 I'm the did any of that get heard okay good evening let's try that again welcome to the South Burlington Development Review Board today is September 6th 2023 and my name is Dawn Filibert I'm the chair of the board and I'd like to introduce other members of the board to my far left is Mark Muscatelli John sorry Mark Bear Stephanie Wyman Frank Coakman and do we have anyone online I don't think so and staff Marla Keane and Marty Gillies thank you for being here there are a number of ways of participating in tonight's meeting you can either attend in person and if you do please sign in on the sign-in sheet at the back of the room to document your participation in this hearing if you're online please send your contact information through the chat function online so we have a record of your participation and if you're on the phone please send your contact information please email it to M Keane K E E and E at SouthBurlingtonVT.gov tonight's meeting is being recorded and we will start with number one on the agenda which is emergency evacuation procedures in the event of an emergency there are doors in each back corner of the auditorium you would exit those doors and either turn right or left to get outside are there any additions deletions or changes in the order of agenda items are there any announcements I don't think so what is the status of recruiting a new member I believe the council is holding interviews at their next meeting which will be the well two weeks from yes it'll be the 18th okay good any other announcements any comments and questions from the public that are not related to the agenda okay let's begin with the projects we will be reviewing agenda item number five appeal a 0 2 3 0 1 of Robert Payson and Kathy Burnett 17 Apple Tree Court in Burlington appealing the decision of the zoning administrative officer that there is no performance standard violation at 480 Shelburne Road the applicant has requested continuation to October 3rd 2023 the property owner and business owner have expressed that they are okay with the requested continuation I would entertain a motion to continue this appeal to October 3rd so moved second thank you mark any discussion all in favor say aye chair both I okay thank you number six on the agenda continued conditional use application CU 2301 of Constantino and Manning to construct a two-story addition to an existing single family home the addition is proposed to be set back three feet two and a half inches from the side lot line at 11 white place who is here for the applicant please I am on line what what's the name again Missa I will we see thank you I'm going to swear you in if you can just tap the button it'll turn from sort of dull green to bright green thanks I would you raise your right hand please do you solemnly swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of perjury I do thank you do okay who would like to introduce this step in the process briefly I'm happy to go ahead no missy you can you can jump in there thank you we just had some revisions based on the comments from the staff I believe the first one was the porch overhang that extended beyond the house we removed that the other was a covered a roof over the stair that leads down to the basement the removal of a stair to the from the porch to the east and lastly we reduced the lot coverage to meet the requirements and we provided a survey drawing okay now I know there's a question question number one the only question actually in the staff report about whether or not the board should consider an actual bound whether an actual survey should be done to show the boundaries and I'm wondering what board members think about this I know you have a drawing by a surveyor so yeah we we provided a survey you did yep that's the survey sorry this doesn't appear to be a survey to me because of the notes on the plan that are called out in the staff report sorry she wasn't my closure based on the notes that are indicated on the right hand side of the drawing Marty yeah so this is not a survey and it's not stamped by a surveyor property lines are approximate and based on monumental found field I think it's because it's a draft he needs to provide the final surveyor he is a licensed surveyor and it is survey condition a survey yeah so we did little content that the surveyor who did the job with this was actually the same one who did the lot next door so we brought him in to do any did the exact same thing that they did for their conditional use in their their addition as well too so we made sure that it was exactly the same to fit what they needed for for their conditional use as well so okay so including having a condition that the survey will be a proper survey is kind of the same with you yeah okay any other questions about this project from the board on that on that point is your is your neighbor's survey recorded do you know I believe they they have it they use the lines in the the markings that they had originally found for them for their they did their addition I believe two years ago I don't think they recorded it and I think the thing is that looks to me like the neighbors doesn't have this tight constraints to the property line that you guys are proposing and that's where the staff is coming at wanting to get a boundary survey done to confirm it it was actually a similar situation but it was on the far side of the property which is why it's not showing up on this sheet okay I was just looking at this okay can I ask where you were headed with that question Frank well I mean we should go the extra step that there's a proper survey or should we record a survey should be recorded so the standard doesn't say that but you can discuss it with the applicant of course there's a there's a statute that controls what the criteria are for a legal survey for one you can rely on for property purposes in your interest as well or if and whenever sell the property okay he was going to do a real survey it should be according to the according to state standards according to statutory standards and it should be recorded is that a big deal to record a survey I don't know what they