have a mezzanine. You've got a railing. It's looking down. Yeah To clear glazing you got yet that solves the problem all together And it's gonna be a far better solution than having that That two-story area be completely enclosed. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. Thank you other comments from the board Okay, so we're moving on to the second issue which is Oh number eight, right. This is the landscaping. Okay. We jumped ahead. Okay. This is the change to the landscaping budget And the increased cost of the building Pardon me has resulted in increased landscaping cost demands and so They have proposed a new landscaping plan Yeah, and it's not really controversial not necessarily an issue But just a lot of new language that I wrote that I figured you should review and then have the opportunity to discuss the applicant So that way you can be confident, you know, that it's that's good This was the new language And it looked fine to me. What do others of you on the board think? Just for context compared to their previous drb approval Um This this one is 44 of the total Landscaping budget proposed is going towards Trees and shrubs. Uh, the previous approval. It was 40 for zero percent So it's an increase of four percent and they've also increased the shrub this tree and shrub dollar figure by over $13,000 So that's so I guess it is it is maybe a more Uh perennial and grass-heavy Landscaping plan then typically is approved by this board But it is less perennial and grass-heavy than the previous one and has gone up by $13,000 like I said in terms of their tree and shrub contribution Comments or questions about the landscaping budget Are we good? So board do we feel as if we have enough information to rule on this project? Just have one question. Um, so it was a previous approval that expired Were there any changes to the ldr's that apply if they're applying again? From when they applied last year to this year that would impact this Because didn't we have some ldr changes that went live? There were some probably the open space, but I don't think that applies to this because it's less than 5000 square feet, right? So they are below the threshold as That would be affected by the changes in the ldr But good question Any other questions? Okay, um, let's um Entertain a motion to close the hearing Thank you, frank second Thank you, john Any discussion all in favor of closing the hearing for sp2406 Say aye. All right. All right. I pose The motion is carried. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay Our next project pardon me is um continued master plan application mp2301 of john larkin inc To establish a master plan for an approximately 40 acre existing pd consisting of 270 residential units in eight multifamily buildings A 20,000 square foot movie theater a 22,500 square foot restaurant medical office building And a 3,500 square foot restaurant with a drive-through the master plan includes four phases and consists of adding approximately 92,105,000 square feet of Pardon me commercial space including a 110 remotel Approximately 281 homes in multifamily and mixed-use buildings six homes in two family buildings Approximately five acres of programmed and passive open spaces And extending a city street at 1185 Shelburne road So, um, are there any disclosures or recusals? I'm recused You're recused. Okay. Thank you, Stephanie Um, any others who is here for the applicant? I am greg dixon from krupp's lansing consulting engineers Okay Ella braco from Wagner Hodgson And joe larkin from larkin Thank you. Anyone else online or are you the are you the crew? All right, raise your right hand, please Do you sound less where to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of perjury? Thank you So Here we are again um My understanding I was not here At the last hearing but my understanding is there are four issues we need to revisit So, um before we start diving into those do you have any comments you'd like to make briefly for the board? Okay The first issue Is about updating the submitted phasing plan And it sounds like staff believes it meets the standards Correct. Yeah, okay Um board do you have an opinion? And do you have any or do you have any questions for the applicant? So we'll move on Number two, this is regarding the proposed construction phasing plan and um To make sure it conforms with the standard Um, so the I think the the key Pardon, we just talked about that one. Oh, that's the same issue. Okay. All right. Oh, sorry. I think so the Yeah, there's this is different. That's true. This is the management plan You're right. This is two and now we're on three. Okay, but three is the phasing How do we do one and two at the same time? I think you just skip one because we just do nothing to talk about. All right, okay Sorry. All right. Um I'm going to read this staff comment because it's not clear to me Staff recommends the board review the proposed management plan with the applicant ensure that it meets the above standard And clarify what is meant by the penultimate Sentence of the plan which reads quote there will likely be offers of water and sewer lines But because the design has not been completed What will be offered and what will remain open? So first of all That's not a grammatically correct sentence. So I'm not even sure what it means um And so was there a typo was there Don it has said the same thing to me. Don't feel bad Donna said the same thing about grammatically not sending this to me. So don't feel too bad Mrs. Fautler from seventh grade would be very proud of you. Okay, you're not offending any of us So what what does that really mean because the design has not been completed What will be offered And what's missing because I so so the gist of it is the design of the water and the sewer are not At a point where we know exactly What would be the cities and what would stay private? Okay, and I think that is kind of the gist of it So basically if we put in sewer manholes That are more consistent with city sewer and the city's interested in taking hold of that Then we would do that similar with water So that's my question does this language meet the standard Well, so the the applicant has specified which street singular they're proposing to go to the city and that By omitting everything else that there's nothing else proposed to go to the city The only kind of outstanding piece is the you know, these the water sewer And so I think we maybe what it sounds like is that you're looking for some specific language to make That sentiment of the sentence on the board meet these rules and then we can be Good Speak up, please frank so we can hear you