 I'm going to call this meeting to order of the Montpelier Development Review Board. Welcome. I'm going to introduce the board members here tonight, starting at my right. Hello, Captain Burgess. Okay. Then on Zoom. Abby. Hi, Abby White. Joe. Hi, I'm Joe Cuenan. Who else? Michael. Yes, Michael. Good evening, everyone. And Jean. Hi, Jean Leon. Good evening. Did I miss anybody? Nope. All righty. Okay. At this point, I'll turn it over to Meredith to review the. Remote meeting procedures and process. And go ahead. All right. Oh, you know what? All that. We're getting everybody in and I didn't open my document. Give me one second, folks. Sorry about that. I have something that I need to show in case there's somebody watching on Orca. Who can't. Who isn't logged in, but wants to. All right. So. This is. Some of this intro is just for people who are on Orca and want to log in. And some of this is for everybody else who's logged in and hasn't done this kind of a meeting before. So. If you are watching this meet up meeting over Orca streaming, you can participate in tonight's development review board meeting via the zoom platform. You can either use the video access by using this link here. You can just type that into your web browser, or you can go to the city agendas page. And click on tonight's DRB meeting agenda. And the link is going to be in there. Alternatively. You can call into this phone number. I'm going to ask for the meeting ID. And it will log you into the meeting so that you'll be able to hear and you'll be able to speak. And ask questions. And you'll be able to hear the whole meeting. If somebody is trying to log in is having problems, please email me and I will do my best to help you get in. For those attending via zoom, please note that turning on your video is optional. You don't need to do that. For everyone attending, please keep your microphone on mute when you're not speaking. This is going to reduce background noise. And as I said earlier, if you're on phone to both mute and unmute, you press star six. If you are in the zoom, if you're in the zoom meeting itself over the computer, there's a chat function available. Please use that only for troubleshooting or logistics questions. If you have a question or comment about tonight's application, then please raise your hand either physically or using the raise hand button on your toolbar. And then for those on the phone, you can press star nine and this will do a hand that everybody here can see. You can also, if you need to, if no other way is working, you can just state your name during the quiet point. And then we'll get you on the list to comment and the chair will recognize you when you get through the list. We have a lot of people today who want to comment. For everyone wanting to comment. Please wait until the chair has recognized someone to participate and then make sure to provide your full name and address for the record. You know, I think. I know that a lot of people here tonight are part of different groups. So we're just going to ask that people try not to, to repeat too much what other people have already commented on. You can definitely say, hey, I agree with X and Y points, but we've got a lot of people we want to try and get through. We want to make sure everybody has time to speak, especially about anything that's new presented before the board. And do note that you can speak on one part of the application and then the chair can recognize you again later on for another part if there's only specific parts of it that you want to comment on. In the event that I get notice via email that there are members of the public that are unable to access the meeting, it will have to be continued to a time and certain. And I will now hand the meeting back over to the chair. Okay, thank you, Meredith. And I would just like to reiterate on that this, the razor hand function. If you'd like to be recognized to speak, it's going to be real important tonight. We have a lot of people and we do not want this to turn into a sort of a lot of back and forth and whatnot, just to make sure everyone gets a chance to speak. And we get through tonight's agenda and get to hear everybody. At this point, I would entertain a motion to approve the agenda for this evening's meeting. So called. Motion. Motion by Jean. Second. Second by Catherine. All those in favor of approval of tonight's meeting. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Jean. Yes. Michael. Yes. Perfect. And it approves unanimously. Already. So this evening, we do have a, you know, a lot of people in attendance for this meeting. We'd like to move this as efficiently as possible and get everyone's comments on the record. I think I will say that public comment in this process is intended to be very helpful. And I believe that members on the board, you know, truly believe that, you know, public comments are integral in making better applications. With that being said, we do want to make sure that the comments are, you know, as focused as possible on the actual application here. Which is for a tonight, a two lot subdivision. There is no development or infrastructure or what not being approved on this site. And so if we do, you know, cut you short on your comments or whatnot, please don't take it, you know, personally, there will be ample time for public comment as those, you know, sort of plans evolve in other venues, which may even be this one. But I will now. Okay, that's, that's that. So, does anyone have any changes to the minutes from the previous meeting? This would be the November 1st meeting. If not, I'll entertain a motion to approve those minutes. So moved. Motion by Joe. Second, second by Catherine. How do you vote? Approved. Yes. Yes. Yes. Michael. Yes. Get it by the end of the night. Dean, how do you vote? Wasn't present. You were not present. All right. Who else was present? All right. And Rob votes. Yes. So that is approved unanimously for all those able to vote. Okay. So our next item on the agenda is an application for one on one North filled street. By COPS incorporated. Do we have a representative or a couple of representatives for COPS here tonight? Okay. Are you the only one in person? Okay. So then I'm going to ask you to just sit at the table. And that way. If you need to speak, you're at the round. If that's okay, or do you not anticipate speaking? Okay. I know John's here. I saw him as well. So. Yes. I am here. This is John Spags this from the Wolf engineering. Also speaking for COPS Inc. And I prepared the application materials. That have been submitted. Okay. So COPS Inc is the preferable pronunciation. Yes. Okay. Perfect. Yeah. So everybody that is planning on making public testimony this evening, we are going to have to swear you in for tonight's meeting. And officially we need to have Phil actually state who he is, even though we all know who he is. Okay. I represent COPS Inc. Okay. And feel free to move the microphone as close to you. You need to just so that the minute recording and everything can catch it. Do we need to write down the names of everybody? I think I've got everybody. Everybody's on here. And everybody here in the audience has signed the sheet. And everybody who wants to speak tonight, correct? Okay. And they'll say their names before they give their comments as well. Right. Okay. So all those interested in providing testimony and application, would you please raise your right hand to be sworn in as a witness. And this is everybody at home as well. You don't necessarily have to have your video on. We'll believe you, but please do try and follow along. Alrighty. Okay. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth under the pains and penalties of perjury? I do. Thank you everybody. So at this point, I would like to turn this item of the agenda that 101 Northfield Street application over to Meredith for a brief overview. Before we get started with testimony. So I'm going to do a pretty brief procedural overview here. Because this is leave the, leave the substance to the applicant. So this is an application for final subdivision. So subdivisions a month earlier go through a two step process. First, they have a sketch plan review where there's no actual decision by the board. There's no permit issued. It's just a discussion and a chance for the applicant to get feedback. The second stage is the final subdivision application, which is where we're at. And at this stage, it's the, everything's on the record. We swear in the witnesses and the, once the board closes the public hearing, there will be a written decision by the board as to whether or not a permit will be issued by my office. And then there's, I want to, I want to note. So there's the staff report that got issued with the. Agenda. And then actually can we have those pieces of paper? I think those are my copies. In that staff report, there was a notice that there were no comments. We hadn't received comments yet back from the department of public work. And the, we actually got those comments after that all got posted and the department of public works didn't have any actual issues with the application. I can share that briefly. Sorry. I had a print out for it. And I sent it around to the board members. I lost it. I'm sure it's there somewhere. Give me one second. Sorry about that. I just wanted to share it on the screen so the people at home can see it. But I wanted to make sure this was in there. So. Here it is from Kurt Monica, who is the assistant director for public works. And he says, I took another look at the application and don't see any issues from DPW. So department of public works perspective. I have no concerns with the proposed subdivision. So I just wanted to make sure that that was in there and that was in there. And I know that there are, there's a couple of different people who are planning to read. Some testimony into the record. We'll get that when we get there. But I want to make really clear that again, this is a subdivision. The. There is. A lot of the development in a subdivision process, but with a two lot subdivision, you're really focusing on. Can the. New lot be developed consistently with the regs. It can it could be a minimal. Development. is something for the future development process and requires a lot more detail and information. And that's why in this instance that's being not not being discussed right now this this this isn't this isn't where we're at if it were a situation where we had a multi lot subdivision proposed which is sort of what our regs are geared towards where somebody was proposing subdividing a parcel into you know 10 new housing lots then we would definitely be looking a lot closer because you would definitely need you know various driveways you'd need to make sure they could space those all out you could need it to make sure that the road infrastructure was set up but we're just at a two lot subdivision so um you know when we when we have more about future development that will most likely go through the development review board process again unless it's something small like you know two houses um so I know people have a lot of concerns and I don't want you to think this is your only shot at that with potential development okay all right that's long enough for me sorry thank you thank you Meredith so the next phase I think how we're going to approach this is we're going to let the applicant provide a presentation on the application and after that the board together will go through the you know some issues raised in the staff report they haven't all been addressed by the applicant's presentation and since this has already been through sketch plan you know I think we can go through some of these issues pretty quickly and we do want to leave as much time as possible for a public comment given the uh turnout that we have tonight and interest in this application so uh I'll turn it over to whoever would like to go first representing cops on the Northfield Street application it's gonna John's gonna make the presentation okay good evening everybody um so I think that I will try to be as brief as possible here uh and as you know it's a two lot subdivision I'm going to uh share my screen and hopefully uh get the right information up here so um this is the subdivision plat is are you seeing my screen here yes okay so um the this is a blow up