charge it was 25 $25 or something like that to record the survey what's the mylar print that the surveyor would need to provide right right is that acceptable to you I guess I don't really follow fully on the and what exactly we need to do differently than what we had submitted I went through actually with all the communication with from our neighbors that had gone back and forth and we use the same survey or to do the plan just so that we didn't run into any issues so I don't I don't know if we need to what what else outside we've had them do that we would need to ask him to do so I just guess into that note more clarified as to what exactly the next steps for us would be well so Ryan how I understand it is we would provide a stamp survey drawing he would just take the draft off this and stamp it and provide it for the planning and zoning permit and what the board is saying is potentially requiring which I'd probably disagree with because it's an added fee is is to file it if it's not a requirement in the statutes of planning and zoning to get the permit then you would file it through city the clerk's office as a as a document that would go into your land records essentially that would show the survey what does the do overkill what is the regulation say what do you want to pull up the red comma and and the bold text above it please typically don't you have to record it if a new lot is created right you don't state statute only requires it to be recorded in the case of a subdivision but the LDRs go require it to be surveyed when the set back is less than 10 feet from the property line well what's the exact language is number four up there basically the survey that you guys proposed that you provided even the surveyors saying this isn't a boundary survey it's just a site plan and it's approximate so if he's confident in his drawing we're just asking him to take off the disclaimers and but yes okay yeah and I just wasn't sure about submitting it and having it I think we're saying is I mean I would disagree with Frank only because we're not creating a lot this is just part of as Misa said it's just part of the property records for the documentation for the filing of this permit okay so it's just we're just looking for the confirmation that what you're submitting is verified oh yeah disclaimer that bothered we yeah yeah you know I and I think I agree with him when I look at that line when I look at that language you don't necessarily have to record okay all right these be confirming the property line something so an official survey a change to the document I'm sorry what's it called certified stamp boundary survey okay you're just looking for the engineer to put a blessing on it okay perfect and take the disclaimers that make it a vague document off okay yeah yeah great thank you okay any other questions from the board before we take public comment all right hearing none are there any members of the public who would like to comment on this project Marty do you see any online no okay just I'll just say that I'm glad that you guys cleaned up the issues we had at the last meeting yeah and it's a it's a nice project I'm glad that it's been clarified and we can move forward with that very attractive thank you and good luck yeah have a good one I would entertain a motion to close the hearing move to close second second any discussion all in favor of approving the motion say aye I can you pose okay it's carried thank you thank you okay the next item on the agenda is item number seven it sketch plan application SD 23035 of Eric's sample to subdivide an existing 1.37 acre lot developed with a single-family home and detached accessory dwelling unit into two lots of one acre and point three seven acres for the purpose of establishing the existing single-family home and accessory dwelling unit on lot one and constructing a new single-family home or duplex on lots to 25 and 55 Highland Terrace at 25 and 55 Highland Terrace who is here for the applicant me Eric sample hi Eric anyone else no just me okay I'm going to ask you to raise your right hand no swearing it's sketch it's sketch no swearing okay thank you so this is a sketch you can put your hand down I'm sorry to confuse you this is a sketch plan which is not a formal hearing it's just an opportunity for you to talk to us about what you have in mind and for us to give you any kind of high-level feedback about what the board thinks of the project and where you might need to focus more on what the requirements of the LDRs are yes do you want to make any introductory comments before we start to go through yes I do for the benefit of my neighbors my intention is to just cut off the piece can you please bring your mic and make sure it's on thanks that good sounds like it's on yeah I can hear it yeah my intention is to cut off the piece as a separate asset I have no intention on building on it at this point I need to do as much I can to create a separate piece which I guess includes the TDRs and everything else but so right now that's the the preliminary outlay it would be divided between the main two houses and then there'd be a third piece on there and there it is yeah so that's basically the proposal right now okay so what we will do is walk through the staff report and focus on the comments that the staff have highlighted in red yes and have board members discuss those with you so we'll go ahead and proceed with with number one I can introduce number one so Eric had a couple years ago a year ago contemplated the similar subdivision I guess it was before it must have been before the 2022 major rule change and so at that time he had been permitted to have more lots and so originally he came in with three lots we warned us three lots and then upon review we determined it won't be two lots so we just want to highlight the fact that we had sent out some of the required warnings as a three lot subdivision but in fact it's only two and make sure that was okay with you guys didn't need to be warned so I would leave it open I think your suggestion it'd be different if they're proposing a two lot and they're coming back with three