 Board Tuesday, September 26th, 2023. My name is Pete Kelly. I'm the chair of the DRV. This is a hybrid meeting taking place at Town Hall and virtually on Zoom. All members of the Board of Public can communicate in real time. Planning staff will provide Zoom instructions for public participation before we begin. Are there people on Zoom, Andrew? Yes. OK, thank you. All votes taken in this meeting will be done by roll call vote. Reports for the law, if Zoom crashes, the meeting will be continued to October 10th, 2023. Let's start the meeting by taking a roll call attendance of all the DRV members participating tonight. Dave Andrews. Here, Paul Christensen. Present. Lisa Brayden-Harger is not here tonight. Scott Riley. Here. Dave Turner. Here. John Hemmelgarn. Here. And the chair is present. We do have a forum. OK, Andrew, I'll turn it over to you for Zoom instruction, please. OK, thanks, Andrew. First Order of Business is a public forum. This is an opportunity for anyone present here in the room or participating in Zoom to address the board on matters not on tonight's agenda. No raise hands, Andrew. Here in the room? Nope, hearing done. OK, we're going to item number three on the agenda, which is the public hearing portion. We have three items on the agenda tonight. DP16-05.5, which is Allen Brooks Development, requesting to modify the basic plan, phase one infrastructure, to modify the overall basic plan, modify the construction staging area, and amend the overall site plan with as-built conditions at Cottonwood Crossing. And we also have DP24-02, which is a pre-app for Malcolm Willard. This is a three-lot subdivision, 10.49 acre parcel. And then there's an appeal, APP 24-01, appalling Craig Samson, Jr. We are going to continue APP 24-01 to October 10. The reason for continuing that is there was a legal opinion that was delivered on Friday, September 22. It did not get into the DRV packet. It has not been adequately reviewed. So that application is continued until October 10. So first up will be DP16-05.5. Allen Bryan, if you would come up, please. State your name and address for the record, please. My name is Al Seneca, Allen Brooks Development, 31 Commerce Ave in South Burlington. And my name is Brian Birch from Allen Brooks Development, 31 Commerce Ave, South Burlington. Pete, I'm going to work you as myself as I flutter across the street. OK. I'm going to be using myself as my business head, Pat, as well. Very good. OK. So a couple of administrative things before we get started. First, for the record, I'd like to clarify that we did have a site visit earlier tonight. It started at 6 o'clock, where we, toward the site, looked at the conditions that we will be discussing and talking about tonight. The other administrative detail is I've asked that, specifically Emily, to break up the discussion into what's kind of broken up as phases on the proposed logistics plan and phasing plan as proposed by the applicant. So I'd like to have a conversation and a back and forth with the applicant on each phase and then conclude that and then go to the next phase just to kind of keep things orderly. That sounds good. OK. So with that, all yours, Emily. Cool. This is a request for discretionary permit to modify the phasing plan, modify the construction staging area at Cottonwood Crossing. Cottonwood Crossing is located at Cottonwood Drive and Connerway in the Taft Corners Foreign Base Code overlay district and also the mixed-use residential zoning district. This item was originally scheduled for September 12. It was not heard that evening, and it was rescheduled for today. I do note that the staff report in your packet I updated on September 20 restructuring some of the conditions of approval and adding updated site photos. The recommendation tonight is that you take testimony and close, deliberate, and issue a decision. My decision comes with a long list of conditions, and it's mostly a denial of the applicant's proposed phasing plan. I'm basically recommending that most of the phase one infrastructure needs to be completed as originally shown with a couple exceptions that we'll get into and that that needs to be completed before a temporary or final certificate of occupancy can be issued for building C1. Cottonwood Crossing is reaching a pause point whereby all but one building, building A1, is complete, but the street and sidewalk infrastructure serving those buildings is incomplete. Incomplete infrastructure is not in compliance with the original phasing, nor in the spirit of the bylaws to have safe, adequate legal access. Project History, Cottonwood Crossing has quite a lengthy one. It received its overall approval back in 2016. That included complete architectural and site design for phases one and two. In 2019, they came back to amend phases one and two, changed some of the building design. In 2019, there was another amendment for community bank. And then most recently, there was an amendment to reconfigure