the overall property the economy lords sits on what will be this lot lot one and the proposed subdivision line is here and this is the lot two that is proposed to be subdivided and this is the blow up of that um and so there's the existing gravel area here derby drive northfield street um and we are now showing the subdivided I mean the the setback lines which are five feet all the way around on the on a corner lot the frontage on the lot is 292 feet along northfield street 212 feet along derby drive there's existing access onto derby drive and you know that's basically the the sum of what the proposal is is to divide the property at this line here uh and the proposed lot meets the requirements of the mixed use residential standards the required minimum is 3 000 square feet this is 60 900 square feet um and the minimum frontage is 45 and it's 292 on one street and 212 on the other um you know the other things that I really would mention is uh during sketch plan there were comments regarding parking and loading and the parking for the existing hotel there is adequate parking on the hotel parcel and there will be no sharing of space across the proposed subdivision line that all access for um the hotel will be via their existing uh accesses onto northfield street and any use of this parcel will be um either via derby drive or via a drive which that where they would propose and permit off of northfield street and other than that I really don't think that's I need to speak much more uh unless there are questions that the board or would want to ask so I will stop sharing my screen and turn it over to Meredith. Yeah this is Rob here the chair um so I guess I did have one question while you had the plat up there just while we're while we're at it and I think we talked about a little bit of this sketch plan but you show a uh a gravel drive crossing the the boundary line the proposed boundary line so like you know right now can you is that as you know gravel drive still there or is that yeah are you talking here yes yes this um the gravel is there now so but you're not proposing any access like between the two lots um after the subdivision is complete is that correct that is correct okay so any sort of pedestrian traffic or particular traffic like you said would go onto more street northfield street or onto derby drive from a proposed development correct thank you very much for that so uh I guess unless board members have any immediate questions we can start going through the staff report here um I think that the first part of this you know dimensional requirements seem to be very well met for this subdivision I think I see that one thing that jumped out with this type of thing is that you have a 25 foot clearance between the existing hotel and the proposed line when I think the setback is only five feet so that doesn't seem to be you know much of an issue and like you said that proposed you know lot area is very sufficient for the MUR district I think that the first issue that was raised in the staff report which was just I think just a minor comment was on the stormwater management which is section 309 of the regs um were any specific uh you know issues here but I think the question I have is um which direction is the water flowing generally on the site as it as is um is it go to you know downhill well I would hope that's the case uh but uh you know do is it go towards the economy or derby drive or northfield street just generally what direction do you do things go um you know we have not done a topographic survey of the property so um I'm just speaking based on my uh you know knowledge of the site and I'd say in general um the both the um both of the parcels potential both parcels slope towards northfield street um you know in you know if I can re-share my screen if I share this what are the overall plan so ortho photo take a minute to load is everybody seeing this now yes so this is an ortho photo of the site um which was taken while it was a storage yard right when Du Bois construction was doing some construction there so you can see here's the existing hotel um the existing access drives to the hotel um and this is the gravel area that's outlined shown whereas this storage area has now been cleaned up and grasped over so the what you see on that subdivision plan as far as the edge of gravel is this gravel area back on the back of the site but in general as far as stormwater direction flow um it's from this uh the back boundary towards northfield street all the way along this is a very steep slope and hence being undeveloped but it all sloping towards northfield street um this this developable portion of uh proposed lot two is quite flat and gently sloping it might slope a little bit towards this driveway here but in general I think the site slopes towards northfield street okay um so let me see if I understand you know what you're saying so you're saying that there's not necessarily much drainage existing drainage infrastructure um or drainage that goes between the two parcels um two proposed parcels um because things tend to drain directly towards the street I'd say in general that's um correct and it may be the case that some portions of this do flow over the property boundary here and maybe a little bit here flows that way but I think in general it's flows towards northfield street okay thank you I think that that's enough for uh stormwater seems straight forward do board members have any question on the on stormwater okay so the next section here we're going to tackle is access and circulation um sorry um and um if we want to highlight the key uh key section here um is that um you know northfield street is a class one highway and derby drive is a secondary street um and section 3010 b12 indicates that the preference is to have um the access on a secondary street if it's a corner lot this is indeed a corner lot as presented in the application but the board has the ability to you know demonstrate that or advocate that a class one highway show if it will improve traffic circulation and in public safety um so could that kid sort of like maybe talk about like sort of the different options between you know having accessing the parcel on derby drive versus axing the accessing the parcel onto north northfield street so but was that a question for me this is john spankas that's for for either of you john yet um so um as you know things you know progress and uh this as a as a subdivision um do you um see any benefit um you know from a traffic circulation in public safety safety standpoint to prefer to go on to derby drive um or on to northfield street this is phil's allinger i'm not sure the applicant can make that kind of a conjectural assessment the act of a subdivision is to create a new permitted lot and there's a lot cannot be created in the city unless it meets the nuts and bolts of the zoning ordinance this lot if it's permitted will have an access to derby drive and an access to northfield street because those are pre-existing the applicant is not going to take any steps to create either of those access or um curb cuts for lack of a better phrase um the applicant doesn't doesn't pretend to project what may happen on parcel two because it may not be through the applicant's action that any permit is sought when that is done it will be a major site plan review i believe and at that time i think is the most appropriate the issue is ripe for consideration because circulation and access are almost academic if there's no nothing happening on the site yes um well i guess one question to clarify so you said there is an existing access on north field street and on derby on derby drive are you referring to potential access but not not necessarily as a permitted access i'm sorry are you referring to permitted access existing access points um or are you referring to um existing access points so they're not i think they're existing yes i'm sorry so um john can you just bring up the the draft final the draft plat because i think we've got i'm sorry i know i shouldn't always interfere but right now we've the new parcel my understanding is has one curb cut on it the other curb cuts are all going to be on lot one the northfield street curb cuts are all on lot one where the iconologist gonna stay and the only existing curb cut for lot two is off of derby drive is my understanding based on this plat but the way i saw this in my staff report and it could be wrong and the way that because deep department of public works looks at access availability and the way i was looking at this was lot two because we don't know what's gonna have gonna happen needs to have the ability to have accesses on either street that gives future application and the board leeway to decide where that access point actually goes when we have a future development application before it um you know if if we've had another other applications before the board where there is only one location where a curb cut could potentially go that would meet sight line requirements all of that where it was on a curve next to a river in that instance for subdivision approval we insisted that they show us they could actually build a curb cut point there in that location that met the v-trans standard department of public works does not have that concern here they feel like if need be you could have a curb cut on the northfield street frontage of lot two or do something with the curb cut that's already on derby drive to fit multiple future potential development possibilities so you know i think that's that's where we're that's where i see this going is is the lot could the lot have additional or different access points to meet those future development possibilities or not yes okay okay um so i guess like marita said public of part of public works at least as far as the subdivision um is concerned because it's what they were reviewing um you know did have no issues with the um you know location of the curb cuts and access and circulation no issues of the application at all from their perspective um so can jump on down to hit the major points here so jumping to 3504 like i think the ackison circulation it's a very limited you know review here um in that um you have to demonstrate that the proposed subdivision will not unduly add an undue adverse impact on the traffic in the area um including the traffic is generated by the proposed subdivision um not unreasonably and disproportionately to contribute to the reduced level of service uh of affected streets in intersections and for all modes of travel and reasonable measures have been taken to minimize mitigate the amount of particular traffic generated by the proposed subdivision um and so this is uh you know a two-lot subdivision um and um so the applicant i'm guessing did not conduct a traffic search you know study um for a good reason um and what is that reason the reason is that there is no traffic contemplated from parcel two as a subdivided watt so say that you were going to uh you know turn uh parcel two into um or this was a 10-lot subdivision and under that case a traffic study might be something that would be considered is that correct it would be necessary okay thank you board members if you have any questions please speak up if you'd like to so it's abby um i do have a question i'm wondering if there's a proposal now to pervade the drive onto the access onto northfield street or is that something that that would that the applicant intends to to wait on until there's a um future you know pending proposal for development on that site that this subdivision application does not is not seeking approval for and access on northfield street okay thank you yes um so i'm really sorry i just spotted an error in my own staff report about the and i know that this doesn't it doesn't really matter because there's no traffic proposed by this but um i accidentally put in an old standard here for that 3504 traffic um just for the record it actually is supposed to read like the section 3303 standard for um conditional use review and just for the record i want to read that in um especially because rob did read it out um that the standard is that the applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed development will not have an undue adverse effect upon the traffic in the area including that the volume type and timing of traffic