now right it's less invasive so okay Frank are you good with that okay good alright whoops the next comment as this is a sketch plan review okay we're only reviewing criteria relevant for review at this stage and commenting on that okay comment number two I'm going to read the introduction to this this is about the driveway configuration staff recommends the board direct the applicant to provide an example lot layout for the proposed lots demonstrating that a home meeting set back and lot coverage limits could be placed with an appropriately located driveway and vehicle parking area mm-hmm so if we bring up the drawing so I've had discussions with this I'm having more with Tim at civil associates the surveyor I could I'm not adverse to combining it and having just a being fed by the driveway that's already there and then the other thing would be just to have the driveway not on the crowded corner but rather just that direction just east of the lot line about a similar distance of from where the the two driveways are apart now I was talking to my neighbors tonight and so it wouldn't get in the way of Edith's driveway and it wouldn't get in the way of all the stuff around the corner be right about where the hand is there if if there were to be a driveway that's probably about where our proposal would go in the in the drawing okay any questions about that or concerns does the board have any feedback on what they think would be a more appropriate solution here part of me is wondering if we don't maintain the pattern language of the other three lots I know it'd be a driveway pretty close to the corner but I specifically don't want to repeat the pattern of the other higher density lots when I bill if I were to build or save was my whatever I would want to keep the pattern the spacious pattern that exists now on 55 and 25 and face it toward the road and be in keeping with the the aesthetics of the at this entire large lot but rather than cluster it with the others that are at a much higher density that would be that would be my intention any concerns make it a compound kind of yeah yeah yeah so the intention is pretty much what you're showing is to carve off lot one and then just put a buildable lot on lot two for you to potentially build down the road yes but you want to maintain sort of more of the not that it's gonna be rural not area but more of the feel of the house on lot one where it's sort of like it's not in a pattern language of a tight row house no it would it would be much more spaces and again I have no plans to build on it but if I were 10 15 years down the road I would probably build something else that's small or my fiance will be moving in with me and we would if we were to do something for our kids it would be nicely it wouldn't be perhaps out of character even with the other small cottage 600 square foot cottage it would be small even for a duplex it would be small it would be away from the lot lines I have three willow trees I planted there 10 years ago which I would like to if I again if I were to build I would keep those so I would want to keep the character of both my side and of Edith's across the street which is now empty which she and I would both love to keep all of this empty really it's a really nice place right now then again I'm my purpose for subdividing is just to have it as an asset so go ahead act 47 which allows up to five units an acre in areas serve by water and sewer does not impact this property right because it's not served by war and sewer served by sewer but not water right it needs to be both so it is unlikely that the city will be able to serve this lot by municipal water and so it's going to unfold in the next six months or so how the planning Commission is going to respond to act 47 they are certainly going to be changing the development density in areas that are very served by water and sewer whether this area kind of gets caught in that as collateral remains to be seen but right now what Eric is proposing is a not vested because it's a sketch and be is consistent with the zoning if he were to come in six months from now it's difficult for me to predict whether you know it'd be higher density lots in which case he would be probably required to space the home so that future subdivision could take place but you say again I'm confused about the worth use of the word collateral if it were roped into the zoning changes that are being made because of act 47 if this neighborhood somehow got roped into those changes even though it's not required by act 47 if the town if the city decided to say this neighborhood being a residential generally the same character of the water and sewer neighborhoods is subject to the same zoning that would mean increased density would be available yeah but it's a total I mean it's a total what if at this point but that wouldn't affect this particular layout it would only make it higher sketch level but if you if you delayed your submission for preliminary to beyond the six months you would be and it could be advantageous or it could be disadvantageous you know if they say minimum of four units an acre then you couldn't have this subdivision and the spread out lots that you want you'd have to have a more that's bizarre I would just I will absolutely just finish this up my intention is to finish this application and with this I've already lined up the survey or already talked to Tim about it I would just so thank you application and see your vested under these currents yeah I just get along get it done and be done like forever and my family you know I have family members that are involved in as well as my parents cottage so on so forth so I need to settle all this so assuming that I do settle and I would like to settle as soon as possible then this would be vested this situation okay okay all right I do have a question sure water if there's no city water how would you are you sure well do or do we care you know what would you do about water for a lot to well in talking to the I had to have the well reach re-drilled when we added the cottage and the pump guys said at the water table it's just nothing