Water and sewer are infrastructure Are you on bright green? Yeah, okay Um, can I make a suggestion? I think that the city accepts water and sewer that is within the city rides of way And Occasionally across country line Um, it doesn't seem like this is a situation where there's likely to be a cross country line No, so could you live with the management plan that says Water and sewer lines within the public right of way will be dedicated to the city Yes Okay, does that meet your Needs frank Yes, but this this language does not, right, okay This is not final language All right, are we good Any other questions or okay number four staff recommends although it leaves something Something unsaid will there be water and sewer not in a public right of way That will not be dedicated to the city or will there be water and sewer Outside the public right of way that will be dedicated to the city. I mean, it's At least it's kind of loose. Is that a question for the applicant? Yes, but it's also a question for Well staff's understanding of what what the rule is I think we're comfortable with how marla put it the the sewer and the water that are in the public In the i'm having trouble hearing. I'm sorry the sewer and the water that are in the public right away Would be The cities everything else would not be And is it possible to be water and sewer outside outside the public right of way Is a hundred percent? Yeah, because you got to connect the buildings, but that would all be privately owned And will that be not dedicated to the city? Correct So can we say that as well? Because it says what will be and what won't be sure Okay, so I hear in this staff the final staff Uh findings of fact conclusions that can be written. Okay Number four staff recommends that the board and applicant discuss how conceptually the applicant proposes to Ensure that all principal structures in the master plan area will meet the site amenity requirement And identify if any waivers or board interpretations Maybe necessary to achieve compliance given the proposed site amenity layout I was able to touch base with elah and greg and joe on this one Two weeks ago at the meeting that was that we couldn't hear them because of the quorum So I think we got most of the way there Um, and so the I guess you can talk about it if you want elah, but just that The idea was that I looked at that site amenity plan probably 25 times in the last year And never once realized that buildings four and six weren't showing a site of amenity They're very close to sanity So I just never registered and then as I was going through and drafting the the draft findings of fact and decision I I realized this could be an issue. So just flagged it. Um, and then elah updated the narrative to include a waiver request for the 50 percent reduction in site amenity requirement For sites that are within 500 feet of an existing civic space. So that's where we're at And I think it's a good spot. Um, but if you want to speak more to it So it's it's it's there But it's just a little bit further from the buildings, right? Um Yeah, this the site amenity has traditionally I think is is interpreted to be on site, right? And so technically building six Is on a different site than the neighborhood park So so even though building six touches a giant what would be a site amenity? It's not that site's site amenity Um, but the board does have the authority to waive up to 50 percent of the site amenity requirement Go for it So building six is the one that's just planned north of the green park But because it's not technically on the property Correct. Oh, I'm fine. Yeah, and there's also clearly. Yeah benefiting building six Correct. Yeah. Yeah, okay. Actually, it's a nice layout. I can't wait to walk around there. Right. Yeah, um Should we approve it? It also applies to building four. Um, but similarly the board Board approves it and it's a kind of a conditioned approval that if the applicant can demonstrate There's a site amenity or a civic space within 500 feet. You can that approval stands, but if it doesn't then it doesn't Any other questions or comments? We good with this Frank. Yeah, okay So I think that brings us to the end of the issues that Um, we're outstanding so, um My question board Is do you believe we have enough information about mp? 2301 To make a decision in deliberations I would say I do I would defer to staff to say do they have all the information they need To craft the conditions and findings of facts Yeah, we feel like we're there and i'm comfortable others Anyone I have a question about what we discussed about the master plan master plan Excuse me Not the master plan the management plan that needs to be amended doesn't It's just the language Who reviews the management plan for its amendment? But it could be a conditional approval Yeah, that would be updated But there's a physical management plan, right? Correct. Yeah And who has seen that? staff It's in here I didn't look Busted So the condition of approval would be to revise it Per what we've discussed Regarding the water and sewer. Okay. Yep sense Okay, I would entertain a motion to close the hearing on um mp 2301 Make a motion we close mp 2301 11 85 Shelburne road. Thank you mark a second a second Thank you Quinn any discussion all in favor of the motion say I I Any opposed no, thank you. Thank you. You'll be hearing from us So do we want to deliberate? Well, you need to do minutes and then you need to do other business and then you need to officially State that the meeting is ended. Okay all right, so the minutes minutes of February 6 2024 I was not there, but Uh, would anyone like to make a motion to adopt the minutes? Prove the minutes I'll move to approve the minutes. Thanks Quinn second Thanks, john discussion all in favor of approving the minutes of um February 6 say I I pose no It's carried. Okay good other business um art Can they deliver right now? and solve our April 2nd problem? Like close this meeting deliberate on the thing that was just closed and solve the April 2nd problem tonight Then we have no other business. Do we make them? Do we notify public of it? If we're not going to have April 2nd, or is that just the notice doesn't go out? Um, I will post an agenda if the item is withdrawn Then I will post an agenda item saying it's withdrawn if it is requested continuation You'll have to have a five-minute meeting and you can all be virtual Okay, and marty or I will be here in person To just continue. I would like to propose a five-minute bio break. Okay So you need to officially end the meeting. Yeah. All right. Meeting is ended at the meeting has ended at 7 38. Okay. Thank you