generated by the proposed development shall not be substantially greater than what would normally occur in nearby uses or at other uses permitted in the neighborhood and then two that reasonable measures have been taken to minimize or mitigate the amount of vehicular traffic generated by the proposed development or in this case subdivision um i'm sorry that was some old language from a recent change um okay so that brings us to a next uh area so section 3505 is the designing configuration of the parcel boundaries um and so i think that in your presentation you clearly show the line going particularly to the street um and i think we meet the um um effectively shown that the dimensional requirements are you know are met here um i think that there's the one question to um expand upon here um and that um there is a requirement um to consider um the future subdivision of the two of the two parcels um and so i think this question is is that um if you were to further subdivide lot one would there be um a potential for access to further subdivide that law given the current conditions is there a and that is a question for either uh john or um whoever so i feel that um so this uh on lot one has over a thousand feet of will have over a thousand feet of frontage on northfield street uh so if there were to be some desire to further subdivide uh they they could potentially be more parcels with uh frontage onto northfield street so um this parcel does not become landlocked in any way um it's just a matter of how developable the the slopes on the property are very much um so i think the next i think section to hit upon here is design layout of necessary improvements and um public work said no comment on this but if you could just maybe talk a little bit about the access to uh city infrastructure like water and sewer and where is that located you know so um the existing hotel as well as um lot two um well the existing hotel has uh municipal connections by sewer and water to um existing city services in northfield street um lot two was formerly the site of the brown derby restaurant um and that had sewer and water connections to northfield street the city services there's you know there are major sewer and water lines in uh in northfield street and and and actually uh existing stubs for those services to this property um so it's very easily um serviced by the uh municipal services that being on northfield street i assume that the electrical and communications and all that stuff is uh is readily available correct correct the power and communication lines run right up and down northfield street um easy access to the site if fiber optic on northfield street yet you know yeah i i do not know um but i wouldn't i heard a yes from in the room you might not have been able to hear it so thank you um so did we have any comments from the fire chief um no we didn't i i think that if there was anything pressing bob would have spoken up i think he's probably been dealing with some other things but no we didn't have any comments i mean there's there's fire hydrants along here there's you know anything anything big that's put in on lot two is would need to um meet fire code and um you know depending on the situation that might include sprinklers but there's you know major major water lines right there along northfield street so that wouldn't be an issue yes i'm not mistaken when northfield street was rebuilt several years ago it also involved major upgrades to the water line so i think they're eight inch water lines now so that they're adequate power and pressure to to jet to one and that's that's one of those reasons why department of public works really doesn't have any concerns with the subdivision because northfield street when it was upgraded all those water lines the sewer lines were all upgraded immensely so it's 21st century service um would you so at landscaping and screening i think for subdivisions you know the way that we've sort of typically done that um you know done this under the new regulations is uh sort of ask the applicant if they've been willing to have a condition on this permit that uh that plan be um you know submitted um in conjunction with the you know future development um would type such type of condition to meet the landscaping and screening you know standards under the subdivision requirements um be okay for you to do during a you know a site plan review or any type of you know development on this parcel well i i would like to ask what what the substantive differences are between 3203 and 3506 32 yes so one reason we've been doing this fell is because sometimes when people come for these two lot subdivisions they then just want to put one or two dwelling units on a parcel and then the site plan standards and general landscaping standards wouldn't apply so the only hook we would have is these subdivision standards i know that's not necessarily the case here um there's really the the site plan landscaping requirements are much more stringent and have a lot more specifics in them than um the the subdivision 3506 um which yeah 3506 so you know a future development that's subject to the the other landscaping requirements is going to have to meet a whole lot more so it's not going to be a big burden on a future applicant well but isn't it duplicative to have 3203 apply as well as 3506 but there's no guarantee that whatever somebody proposes on that parcel is going to necessarily trigger 3203 um it's not having a future if somebody's already triggered 3203 having to also make sure they meet this one is not going to be a big deal they would already meet that anyway would the drb consider a condition that said in the event a project is applied for that does not trigger 3203 review then any applicant would be required to meet the strictures of 3506 that's your belt and suspenders yeah i think that works i think that because i think this is all of these standards in here about green stormwater infrastructure vegetated buffers buffers along waterways enhance appearance of street frontages and then maintain privacy that's all in 3203 i think that makes a lot of sense thank you so 3506 will be applicable only if 3203 is not that's correct yes makes sense so uh i guess the character of the neighborhood um is the next uh section which is 3507 um i think that we can uh maybe take a pause you know pause on really going into too much depth here um and maybe expand on the some some of the public comments that we have um but um you know as stated before by the applicant this is in the mixed use residential uh you know district um and you know certainly the subdivision that is proposed uh you know appears to very clearly sort of meet the character of the neighborhood as a subdivision um standard when it comes to lot size and in configuration in in that matter what we don't know is what would be proposed on this which is the for the date of a different hearing so i don't see a need necessarily to go into too much depth the staff concluded that this you know complies with the you know character of a neighborhood you know standards as the subdivision was approved um and um i think that's all i have for the staff report marita did i miss anything just one item that i so um i i i don't think it actually is is going to matter but for their record um so that we can actually get a tally of exactly how many parking spaces the hotel actually requires is there a a total square footage known of the public assembly space so the public assembly space isn't like large meeting rooms it's more the like the um you know the entry area or the um front desk the front desk area or a general like the the dining if there's a dining space or uh office business office space that that guests can use do we have a square footage of that i only have one experience of having visited the front front desk and met someone there met the applicant there um and it certainly wasn't 7200 square feet and there's i believe there's a coffee machine in the corner okay um john have you been there more recently um yes and that's also uh my experience i i would guess it's in the 100 to 200 square foot um zone but i have not measured it but it's i agree with you that it's definitely not 7200 square feet okay that's i think that's all we need the disconfirmation that there because as long as it's not not more than 7200 square feet it then you can have the parking that is there thank you very much yeah okay um i guess so i guess one last issue for clarification here and i think this is sort of like in either or maybe a inconsistency that you know exists on the on the plat here and that so we show can you uh can you call up the plat again uh john so you show on the plat this north of the proposed boundary that the southerly entrance to the Econologue um a driveway that goes in and goes up the proposed boundary line uh and then crosses um you know and then goes into that you know gravel area that's shown on the interior parcel a lot too so i look at this and i see that like you know you could possibly you know drive a vehicle or walk up this driveway and onto onto the parcel so i guess my question is is will that be blockated blockated off and there'll be no access between the two parcels here or will there'll be uh you know permitted access in some way um allowed to continue along that you know connected um gravel drive or paved drive whatever whatever whatever it is because i just seems like it has to be either one way or the other based on you know the plat if i were to you know go by this property or somebody like that you might see like oh i can you know go across that line and go onto north northfield street without you know further further further information um if you understand sort of that either or here that's quite neighborly most the time neighbors don't just avail themselves the use of their neighbors driveway or front yard or what have you um and i say that honestly um any aspect of ingress and degress on parcel two will be an element of major site point review when an application is submitted and so i i can represent to you the status of this contract between the applicant and a prospective purchaser does not include at this time any common access or use rights of use between the two parcels but that's just a representation of what exists now i can tell you what was not bargained for this is a lot like monopoly you can't build a hotel until you have three houses and you don't sell rights unless they're spelled out in the contract and so they're to my knowledge and i was involved in the drafting of the contract there is no exchange of property rights between parcels one and parcel two at this time and that's just a representation as to what exists now i can't i i'm not we haven't gone to a closing yet but that's number one number two any element that would involve such a common use on parcel one or parcel two would be an element of major site plan review and now there may be in the future there may be stormwater issues or water and sewer issues or accesses and technical engineering issues that might arise in which one property owner alleviates the difficulty the adjoining property owner has i i can't say that won't happen but there's no element of parcel one that there's no element by which parcel one wants to provide anything more to parcel two than it has to that's a i think that's that that's a clear answer i um yeah i think if that's if that's the current current situation that i'm good i'm good with that any other questions from the board before we start with the public comment okay i don't have any questions i'm just eager to hear the public's comments at this time okay um i think that i would entertain a five minute recess prior to entering this day just so that we can do it in the orderly fashion that is makes sense but the board members like to continue going or would a five minute recess be something like i'm sorry jean you're going to have to speak up five minutes five minute recesses nine okay uh so we will reconvene here at eight oh five um and um meantime everyone just hang hang tight um there's meredith yeah can i make a comment um let's let's can we wait till we reconvene no it's about it's about the um your description you know the message you sent out to us with the big stop sign for the butters okay i just want to say that it's really hard to see