but water all the time and this is like the wetlands the water tables so if a new well were needed east of the property line that I guess that would be the proposal yeah he would have to demonstrate adequate water capacity at final plot so you're gonna have to present and I know that your engineer has done this before you're gonna have to present documentation showing that you have that capacity at the next stage of review yeah and is that for when a building proposal is put forward right because you can't create a building lot that doesn't have adequate water capacity but I mean in terms of what I'm proposing to do now right as just to divide it as a separate piece without building proposal it would you can go through now without doing that part of it no you would have to demonstrate that it the water is available even if you didn't actually take the physical action to make the water available and is that the state who makes that determination I don't think so I think that it's just a report from your engineer from my the surveyor engineer the civil engineer that well depends on you know what what services that your engineering firm offers but they may reach out to the well-driller and get information from them they may see they may look through the state records to see information is available there okay yeah because we had an entire water plan it's been a lot on it to set this all up and at that time the idea was that with the line running along the back sewer that that the wells would not be in problem all along the proper I mean if and wells drilled all over at higher density than what I'm proposing so I you know I am so that is something that I would discuss with my civil engineer as to how we would document that right okay and I don't think that right now anyone is questioning whether it's available it's just a box that needs to be ticked okay okay moving on to number three this is regarding the orientation of the front of the building and the staff comment suggests that the orientation face east but based on what you just told us it sounds like in your mind your orientation would be facing self yes because all the other two buildings on the lot face out would make much more sense right I hear that yeah so I wouldn't just glob it into the existing density I would keep it more spacious and have it face the road I think it would make more sense also if you're facing a lot people want their driveway to come into their front door so that's another that and that's there's not a lot of room there for a driveway I mean it wouldn't be any greater density than driveways that are already there but I would want to not follow that pattern and have the front face south and if there would be a driveway it would come in yeah any questions or comments about that okay number four I'm going to read this staff recommends the board direct the applicant to provide a proposed well location and demonstrate that the proposed location is designed in accordance with the state's potable water supply program as part of the application we just discussed that so I think we need to belabor that number five this comment is about street trees and the LDRs have changed since the properties along is it Highland Terrace were built and they aren't requiring street trees anymore but we're wondering if you would consider putting some in absolutely what I planted ten trees since I've been there there are three giant willows on the property that I planted with my father and my son and it's my intention to keep those so I have no problem with putting more trees but I've already added sure I was bare a lot when I got it and now there's 10 trees three willows oak tree two apple trees peach tree a lot of this is my father's okay thank you have no problem any questions from the board so presumably when you present your preliminary plan it'll include a landscaping plan that shows the trees sure yeah absolutely okay number six this is about is this a simple subdivision or as a it does the board believe a master plan should be required what do board members think I would agree the other I think so too I mean what would even well I mean if we're all agree that it's anyone not agree okay okay great any other questions before we move on to public comment are there any members of the public who would like to comment on this project are there any online okay I guess that concludes tonight's sketch plan and we will look forward to seeing you back and encourage you to get that application in as soon as you can okay so my next steps are just those engineers drawing and then what after that so it's a minor subdivision I think I forget what it said at the beginning says the beginning whether it's a minor or major so then you have to submit all the things required in the checklist under either minor or major subdivision and then get that application in and do we have an idea if it's minor major it says in the staff report I just wrote it so long ago I don't remember what it said yep it's minor stuff you gave me before with the flood maps and all that stuff it's in the it's on page well it's under be general subdivision standards the application will be considered a minor subdivision so take this document and you know make sure you catch all the things that it says you're gonna need to do in addition to the appendix e requirements for that submission yep yep and I have all that so that shouldn't be a problem can I are we do we have space in the next when you do need another meeting or is this just processed after that so the board has concluded sketch so once you get your application in it'll be put on the neck on the board agenda that follows that next application okay so we do win it when you know the meeting yes for the minor subdivision okay it's got to be a notice period okay notice period seven days it's 15 for a subdivision 15 yeah applications are generally do for four weeks before the meeting that they are scheduled for okay okay thank you very much thank you we'll see you back here thank you now we are way ahead of time number eight on the agenda was scheduled for eight o'clock Dave are you representing