the the link to this zoom meeting it's a red background okay and blue text if it could be link could be put down in the white area and maybe bigger okay i'll i'll well we'll work on adjusting that thank you for that critique okay that's all okay thanks p back to order is eight oh five um we are going to uh hear some comments from the public of folks that are here in the room um so the first person we'd like to recognize the speaker let everybody know that we're not ignoring zoom that we're going to start with people here in the room and then we'll get to them just so they're not so the order here is we're gonna um do the folks in the room first um we have a couple people that are representing um a group here um to make things more efficient um and then we'll be sure to get to everyone on the zoom platform after we do everything in the room here um so i'd like to recognize Emma is here um to speak on the and so instead of there if you could go to the stand-up microphone um and phil you can still sit at the table if you need to in case we have other questions for you however you want to do it um and so if you could make sure to state your name really clearly for the record and your address um and then go into your good let me know if you can't hear me and you you've got that one that's awesome um so good evening good evening um my name is Emma Zavez I live at three derby drive a property which abuts the proposed lot number two i'm also the primary contact for the derby drive metal lane abbey road and mountain view street neighborhood residents who submitted a letter requesting interested party status we live in the northfield street neighborhood a residential 9 000 district that surrounds the proposed lot number two on three of its four sides as the primary contact I will provide a summary of our key concerns as well as recommendations however I want to note that many of my neighbors are here tonight and I fully support their right to speak to their own personal concerns as well I want to emphasize that our concerns and recommendations are specific to the subdivision application according to section 3505 of the Montpelier zoning regulations a subdivision application should be designed in such a way as to present quote foreseeable difficulties in future development of the parcel the derby has the authority to attach conditions to a subdivision plan that it deems necessary for approval we submit that the application as written would create foreseeable difficulties in the following three areas and we call the derby to take steps to address these issues at this early stage in the process rather than wait until they become more serious or contentious the first issue is the character of the neighborhood as written the subdivision application is not in keeping with the established development pattern of the neighborhood the northfield street north neighborhood to which the application refers is not a true neighborhood but rather a steep lease a steeply sloped and heavily wooded area running along lower northfield street in which a scattering of buildings have been constructed at various points over the past 150 years although this stretch of northfield street has been designated as a mixed-use district in fact with the exception of the much more recently constructed icon a large motel all of the buildings are residences furthermore lot number two would be surrounded on three of its four sides by the residential 9000 district and the proposed access point to that lot would be located well within our small neighborhood which was established as a planned residential community in the early 1950s our recommendation is that the derby should require that approval of the subdivision be subject to the condition that any application for a development or zoning permit on lot number two must ensure that the lot will be developed in a manner in keeping with the character of the neighborhood which physically surrounds it the residential 9000 district this includes proper access management and landscaping so that it does not alter the character of our neighborhood the second issue is traffic as written the subdivision application would create foreseeable difficulties with traffic congestion and pedestrian safety by making derby drive the primary entry egress for a possible sizable future development like the one presented to the design review committee by rick bow this past spring derby drive is a small residential road that already experiences a high volume of traffic due to the presence of national life and because it is used as a gps-enabled shortcut to and from exit 8 of interstate 89 the derby drive access point identified in the subdivision application is so close to the stop sign at northfield street intersection that it almost it would is almost certain to lead to the vehicle to vehicle gridlock on both derby drive and northfield street during peak hours our recommendation is that in order to determine whether or not the subdivision will be free of foreseeable difficulties in providing access to buildings the drb should require prior to approval of this final subdivision application that a thorough traffic study be conducted to ascertain the impact of the potential for a significant number of cars entering and exiting the parking lot our third issue is noise and light pollution as written the subdivision application would likely create foreseeable difficulties with noise and light pollution entering the residential neighborhood in the parking lot of a future development this is a particular concern for immediate butters on meadow lane and derby drive our recommendation is that the drb should condition the approval of a subdivision on a requirement that any application for a development or zoning permit on the new lot number two would include a professionally designed landscaping and screening plan and that effectively addresses concerns about light pollution and noise as well as the visual impact of a large development and in the handout which i have copies of i think meredith probably distributed to board members there is a screenshot of the zoning district map indicating where the parcel is located in the middle of the residential 9 000 district on behalf of my neighbors thank you very much thank you amma next public comment we'd like is peter kelvin here the person i would like to defer a little later please okay is anyone else here present in the room that would like to issue public comment yes anybody anybody in the room would like to if you would like to if you come up to the mic stand up microphone just introduce yourself and uh go right ahead hi i'm dan jones i live at 116 northfield street i am the closest to butter if you will um across the street uh so anything done there i will be looking at over my morning coffee um it is interesting to note about the whole thing about the character of the neighborhood that actually up until there was quite a stink made of it we had a rotting hulk of the brown derby there for a number of years that uh neither helped the neighborhood um you know created vermin etc we have the motel which is a hardly sightly if you will up the hill on the other side across the street there is um a couple of large apartment houses uh with eight or nine units and so the idea that this is a single family residential neighborhood um is a bit of a scam uh the the area is actually of mixed use and very clearly mixed use and probably should be considered as such um i say this because i believe that we have to start looking at a broader use of our properties in town rather than trying to maintain the idea of a mayberry single family home neighborhoods we're a central uh vermont city and we have to start uh treating as such and that particular lot actually could allow itself to be developed in a way that would add to the absolute housing need in the city we have a crisis and we have to do it as far as the traffic an extra 20 cars at any point is de minimis because we have regular uh traffic flow down northfield street from northfield at the rush hours that can be uh go on for quite a while we have the traffic flow from national life going on so uh it is a bit of a red herring to talk about the traffic flow i think we have a an area that is already highly trafficked uh you know as far as uh that goes i would like to say you know anything that goes in there we're not talking about a parking garage thank heavens and uh we would like to uh see you know from my point of view i'd like to see the design review board development review board take into consideration in this the allowance of the broadest possible future uses of this property thank you very much just uh introduce yourself and go ahead hi my name is steven cook 34 mountain view street and um i have lived in the on mountain view street for about 18 years now and the property at 101 northfield street has been the topic of conversation for nearly the entire time i've lived there i've spoken front of this committee as well as city council as well as work with the mayor as well as work with the city manager uh on the former brown derby property which took 10 years to have taken down it was blight on the neighborhood needless to say a lot of us who live through that time frame are a bit concerned um i know we're not talking about the development but we've all seen photos we've read the articles so we're concerned um you know there's a number of issues at play here a lot some of which have already been mentioned but another one but i i am also concerned about traffic related issues the national life campus is located in that area which brings in a couple thousand employees every weekday under normal circumstances and uh the exit from derby onto northfield street can get really backed up uh at times so making that exit onto derby drive is going to be a challenge for all of us who live in that area if that is the location of where that entrance and exit is going to be located um and traffic along northfield street is also pretty bad at times backing up all the way to the account lodge or further again under normal circumstances so you know we have a number of concerns those are my concerns um and i'll leave it at that thank you thank you very much anyone else uh here in person like to go before we go to the remote yeah come forward just martin homersky i'm at 11 medallane b-r-o m-i-r-s-k-i thank you um can we put the visual back up the map of the lot i just want some clarification on so the the um the plat either one either the satellite image or the plat yeah john could you share the um plat just because you have it up right away work i'm working on it okay yep no thank you if for some reason it's not working i can do it i just have to what is that like how's that um is that adequate yes um so i'm basically just recently getting that that lot lot one and also lot two lot two and lot one we're talking about we're talking about a neighborhood but the definition of neighborhood is pretty loose there's the technical definition and then there's you know what we think of as a neighborhood so i just learned that lot one and lot two are a neighborhood the northfield street north neighborhood that goes all the way down to all the way down yep but this is sort of like a peninsula and in fact what we're seeing here on every side is a different neighborhood it's the northfield street neighborhood which is a which like emma said is a residential 9 000 neighborhood okay so that's its own internal it's like it's not really in a neighborhood it's um yeah i just want i just needed the visual aid that so we're surrounded by that that neighborhood is surrounded by in fact a whole another neighborhood that lot that lot is its own neighborhood um can can i address this okay um so john can you stop sharing your screen did i put this in just a minute give me one second okay so let me pull up the staff report so people at home can see this as well give me a second i don't have the whole packet open um so in january of 2018 a whole new set of zoning regulations were adopted okay and this was a multi-year process and part of that was redrawing where zoning districts were in montpelier now this happened before i took my job but i've i've heard lots of discussion about it um and new lines were drawn for a lot of districts so that we would actually have neighborhoods um in zoning