this applicant are you the only representative oh alright okay so we can go ahead oh they are okay great thanks hi I'm not I'm here online okay yeah it's it is a little funny putting times on the agenda but we do put in the agenda that all things are warned for seven just in case somebody you know thinks that they can get away with showing up at nine sure and then gets upset about it but we do try to be respectful and I appreciate you asking the question okay continued preliminary and final plaid application SD 2311 of Casey Douglas to amend a previously approved 5.52 acre six unit planned unit development the amendment consists of subdividing lot six developed with a single family home in barn into two lots of point six nine acres lot 64 or lot 6a and point six zero acres lot 6b for the purpose of demonstrating the existing single family home in barn and constructing a new single family dwelling on each lot at 1200 Dorset Street so who is with you Dave Casey Douglas okay I'm gonna ask both of you to raise your right hand I'm gonna swear you in are you with us Casey I am okay thanks do you soundly swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of perjury I do I do thank you okay we we've already been introduced to the applicants before we start to go through the staff report are there any comments you'd like to make no the last time we appeared before the board there were a number of homework items that were required to be addressed and we believe we've addressed them but nonetheless this will be proof in the pudding in regards to how staff has reviewed what has been submitted and the board's thoughts on those okay thank you the first comment is asking you to respond to the DPW comments so that one actually we did address but we just didn't share it with Marty on that so we sent out a very detailed package to Tom DeBito public works directory four weeks ago that specifically talked about the force mains that basically run through the property point of interest if you would like to know there there is a force main that runs all the way from Dorset farms through this particular property and ultimately ties into the city's conveying system and Tom wanted to better understand exactly where that is and we provided all sorts of documents to do that it wasn't until about seven o'clock tonight I shared all that with Marty so there is email correspondence to that effect but Tom specifically asked us to identify how the force main runs through this particular property and actually the pink line is is the one that services the existing lots that is not associated with the Dorset farms pump station all right um but the the the reason anyways if you could put in your mind's eye Dorset farms and a force main that that essentially runs up the east side of Dorset Street northerly and basically all those drops of sewage are forced past this particular project site however when they got to the Heald House there was both bedrock at that particular high point as well as a specimen tree that would have been right in the way of that particular force main so rather than taking down the tree and dealing with bedrock they asked permission to go onto the backside of Paul Heald's house and in this particular case the force main was installed essentially following Folsom Hollow Road and then cutting through the north just to the left of the Lot 5 house in that cross hatched area so with that there is also on the application that had been a separate application pending before the board a proposed group of condominiums north of this project site it showed where this force main comes back out through and eventually heads back towards the recreation path so anyways plethora of information we shared with Tom he did come back with one follow-up question on the 30th of August and we address that very happy to have it as a condition if you don't believe me but that's that's at least what we have done in order to help public works better understand the situation okay yeah so I had put in the staff comment there that I would share a report from Tom and update verbally and same as what David's saying that they have this is common resolved the email and Tom had just sent me on the 30th I think the same email that I shared with Dave sort of for almost conditions of approval type comments just saying that the pump station serving lot 6b would be private and remain private and that kind of thing yeah okay thank you any any questions or comments all right the next comment similarly this asks the applicant to address storm water superintendents comments so this is where I apologize Frank last time we had a discussion in regards to theoretical cherry picking as far as whether you do or do not have to comply with storm water Marty was very good and found an embedded requirement deep in the land development regulations that specifically ties together previous subdivisions and subsequent development of those lots as a cohesive package in determining jurisdiction for storm water so nonetheless with that being found we followed that we've developed a storm water management plan we shared that with Marisa and I understand that there's no adverse comments but I'll let Marty confirm that confirmed I just heard from Lisa today she just had one comment and it was similarly a condition of approval type of thing just there was a call out that didn't exactly match the outlet structure detail in sheet C4 to but someone that can be cleaned up as a condition of approval we understand that's a typo that yeah quite comfortable fixing okay thank you all right can I ask you just a dumb question so what is the proposed storm water treatment I'm sorry what is the proposed storm water treatment so we have a gravel wetland that basically collects stormwater from both the north lot north building in the south building and provides both water quality treatment as well as peak flow mitigation so that's essentially the feature that will meet the state storm water rules as well as the city's 25 year design storm requirement that one pardon me that little one that I'm highlighting on the screen I'm sorry couldn't hear you sorry that that's the gravel land there in the middle there so no so that's a that's a very small localized treatment component but the larger system is down on the southerly lot so all those flows are directed to that particular facility thanks okay any questions all right number three staff recommends the board include a condition of I just have a general knowledge kind of question that I lack going back to the you know the stormwater sink or whatever you know the ultimate destination of the storm water does that include visitation or is that open water what's that going to look like so a gravel wetland is actually designed to manage the storm water typically below surface so you know go back 20 years ago we would have designed an open pond and and it would provide treatment through essentially settling of particulates suspended solids and the theory being if you detain the water long enough that those solids will settle out the bottom and that's where the pollutants will stay the gravel wetlands are different in the fact that it's essentially a porous type filter where drops of water are forced to go through the void spaces of essentially drainage stone and it's through that contact of the void of those particular surfaces that you get additional treatment over and above a much better improved treatment efficiency than additional open water pond and what it does is eliminates the majority of the time the open water what do you want to call it what do the attorneys call it it's marshy is that how well I'll get there but anyways as far as trying to put fences up to keep the kids out of that's the word right you win so anyways we it eliminates that particular issue because the majority of the time all of that activity is occurring below essentially a muck layer it's a wetland layer that is designed to support wetland vegetation so you're getting some uptake through the vegetation on the top but at the same time you're also having much of the treatment occurring in the drainage stone underneath so what what's the surface of the area like is it mucky is it solid I mean if a kid wants to it's actively nuisance it's going to be like a wet lawn okay and how what it looks like is up to you in regards to how aggressively you want to plant that out and no need to fence it or anything no typically not however when we talked about the majority of the time it being dry during those really start large storm events in which the peak flows need to be held and then released in a controlled way the area above your lawn or the muck layer does fill up temporarily gets released and then typically 12 to 24 hours later there's nothing there so that's typically how those gravel wetlands work and they're now uh outside of the preferred method of infiltrating the drops of water and they're unfortunately very few sites in in the city that actually qualify to do infiltration when you can't do infiltration the gravel wetland is the the next preferred choice thank you interesting thank you okay um did we do number three condition of approval out no we did not staff recommends the board include a condition of approval requiring roof lines to maximize solar gain potential this one comes from our discussion last month where our original condition was going to be uh that the applicant uh orient the roof line south and there was some discussion of perhaps south is not always the best for solar gain so instead of saying orient south for solar gain let's just say orient for solar gain and that allows us to orient it south because that's the best for this property but also allows us other orientations if those are better for this property we like that language okay any any questions from the board all right number four um our is the applicant okay with the uh conditions that are um set out above number four in the staff report correct so we have provided um two staff and the board um specific um narrative of features that are going to be associated with each future application zoning permit application and what i'm seeing here is that essentially we are to bring that back forward as part of the application to help reinforce not only the staff's ability to understand what they're supposed to be reviewing but also reinforce the applicant's understanding of what they're supposed to include in their application so it's different but it's not onerous as far as that's concerned so that's acceptable questions comments okay number five staff recommend i have a question i should have picked it up on the site but how what's how far recessed are you from dorset street oh good question off the top of my head um it's i think the south house um is set back approximately 20 feet from the right of wayline and for the north house it's set back more from either one so waiting for the plan to come up you can see frank the right of wayline as it started the bottom left of the drawing where it says fulsham hollow road and there's a long dash dot line that represents the right of way so when we're computing those distances from dorset street right of way not the pavement itself that's the 20 foot number we shared with you as far as the actual distance to the street itself it's probably about double that well i mean i just mentioned it i don't know how how much we all care anybody besides me but i i don't like the backyards fronting dorset street is there anything i mean isn't there going to be a lot of vegetation isn't that what you've planned so i think what we talked about was making sure that there was communications so here we have a back porch that specifically speaks to anybody on the recreation path as they're going by so we this is a very challenge site in the fact that there's essentially three sides with public roads so we had to make a conscious decision as far as which parts would be communicating with the east side how the west side would be communicating with the recreation path and dorset street to balance the challenges and requirements of how buildings communicate with the street but you didn't answer it unless i missed the you didn't answer the question can you repeat the question screening