districts where the parcels actually complied with the standards of those districts and tried to group similar types of development and properties together so in some of those instances the neighborhoods are nice blocks right um but in some of them they're kind of odd shapes i'm just trying to get to the right page here um and this is one of those zoning district neighborhoods where it's an odd shape and that is in part because you do have the hotel there right um and that particular use would not be allowed at all in right the surrounding residential neighborhood right and so this goes down and these other parcels were brought into this particular neighborhood because because these are different kinds of housing compared to some of these little lots where it's single family right and these are also closer to the you know some people call it like the gas station alley but where you've got the gas stations and other commercial development it really isn't like a lot of these other parcels the parcel sizes are a lot different and these buildings because of where they're located are a little more um apt to be able to be some of those non-residential uses that are allowed in mixed use right i mean i know at some point there was a um like a hair salon down in one of those buildings um down near river street um it's it's so it wasn't just drawn willy nilly um but it is one of those ones where there's a strange little peninsula in part because this parcel is so long yes right i just want to make it clear that anything that's built on lot two any structure big or small if you walk out the front door of your of your structure and you step off your property you're in a residential 9 000 neighborhood if you got your side door and step off your property you're in a residential 9 000 neighborhood you've got the back door and step off your property you're in a residential 9 000 neighborhood yep and and that's one reason I pointed that out in the staff report is to make sure the board was aware of that that it is and that why this picture is in the staff report to show the board that you know there's there's there are two neighborhoods at play here. Thank you. Yeah. Anyone else here in person that would. Yes, please come up. My name is Jennifer Roberts. I live at 12 Mountain View Street. And I bought my house earlier this year. And when I was looking at the house I considered the fact that I would have to deal with national life traffic at my house which is at the corner of Derby Drive and Mountain View Street traffic is particularly problematic because when I back out of my driveway, I have traffic coming from three different directions potentially so I'm definitely very concerned about additional traffic that development on these lots might cause and completely support the idea of doing a traffic study. But as I said I considered the traffic and I bought the house anyway because I love the house and I especially love the neighborhood. It's a lovely small very connected neighborhood. So I'm also very concerned with one of the other points that Emma made in her great presentation of what any kind of large scale development would do to the character of our neighborhood. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Yes, please come forward. Hello, my name is Deborah Archer and I live at 6 Derby Drive. My property is diagonal to the proposed subdivision lot. And I would just ask members of the board to consider that the application for subdivision is not a standalone process. I can't imagine the current owners are going to subdivide the property to keep it as it is now. Maybe as a town start considering how to address a shortage of housing in our town and start looking towards infill as a way to address those those concerns for a lack of housing in our town. I just ask that the members of the board consider any concerns that they might have if a subdivision would to occur near their home how they would what concerns they would have how they would apply those concerns. Thank you. Thank you very much for your comment. Anyone else here in person. Okay. We'll go to anyone. The folks that screen to keep track of who's in order for my screen, either one I just in here. Okay, so I think Billy Pearl will be next. So I'm just going to start from the top on my screen and move down. Okay, that okay. Well, so we'll now recognize Billy Pearl to issue any comment may have. So Billy if you can, can you unmute yourself and just let us know if you have any comments. Yes. Yes. Okay, and if you could let us know, remind me what your address is, and then present your comments. I live at 35 colonies drive with my wife Kathleen. Can you hear me. Yes, we can thank you Billy. I always had a very negative attitude towards the ownership of the economy lodge, because they have been slum lords to the extreme, Billy, and for the last 20 years they have denigrated on neighborhood that's all I want to say. Thank you for your comment. Okay, so Joe Moore would be next. Joe Moore would you like to speak. Yes, thank you. My name is Joseph Moore. I live at three Derby Drive. I'm going to thank the review board for allowing us the opportunity to speak. I know it's getting late on a Monday evening. So, like I said, my name is Joe Moore and my partner Emma and I live at three Derby Drive, which is the parcel at the corner of Derby and Meadow Lane, immediately abutting the proposed lot number two from from the rear. So before I quickly echo the concerns of my neighbors regarding foreseeable difficulties with traffic traffic volume, pedestrian safety noise and light pollution, and potential alterations to the character of our neighborhood, resulting from a large development on the proposed lot. And I urge the review board to carefully consider our collective recommendations for addressing those issues. Additionally, I want to bring to your attention a particular concern that Emma and I have with the lot to boundary lines as drawn in the subdivision application. So the subdivision plat included with the application that you saw earlier indicates that our driveway encroaches the lot number two boundary on the rear side near Derby Drive. On the map, you'll see it has a little outline of our driveway with an arrow labeled driveway encroachment pointing to it. And I just want to say that, you know, we, we do not believe that our driveway passes over the property line. The edge of the driveway is several feet from the tree line that divides the properties. So if you look closely at the satellite image on the preceding page, it's clear from DeWolf's own rendering that there's at least several feet of space between the edge of our driveway, and the applicants placement of the property line. So we just want to encourage you to verify the accuracy of the applicant survey prior to approval of the subdivision. You can understand why we would be a little bit uncomfortable with the DRB signing off on an application that indicates that our driveway is not entirely on our property. Finally, I just want to say, speaking for myself, I am very much in favor of socially responsible housing development. I think we have a housing crisis. And we should be doing everything in our power to ensure that Vermonters have access to truly affordable, safe and sanitary housing. Speaking for myself isn't a butter. And for many of my neighbors, so I know personally, we're not asking you to limits use of this parcel to single family home. That that's a straw man argument no one is suggesting that what we're asking you to do is consider how a potential sizeable development would impact our neighborhood and take steps to make sure that any future housing is responsibly integrated into the surrounding community and considers the safety of residents and particularly our traffic concerns. Thank you very much. Thank you very much for your comment. I guess at this time does the applicant have any any comments or anything that they would like to share, given the current public comments thus far. I think the foreseeable difficulties words of art that are used in the zoning ordinance deal with foreseeable difficulties that the rational man could identify with a specific development or project. It's a very difficult pun intended for Institute of Traffic Engineers to perform a traffic study for a project that has not yet been defined. It's also very difficult to design to provide a landscape design that prevents noise and light pollution for a project that itself has not yet been designed. If you notice the character of the area, you cannot project. If you don't have a plan in mind specific project. It's virtually impossible to assess what impact the undefined project has on the character of the area. I recognize the issue we have here and I'm sympathetic to the neighbors and to the plate they find themselves in. The zoning ordinance contemplates this is not this is a legal fiction and the zoning ordinance ordinance contemplates the ability of a landowner to subdivide the parcel without asking for view of a project on a lot. And that's what we have here. I think the neighbors should understand that major site plan review will enable all of them to address these issues when there's a concrete project that's presented. And that's, that's all I'll say about foreseeable difficulties as to the location of the driveway. Yes, that's a matter that's not a matter that's just dishable by the development review board. It's a private property matter, and the way for that neighbor to discuss it is to be in contact with the surveyor perform the survey. And I will take issue with the neighbors saying that there's a tree line that defines the property boundary. The boundaries exist with or without the tree line and one draws an implication or an inference from the location of a tree line. So, it's very easy to contact the surveyor and work with them on site to determine and ascertain how they set their pins. It's really not a matter for the DRB. Meredith, do you have any additional comment on that? No, I think that's right. So I think we need to go back. Just in case she has something like she has to log off or something have a Megan. I think that's where they've drawn the boundary line and those two are in conflict in the applicants application. So the the flat is the is the thing that's required by the subdivision and that's what's going to get recorded and signed as as approved. Okay, so the satellite with boundary lines is not accurate. That's sort of a overarching just guidance, give everybody the big picture sort of the thing that will be governing the subdivision is the plat that has all those survey notes on it. Okay. And so, it's okay for them to be in conflict. Yes. The lot lines on it on the Google Earth photo are imprecise. Yes, from outer space. Okay, hold on one second. This could be somebody on zoom that has their hand up and I want to make sure we get to them before they have to ask a question about the. Yeah, I mean it's on it's on the plat the surveyor is the Wolf engineering associates. Sorry, sorry, nope, sorry, sorry, that's the that's it was planned prepared for its true line land surveyors incorporated. This will be in the recording for the plot date is July 28 2021. And this document is down in our office and it's also posted on the website. I can zoom in on this, but it's true line land surveyors incorporated they're out of St. Johnsbury. And anybody who wants to get their full contact information they can email me and I can send it to them. If they need it. It's also all out on there. So, Megan, how I think had her hand raised I just want to make sure in case you had to log off that Rob is that good to have a good talk. Hi, thanks. Yeah, thanks for being here everybody I really appreciate the conversation. I would like to thank and echo my neighbors concerns. I live at 66 Abbey Road. So we are not direct about us but we're directly around the corner and drive every single day by the proposed subdivision lot. And we too have lived here for almost 11 years and the site previously was very difficult to get action on as it was an eyesore and there were rodents and pests and people who are all the time criminal activity and so on. So, I also just echo what my neighbors had said about how concerned, some of us feel about the idea of moving right into another development that feels like, even though