dorset street so are we trying to screen or are we trying to communicate my understanding is we've always been trying to not hide the homes but basically ask get people to communicate with each other and that's by having these particular front porches is in proximity to the street itself i think at our hearing last month what we had talked about there was some sort of that's where this kind of requirement to lock in certain features came from because the sketches that dave and kco provided were pretty nice and we were like well what which of these features can you commit to because we kind of like what we're seeing but we want to make sure that this is going to get built as it's being shown and so one of those features was a porch that makes the back of that house facing dorset look less like a back it would have like a deck porch that almost resembles a front porch and in that way to both the pedestrian biker on the bike path and also to the driver and this is a this is that elevation here and so you can see it includes the porch so there won't be screening there by trees i thought i read their work we just to answer the question about screening we are retaining those particular trees along the street line that are mature and in that regard only proposing to remove the trees that are in the immediate vicinity of the footprints of the buildings so the landscaping plan does show those particular trees that exist and would be retained but is there a plan for constant landscaping to hide the building no that that that never was in the discussion point in the past from my understanding what okay so i think just jumping in here i think my the aesthetics yeah my recollection of the of last month's meeting was we kind of talked about what the east side facing uh Folsom Hollow Road and also the west side facing dorset what they needed to do to kind of you know lock in those communicative features and then sort of where we landed on the south facade which faces the flat part of Folsom Hollow Road not the not the cul-de-sac part but the flat part we decided there was enough vegetation there that they didn't necessarily need to be a an attractive communicative feature on that end of the building so that that facade is probably just going to look kind of something like the the left facade in this picture yeah given the given if we can rely on the elevations for we'll ultimately be looking at which is always dicey but you know if you sue me we can i really don't have much of an issue in this particular case i have a general concern segways listen to the fifth comment here which has to do with the the windows so in that elevation that myla had up earlier um you kind of saw the the porch that faces on to dorset and then also there's other elements of that facade that make it look front front facade beyond the porch and maybe the number of windows or the number of building breaks or the different roof heights there's other elements beyond so if the applicant were just to add a porch but do things differently with the rest of the house it still may not feel once it's constructed like a front porch it may just feel like a a porch slapped on the back of a house and so that was kind of where this fifth comment comes from is just asking the board if there are other features that perhaps the applicant would readily agree to but that just weren't enumerated in their first round of design criteria so that's kind of where that coming from so we're acceptable to that and marty just mentioned a number of good bullet points that would be prudent to carry forward in that regard different roof lines breaking up the mass of the building so the point being is how many times do we see a basically a rectangular shape building with a couple of punch out windows and something thrown on the back that's not what we're looking for so what we want to do is prompt all future applicants for this particular building to recognize that there are certain features that we want to make sure are included in its design to ensure that the goals are being met here so this is where I lost track of marty's third item that was beyond the first two I just mentioned but we're very comfortable I think with that particular aspect so we basically have differing roof lines breaking up the mass the building and the windows I'm not sure how to integrate windows I think I mean if that's if that's a fair representation of what's going to happen well so the point here is that this is not a designed building this is a concept a concept so the condition could be something like you know whatever percent of glazing is represented by this shall vary by no more by you know shall be reduced by no more than five percent or something and we could have we could work together to figure out that calculation looking at the site plan and looking at this elevation looks like you could pretty closely create a house with that likeness you know if I'm looking at so it says you know similar that was the whole intent was to basically identify what the applicant was comfortable representing to the board and who now it's a matter of narrating this particular you know the major features so that if we don't come back with the exact elevation here that something that that the future application does include specific features that we're trying to narrate so all we're trying to do is take the picture and narrate those features that were all what is it that makes this acceptable well the the point about this particular elevation compared to what you find to do is if you took out any one of these windows in my view it would materially change the effect so which is got the little window on the right side of the garage and center that day of three you would have proved before reducing the number of windows if that window was gone and that but we're trying to reduce your your collective your workload in the future we don't want them to have to come back when they decide that instead of you know gangs of three they want two gangs of five or they want no gangs and they want the same number of windows but all individual and you know we don't want to have to