this hearing is about subdivision I think we've all or many of us have seen the proposed project. So to suggest that this is while procedurally this is merely hearing about the subdivision I think to suggest that there's no idea what could possibly be planned there is simply disingenuous. And so with that said, understanding that no project has been approved because no, it couldn't be the case since there's been a subdivision yet. I'm still understanding that there are substantial concerns, even among people who fully support affordable housing at a multi family level. There are a lot of concerns regarding the foreseeable difficulties for traffic light noise in the character the neighborhood. Specifically, I'd like to bring attention to not only the impact on drivers but the impact on pedestrians. It's a pedestrian neighborhood. We have children and pets who, as it stands are already impacted by the national traffic but which, you know, is manageable. Because it's kind of only two times the day that the national life walking becomes significant. My 11 year old has expressed concern that if there's additional development that fronts enters and exits on to Derby Drive, her ability to be at ease as a pedestrian in the neighborhood, walking with pets could be impacted as well. So I would like to integrate that into the conversation as well. And thank you so much for doing all this and hearing all of our comments I really appreciate it. Ben Montrose, did you have any public comment to issue tonight. Just to second the expressions from my neighbors and just the concerns of trying to keep with the neighborhood character. I agree with the concerns about traffic there aren't even stop signs up here. So there's a general sense of confusion as to what to do when you get to Meadow and Derby and Mountain View and additional traffic will exacerbate that for sure. I've seen some pretty foolish things by some pretty foolish drivers and if there's going to be an influx in traffic and drivers that is a significant concern. I walk to work at the National Life Building and I can tell you, it gets pretty nutty up here at certain parts of the day so I just would wish that that would be be considered as part of it. Thank you very much for for being brief and really appreciate your comment. Hey James, you want to go ahead, Sheridan. Hold on Jean. Hold on a second. So, I know that is there anybody in the room that actually has to leave. Okay. Hold on. Teresa I know you have your hand up. Is this do you need to head out. Oh no I just thought that was the protocol. Right so what I'm trying to do is I'm I'm trying to go through my screen to make sure we had everybody and check everybody off in order on my screen. So but when you put your hand up you pop to the top of my screen. We have Lori Bowman and Andy. I don't think we've heard from you yet. Everybody on the zoom call would use the raise hand function if you would like to speak. We can do that. And then we can make not everybody knows how to do that. Okay. So, I mean, because then if they all put their hands up it's going to reshuffle my whole order. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. Sorry. So Lori Bowman, do you have any comments? If so, then you can unmute. Thank you. No, we don't have at this time. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So sorry. Just reshuffled again. Because Teresa put her hand back down. Oh, now Teresa is next. Teresa, go ahead. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And I just want to say that we all understand. That this is a hearing for a subdivision. And that we will have an opportunity later on when the development that we've all seen the picture of and, you know, is, is, you know, is actually presented to the DRB. But here I just want to express some fears that we have. That the development starts rolling once it gets proposed. We as a small neighborhood will not have the means to go up against these large corporation and their lawyers. And so we'd like the DRB to now listen to our concerns. So that when that next step happens, we are not defenseless. Because we are not going to be able to hire big lawyers to. You know, to deal with both. If it turns out that they're doing something that we feel like is really dangerous to our neighborhood. And so to the extent that the law and the provisions and the way this whole process works to the extent that that is possible for the DRB to right now address some of these concerns through this process, we would really be appreciative of it because we may be more to give us some defenses for the next stage. Thank you. Thank you very much for your comment. We have the dolls. I recognize the dolls to see their public comments. We don't have any at this time, but we're very grateful for everybody's patience and clarity. Yeah, thank you. Thank you very much. So Matthew and Catherine. So that's Matthew and Catherine. Nunnally. Do you have any comments, please unmute and make them. Hi. Hi, so yeah, we live at eight Mountain View street. And echo much of what our neighbors have had to say. We really appreciate everyone's comments. So it's it's really interesting and enlightening to sit through this meeting and hear how everything is. Sort of how things go, how things get done. It's interesting to see how the neighborhood lines that were drawn. And. Interesting like criteria for. The character of the neighborhood, especially I thought that was interesting. We'll, I guess we'll, we'll wait to comment on a lot of the other things as the process moves forward. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Can I just, hold on, I think we lost. Dana at some point. Anyone else in the Rumba like to speak just while we get our order figured out here. Go ahead. You gotta come up to the microphone. So that people online answer the person who does the minutes can hear you. I want to note that it was more than facetious to, to say, three times, we're talking about for a project that has not yet been designed on a project has been designed. That's a fact. A project has been designed. We're not talking about a project that has not been yet been designed, which was stated to dismiss concerns three times. I just want to sort of back up here. I think I opened the meeting, you know, with, with, with this, but essentially we have one set of regulations to review a subdivision. We have another set of regulations to review, you know, you know, a development of apartment complex, you know, a single family home, which may not become before this board, but there is a, you know, there is a process. And the problem is that if we try and apply the regulations for Part B to this to this process, our hands are actually pretty tied and like, we can't even respond to any of the, you know, any of the comments. The regulations just don't allow us to do much. And so it's not that, you know, we're ignoring or anything here. It's that the better fit based on the tools that we have in order to address on offsite impacts are dealt with through a formal proposal and ask for review from the client for a specific, you know, development. And that's just the background here. Meredith, back me up if you have anything else. So, um, just to sort of, there is a, there is a, there was a preliminary proposal that was run through the neighbors, and it was run through the design review committee for sort of a first and for the design review committee there was sort of a first tier review right and it had images of the building it had ideas about maybe how many, how many apartments might be in there. It had some very general sketched out stuff on the surface right on site plan. I would never ever accept that minimal amount of information for an application for that kind of development. I need to have a full erosion control plan. I need to have all the stormwater layout put out. I need to know exactly how many parking spaces are going in exactly where those are how many ADA accessible parking spaces are put in, where all of the lighting is exactly what species of trees and shrubs are proposed where they're going for something really big it might trigger trigger a traffic study. So, I think that's one of the specifics of that. I would not, I wouldn't even look at it myself to do a staff report until I get all that information. Yes, we've all seen the preliminary proposal. That team, as far as I know, does not have all the additional data that they would need to show to even respond to your concerns. I haven't seen anything like that until we have that and we have the full package so that there can be a cohesive response to concerns. Right. So that I can look at it and so that our department heads can look at it right so I run it through the Department of Public Works, something like this I would run through the police department, the fire department, probably our building specter would have an initial look at the plans because he needs to look and see does it need, you know, a sprinkler system because if it needs a sprinkler system, it needs a different amount of water, and Department of Public Works needs to make sure that the water line can support that. Something this big I may even reach out to the local school district to say what what would an influx of, you know, X number of potential students if there's two bedroom apartments. There's a whole bunch of preliminary review that goes into it before we get to a public hearing. And before I am even allowed to pass it on to the development review board. So that's I have all the same questions you do about traffic and access right for a big proposal, but they don't have that data for me yet, or I would have that application. That right if we were talking about somebody who owns the property already and wants to subdivide and knows what they're going to do. It was all one person one entity. We would have probably been more up to push to say hey, you know what you're going to do here. Let's do it all at once. But it's different entities it's different owners it's different developers right who own it versus who wants to potentially develop it. There's no, there's no, there's no promise it's actually going to happen. Right. There's always chance. You know, that would be a whole different circuit was one entity doing the whole thing, but they don't have that information. I can't. I can't I can't even ask them and say what's what's going to happen with this stuff right because I understand the designed there's designed as in we have this idea, we have this preliminary and then there's designed the level of an application. You know, okay, I think, I think it might have been a misuse of phrasing as in, we don't have we don't have something designed to the level where we can say we have a complete application. And we can apply everything to it right if I if I had that it would it would be in the file and I'd have it as an application stamped and on an agenda. So I get it. I understand the discrepancy, right. But we're also the board and me as as zoning administrator we're limited to reviewing the application that we have before us. It's part of the requirement of the board. And if it's an administrative permit for me. Right. Somebody comes before me with a two family home I can't be like, Oh, but in future you could put in five units here so you have to show me that what you would do that. I'm not allowed to do that. The same sort of situation as as difficult as it is for us all to deal with that discrepancy in our heads. So we have Matthew Catherine. So, Susan Roup. And then I'm going to need to read this into the record. Good evening. I will try and keep it as brief as I can. First of all, I'll agree with my, with my neighbors. I live at 17 Mountain View, which is at the intersection of Meadow Lane and Mountain View. My family has lived in this house since 1952. So I know a little something about the, the area. So first of all, I think you'll find that the, the site for a lot to is virtually flat now. It used to have a grade to it, but I believe it's virtually flat now, and indeed is a mud hollow for after torrential rains. It used to be a motel that is in the where the gravel road is in the upper lot. And that was what the driveway onto onto Derby Drive was for was, and there was one at the other end of the ground derby restaurant, so that they could go out either way. There are very few units there. I believe there might have been 10 but might have been fewer. And it did provide some excitement of poor traffic. Second of all, the, the infrastructure concerns me. I know we had the upgrade to water and sewer on Northfield Street, but I can tell you that my water pressure did not improve with that upgrade. And in fact, stayed just about stable sort of kind of but certainly not the same kind of water pressure that you get in most of the city of Montpellier so the addition potential addition of any larger units in that area concerns me. Last but not least, I've raised four dogs, five cats, two parents from this house and and traffic has always been a challenge and the, especially when national life was built. They cut down my favorite climbing tree to do that by the way. And it, it over time, it's gone through several phases, the worst of which there were probably a decade when it took 45 minutes in the morning and the evening for the traffic to be other than bumper to bumper from national life down. And I only mentioned that because if you're going to have additional traffic flow under Derby Drive that's, that's just going to be a disaster. So I thank you for your time that's pretty much what I had to say. Thank you. Okay, thank you very much Susan for your comment. Bob Dunham would you like to have any comment here. You're unmuted Bob so you, oh, you were. There you go. I don't have any comment at this time. Thanks. Thank you very much. Can I just read something we have I have somebody use the chat and then locked off so Dana Hawke so it's D. A. N. A. H. O. C. K. commented thank you this meeting has been very helpful. I would add that at this point it seems like the property meets all the requirements for the subdivision. I hear what the neighbors are saying about concerns about what comes next but at this point I support the subdivision. And we have somebody there's somebody on on an iPhone that I don't have a phone number or a name associated with that. Could be me. Yes. Sorry, I joined late my name is Diane Dakota I live at seven Mountain View and have since 1997. I agree with what everybody said. Go Bob go Emma. I see what's going on. I don't know what Maureen maybe she was very eloquent. My concerns are their concerns traffic water and also with the sewage because I've had to sewer back up into my basement three times. They say it's fixed now but that could be another issue and I really don't want a chocolate fountain going in my brand new washing machine. Ever again. need more housing because that's why my kiddos are still living with me but I'm also very concerned for pedestrian and vehicular traffic because the national life people drive like maniacs because there is no yield, no stop and their left is the most important and if there's going to be a lot of traffic in and out of Derby within I don't know how many feet not many of a stop sign that's also going to be another issue. I agree with everybody else and bless you guys for doing this meeting because I would pull out every last hair out of my head if I had to do this on a regular basis. Well thank you very much for your comment. Peter would you like to come up and give a couple comments here? Yeah we do have one more person that hasn't spoken yet. Duncan Robb on zoom sorry Peter just let me get this one more. So Duncan Robb do you have anything you wanted to add? You'll need to unmute yourself. Maybe we missed Emily Shelly she just put her hand up and well things have shuffled around we have a GM Sheridan too. Okay Duncan's not un-nooting himself so I think people got moved around. So Emily yeah Emily Shelly sorry. Hi just a point of fact if you look at the participants list that doesn't move. That little thing on the bottom since we've all gotten a little bit better at some of these things over the last year so. This is we haven't had this many participants like this whole time so thank you. I'm Emily Shelly and I live at Fort Derby Drive. I'm directly opposite the proposed lot too and the access would be pretty much directly across from my parcel and so I'm not going to reiterate. I support many of what my neighbors have said thus far. I was glad to hear that the possibility of a curb cut to Northfield Drive isn't off the table. You know as you say we don't know exactly what would go in there but I was a little concerned that being a class one town highway that that would be I know it's not preferred but at least if it's still on the table we have some room and the only other thing I would say is that I was wondering what the best way for us to stay participating as the future steps of this process go forward because I'm a direct a butter I got a letter I think the fact that we have so many people here is more due to the fact that we have thanks to Peter and others a neighborhood association now but I think many of the folks didn't actually get aren't notified because they're not directly a direct a butters but are nonetheless concerned and want to stay involved in the discussion. Yeah thank you Emily and I think I just talk a little bit about the extra of opportunities for participation and I think that you've got 3 baby avenues you know one is the actual application that may or may not come before you know this board which would be a similar type meeting but you know on different you know issues also what you have is the planning commission in Montpelier meets you know at least monthly and there's policy level decisions that you know can be made at that which you know it's an important process to participate in and you know also there's comments for policy level decisions that can happen that you know city council let's not say that anything you said isn't going to be considered in this meeting but I just wanted to throw those out there as options as things move forward. Can I? Yes please go ahead. Okay so when it comes to the actually getting notice the you know we go by state statute with regard to that mailed notice and so yeah it's the the direct abutters and property owners across the street that get that specific mailed notice. We have also Peter Kelman has requested to get notice of it was this final app the subdivision application as well as it would probably be like the next development application right for the for the new lot too it's not something where we just have people on forever and ever as people to be notified for a parcel that they're not abutting that's something that would be really really hard to keep track of that because we do anticipate an application you know Peter has asked to be sit to be a notice person because of his role in CAN and so you know and you know another option is to check and anybody who emails me can do this we have a city web page that is a pending applications for public hearing page that's through our department the Department of Planning and Community Development so if at any time you're curious about what might be coming up on a public for public hearing whether it's the design review committee or the development review board we post those applications there when the public notice has been mailed so that's you know two to three weeks before the agendas get posted and then I would need to double check on this there used to be under an old our old website system a way to get on an email list so every time an agenda was posted for a particular committee you would get an email on that that's a lot of emails if you only are concerned about one application you know those are options you can also always just email myself or Audra Brown to ask hey has something been submitted yet if you're not in the butter but I think for this particular project probably keeping in touch with Peter keeping in touch with Emma especially because Emma isn't a butter and she will be getting the notice those might be your the best avenues and then like I said feel free to to email or call into our office I hope that helps there and there will be when we actually have a project it will need to go before the design review committee for just about anything that gets built there and then the largest type projects would need to go through and by larger I say anything other than a single or two family home are gonna need to come to the development review board because it was all trigger site plan and it would have to be a new structure because there's nothing on the parcel I hope that addressed your concerns so then sorry there was James Sheridan I don't think got to speak yes sorry about that James can you hear me yes okay my name is James Sheridan I live at 13 Mountain View I grew up on Ken Derby Drive where my mother still lives who's lived there for over 65 years my brother and wife live with her and I'm representing the four of us I have full power of attorney for my mother on everything and she has to mention and so I manage the two properties I'm right across the street from her I'd like to make first of all a comment on the water situation I was a city counselor for 12 years representing this district so I have some history of the water situation the water situation is divided into three quadrants this section the section up on Town Hill and this section over by Territory we have the worst water situation in the city because we are the only quadrant that doesn't have a water tower to stabilize our water I know that for a fact because I have arranged for during my time on the council I cut a deal with Westview Metals to get some land for them to build the water tower there so we could stabilize our water it is not as good as the rest of the city I have lived in another part of the city so I know that for a fact so I am a very surprised Kurt Montaya who I know who was hired during my time on the council did not make a notice of that to you people that the water situation is different because there is no water tower up here okay that's the first thing I want to ask a question I think is related to subdivision you talked about how when the road enters from Derby Drive and it swings around and goes to Mountain View but it crosses over onto the hotel's property is it too late after the subdivision is made for you to ask say that a right-of-way has to be given for that road to be used as access out of the proposed possible parking lot that goes to new down to Norfield Street because you know if it's done deal and they can't get a right-of-way at that point then can you say that they have to or is it too late so that's a question I have for you I'd like to make a comment on a comment that was made by somebody that I think part of it should be struck from the record now is by Dan Jones making a comment that what's 20 cars I would like to know where he got that figure of 20 cars does he have inside knowledge that is how many cars that are going to be used in that property because I could say to you maybe there's going to be 40 units that equals maybe two cars a unit because everybody has their own car and let's say it's couples that's 80 cars that's four times as many cars as he talks about now I'm not throwing that figure out that I think it should be used because I don't know that for a fact I don't think he knows that for a fact so I don't think that should be considered as a comment I grew up in the neighborhood like Susie I know the history it's always done a traffic nightmare especially when national life is full and it is starting to fill up again the parking lot is starting to get full again and over time as the pandemic maybe recedes it's going to get more cars so that has always been a stressed intersection at Northfield and Derby Drive but again I would like to know can you ask for a right away after a subdivision is granted maybe there's a legal person here Phil Zalinger might know I know him and he was on the DRB for a long time so I think that's something that needs to be answered before the subdivision was made thank you thank you James is the applicant have any comments at this time in response to Jim Sheridan's comment anything I didn't understand his question about a right of way to do yes I think that he's asking if there is an existing you know gravel or paved road that goes through the parcel and that after lot two cells or lot one if one or the other were would it at that point be impossible for one of the owners to establish a right of way through the parcel no the question was