use the board time for that kind of a change so really what we're trying to do is is create a bullet point narrative that allows an applicant without the benefit of this picture to be able to understand the features that have to be integrated into the house design so that when they come back to staff with a zoning permit application that all of those items have been hit it's not always going to be perfect but as long as we basically put on notice that those are the requirements going forward then staff is going to be in a position where they can either say yep or nope if they say no and the applicant doesn't agree they get to come back and see you perhaps so there is still a process where disagreements can be further discussed but in this particular case what we're doing is trying to do is minimize the use of your time and allow staff's professional judgment to care of the day and all we're trying to do is give them the tools to be able to make that particular determination so just to wrap up this discussion a little bit um Marty has suggested that some of the characteristics in here be written into the decision so the characteristics um and we're talking about um both lots Marty or just one of the lots right now um right now most of our conversation has been about lot six b the southern one i'm going to be a ton of concern about about six a but we can certainly fold that one in there too the six a is going to be down the road years right the north lot will be the first it's the south lot that will be the one in the future oh so the one's got a lot of big vegetation so six a they're committing to this list of things two stories dark roof ridgeline running east to west front porch facing south a recess garage in a private yard of at least 100 square feet 100 square feet seven type of that's your regulations at least yeah oh to meet the open space requirements yes i see well can we just tack on there a statement about minimum glazing so that's for the northern lot and then for the southern lot it's this other list of things um and yeah i think that's the suggestion is tack on what you feel it needs to be tacked on so if it's glazing you know at least a certain amount of glazing facing um dorset street and a varied roof line and um you know the siding pattern being not perfectly uniform across the whole thing or whatever it is you like about this you know it has this like you can just insert varied after the word dark in that paragraph dark varied roof line that's good and then the issue is how to frame the language to get your minimum glazing and how tight you want it so we had this conversation last time about what substantially similar means and the conclusion was that it was not sufficiently specific what we can do is we can allow it to close and i'm sorry i'm stepping on your toes here we can allow it to close and i have the information i need to calculate what that glazing percentage is so you guys can make a decision if you trust that the board is not gonna you know go crazy and say it must be within exactly one it must be exactly the same amount of glazing if you guys can agree now can you represent to them that you're going to say plus or minus the amount of you know some reasonable amount and then something about appropriately balanced window oriented yep yes that's that's that's what was missing in bottom lines we don't want all the windows on one side and a big blank building on the other so that's that's of there that's an appropriate so what would be the percentage of deviation that we would we would like to allow so if this particular building worse were 20 per where it was showing is showing 20 percent and that may be an excessive blazing number but let's just use that for round numbers uh if it's currently depicted as 20 percent is it plus or minus five percent is it plus or minus three percent you know that's that's what we're trying to understand so typically something like that you'd want a sliding scale because if it was 20 you'd be comfortable with the three percent swing the other way if it was showing 40 percent you know it could be you could be within a five percent swing so the mathematician says uh when we we start with three percent oh excuse me 20 percent and you have a three percent variation on either side it's essentially 15 percent of the number that right Marla's going to even I were making the same face when you said that we figured that out yeah so it's a percentage of 15 percent of the glazing calculated how you make sense yep okay all right Marlon Marty are not happy with it then I'm happy to look at it I think we hope it doesn't come to that and that's come maybe the point of being really explicit with these is that it doesn't leave anything up to our judgment there's no like kind of argument about whether or not this is similar enough it's just we just run the numbers we just say is your roof line is your two heights or is there one and in that way it's black and white and we don't have to yeah so board do you have any other questions and do you believe we have enough information from the applicant to make a decision is that it for staff comments there are just five yeah so we're good yeah okay thank you Dave let's see if there are any public comments there's no one in the house I can see is there anyone online nope okay I would entertain a motion to close um SD 2311 second I'll second second any uh any discussion all in favor say aye aye opposed the motion's carried thank you for your time thank you for your time thank you for starting early thank you for being efficient we're all for that thanks a lot right okay oh minutes yes the minutes of the august 1st 2023 meeting I read them I think they look fine I'll move that we adopt the minutes thank you any discussion in favor of adopting the minutes as written say aye pose no the minutes are adopted and the meeting is concluded so I have a question for you show me um and the meeting unless you won't hear unless your question is something for the public oh it's after the end of the meeting okay so let me end the meeting post meeting question so while while we're in logistical