will the DRB be able to demand you know right away has to be granted after the fact that was the question no so you understand my question Phil well I believe I do Jim but the DRB can't condition a permit upon well the DRB could condition a permit upon the applicant obtaining a right of way over to joining property that would leave the applicant between a rock and a hard place because you can't compel the neighbor to grant the right of way nor nor can the DRB compel the neighbor to grant a right of way well that was my question so you answered it and I'm just saying by the time the subdivision is made it's obviously too late to get that right away so they can have access to Norfield Street so all the parking lot does not empty under the drive thank you for your answer do you have anything to add Meredith if you're good then I'm not I'm I'm I'm good I think with it at this point I I think that the point that James is making here that is that it's through the subdivision process at which if necessary the DRB may you know see fit the needed for of right of way now you know I think it may be case that you know for access in circulation you know as we have to address for the subdivision not knowing what you know is proposed here or what a traffic study for repose might be you know maybe not as much as what the DRP's require but the applicant might not might not want to you know reduce their opportunities for you know access if possible and so if there's an existing access like maybe it would be beneficial to at this juncture you know make that a possibility going going forward and I think that that's that's the point as I understand it that the James is you know it is trying to make which I see that's exactly right thank you in other words if it's too late then why can't you know what is it what are you holding this hearing for if you're not going to consider stuff that when it's and then it becomes too late okay thank you for your comments James I think we'll move on to the next is there anyone else on the on the zoom Jay Erickson do you have any public comment Jay you're muted I don't know if you have anything you wanted to say it is getting a little bit late so I think we do want to start wrapping this up Peter Kalman do you have anything to add I live at Six Mountain Dew Street and almost any increase in traffic on Derby Drive is likely to make even more dangerous partially obstructed left-hand turn from Derby Drive onto our section of Mountain Dew Street there is nothing fictional there's nothing fictional about the traffic situation as I think you've heard there's no reason why a traffic study could not be done regardless of even whether or not this a subdivision had been applied for this is a very dangerous area and a traffic study is called for I'm also the can coordinator for the Mountain Dew neighborhood many of whose residents have been asking me since June about the reported both proposals to develop a large market rate apartment building on the former Brown Derby property which took me completely by surprise because like most of the people in my neighborhood we were not notified we didn't even know it was happening only a few of the butters did receive notice and as far as I know Emily Shelley was the only a butter in our neighborhood who actually went to that I didn't know anything about it until people asked me consequently I've tried unsuccessfully to arrange with Mr. Bove to meet with interested members of our neighborhood not just a few of others to discuss his plans and listen to neighborhood concerns so Meredith I'm sorry but there was not a meeting with more than one neighbor from our neighborhood not because we want to discuss this not because we are nimbies as Dan Jones implies we've made it clear to all parties that we would support the development of housing on that now abandoned Brown Derby lot we are simply asking to be included in timely discussions which waiting for a major site review is not timely about such development so it will be done responsibly by the applicant and the both organization seems like a oxymoron in the spirit of this request for inclusion I am asking the DRB to consider two points regarding approval of the subdivision application both go back to Meredith saying that you are limited in what you can do on a subdivision limited means does not mean you have no options you do have options Emma raised one of them which was brushed aside by the attorney and that is concern regarding foreseeable difficulties I think you've heard enough tonight to know that there are certainly foreseeable difficulties regarding traffic and I think if you've seen the drawings of the fictional proposal that the lawyer itself has said he was involved in the contract for thereby opening that up then you know that the parking lot is scheduled to be up on where the access to Derby would be so the gym of Sheridan's questions are very very important because if that's where the parking lot is going to be and Derby turns out through a traffic study to be impossible that is a foreseeable difficulty and I think that is where you the DRB have an opportunity to say wait a minute there is something we can do about this however the staff report didn't even comment on the foreseeable difficulty requirement in section 3505 so I would ask the DRB to carefully consider such foreseeable difficulties before deciding whether to approve this application the subdivision and ask staff to go back and take a look at that very foreseeable difficulty issue the second point is that the repeated reminders that this hearing is only about the subdivision of 101 Northfield Street feels very much like a brushing aside of what we all know to be the case which is that this proposed subdivision is key to permitting both development that has been encouraged by the Planning and Community Development Office and whose design was shared with the DRC last spring I would therefore ask the DRB not to ignore the elephant in the room in your deliberations in fact Meredith said that if this was one entity then you would have something to say about it well there is one entity and it's in the contract that this attorney put together for two parties it's not fiction so in closing I urge the DRB to postpone approval of this final subdivision application until at least the following recommendations made by Amazon as and others have been undertaken a traffic study approval condition to require light and sound screening and a professional review of the accuracy of the survey map submitted for lot two I do not think it is fair to ask the people who's where the survey shows claims there is an impingement have them to call up the surveyor and find out I think that is a matter for the DRB thank you appreciate the comment there Peter and certainly a lot of information for us to deliberate on and whatnot to board members have any additional questions or feeling like they have the information they you know they need to conduct a review of this application I'd like to motion to close the public hearing going to deliberation Rob I think I've heard enough you just said you heard enough and wants to yeah yeah yeah um yeah yeah yeah so Jean has made a motion to close the public hearing and take this up for review in a deliberative session just sort of a note of process here that would mean that no more new evidence would be you know collected on this hearing in the application and also we would you know discuss this at the end of this meeting tonight in a deliberative session just that you know DRB members and that is something that in this sort of zoom and hybrid environment that we have done for every application so that is not indicative of you know any particular aspect of this application so I'll entertain a second on on Jean's motion seconded so a second by Joe okay is there any discussion on Jean's motion to close the public hearing and take this up in a deliberative session after the close of this meeting not only will you close the public hearing but you're going to close the record as well yeah the closing the public hearing yeah I know um I'm not supposed to discuss it's not my job yeah members come to discuss I think that we needed to do but that will be after the meeting yeah we'll uh we'll discuss this and then let the applicant have some have some final comments um yes um so uh there's no seeing no discussion from the board unless there's anyone on zoom has anything to say no um so we'll now call the rule once you call the rule they can't oh yeah sorry so so sorry I'm trying that all right a bunch of different stuff yep no uh so we'll now take final comments from the applicant uh on this application John do you have any comments you wish to make uh I don't think that I do feel no and and blessedly I don't either sorry Phil I shouldn't laugh but that was awesome uh all righty uh so I'll call the roll on the motion to close the public hearing um end the record and um take this up in a deliberative session um Catherine how do you vote yes okay Abby how do you vote yes Jean yes Joe yes Michael yes and Rob also votes yes and the motion passes unanimously I've lost my agenda right here that's it so our next meeting of the drb will be Monday December 6 2021 and Meredith do we have applications to review for the December 6th we do okay we will have applications um and yeah just I don't know if you want to remind them of the process since we're doing the deliberative session after yeah so attendees yes so everyone we will um be deliberating on this application uh tonight um and we will come to a decision um hopefully tonight but I do not believe we have to we could continue our deliberative session if we feel like we need it given the late hour um and uh you know a decision will be made on this uh in writing uh and sent out by the zoning administrator um and uh there's anything to ask yeah just I mean technically there are the board has 45 days after the close of the public hearing to issue a written decision we aim to do that much much sooner than that 45 day window that's a statutory deadline um and you know depending just for because there are so many people on tonight interested in this um sometimes the decision gets issued at the exact same time as the permit if there's no conditions on that decision that have to be met for where the permit can be issued sometimes the um decision and the permit get issued same day um but the the um copy of the decision will be mailed out to participating interested parties anybody who signed on to the petition that Emma submitted the decision will just go to Emma and Emma will be responsible for then sending that out um that's just the way those interested party petitions work everybody else who participated in the hearing individually um will get their own distinct copy of the decision um and then it will also be available in our office um and you know we'll we'll mail out hard copies to people um if people want also electronic copies please let me know um but it's written copies that get mailed out that's what we're required to do that under statute um so so a butters who technically participated um they would they would they'll get those decisions um but just because if it was the decision part you only get if you participate it's not just to all a butters it's a little different but I think you captured most of the butters in the petition so okay um that will so there's a 30 day appeal period this is all in in fine print at the bottom of decisions so there's a 30 day appeal period from the date of signature on the written decisions um there's also a 15 day appeal period for permit issuance a lot of times if we get it all done quickly that is overlap so it's really just a 30 day appeal period but that's the way that works you're welcome thank you all for coming out sorry i've got to set up the deliberative zoom so but we can you guys can close out the hearing and i can send it if people are willing to wait a few minutes i'll entertain a motion for adjournment fellows second anybody second all right motion by abbey second by gene um i've called the roll catheter and how do you vote yes abbey yes gene yes i'll send it to you and michael michael yes or no or you're already gone joe he's gone yes rob votes yes we have one absent and um the rest uh what six positive yeah yeah uh so we the meeting is adjourned