some of the units in building B1 and C1 and reconfigure the architectural design of building C1. There are three administrative permits of note. So there have been several permits issued overall, including signs and tenant finups. These are the three main permits that allowed for site development, new building construction, was also when impact fees were paid. Currently, building A1 has discretionary permit approval and full site plan and architectural design, but its administrative permit has expired. No advisory boards were required to comment on this application. We did receive comment from the public works and fire departments. Their recommendations are included. We also held an interdepartmental meeting with public works and fire. No public comment letters were received at the time of mail out or up to this night's meeting. So an overall overview of the current status of Cottonwood Crossing, there is all but one building, building A1 that has been constructed. It's been planned to have five phases. It has all of its growth management allocation. Phases three through five have concept approval, meaning we know where the streets are generally planned. We know where building footprints are going to be, but we don't have detailed site plan and architectural design. When Cottonwood Crossing was originally approved, it was constrained by density expressed as dwellings per acre. Now with the adoption of form-based code, there's different design and density metrics, which mean that phases three through five have an opportunity to be redesigned under form-based code. So phase one is in progress. Building A1 has designs, but an expired administrative permit. Building B1 has been completed. C1 is under construction and is anticipated to be finished this winter. Phase two is fully complete. That's where Junior's Pizza and Community Bank are located. And then phases three through five are that concept approval. We'll go into those areas in a moment. I'm going to jump to page 12 of the staff report, where I note permit expiration, so administrative permits expire after three years. The bylaw doesn't really provide clarity about what happens when a permit expires, when a project is actively under construction. And here's its staff's interpretation that active work can be completed if the permit is expired, but elements that were not started cannot be begun. So that permit in 2017 that included A1 also included all of the phase one infrastructure, the streets and the sidewalks. Work has taken place. The streets are partially completed. The sidewalks are partially completed. But A1 has not broken ground. On access and infrastructure, I note that our bylaw requires that public and private streets conform to the public work specifications, regardless of if they're going to be public or private. The road sections and profile for cottonwood crossing don't have a partial step whereby a curb or a sidewalk is complete on one side but not the other. And public works also doesn't have a standard for a partially completed street base. Public work specs also have standards for pavement markings that they be of a durable reflective material. Lastly, our bylaw has standards for temporary uses, including construction. When the DRB originally approved cottonwood crossing, we didn't look very closely at Chapter 17, particularly this chapter of the bylaw that talks about access, security, and site maintenance of construction storage areas. The DRB does have the authority to require that. Can I just put a job? Can you close that door, please? The DRB does have the authority under Chapter 17 to require that access be secured, security, fencing, et cetera. And final note on signs and public art. Cottonwood Crossing does have an approved master sign plan that regulates the location and number of signs. Chapter 25 also limits portable and temporary signs, things like feather flags, or more than one sandwich board per property are not permitted. And with that, I think we can go to each individual area. So jumping back to Area 1, this is around the building footprint A1. Originally, the master plan showed the blue dotted line around this entire area, including the sidewalks, parking, multi-use path. That multi-use path along Williston Road has been constructed. What the staff recommendation is here is this crosswalk bump out that's not complete today, be completed with concrete. A temporary asphalt sidewalk be built to the Williston Road intersection. And that curb along it would be concrete, as well as finishing the concrete sidewalk around the stormwater pond all the way to the multi-use path. Part of the recommendation for that temporary asphalt is we do expect that area to get torn up when building A1 is constructed. So do the pedestrian crossings correctly, but then allow for that temporary material where it would front along building A1. I also have a second condition about the construction staging area. It's going to be more convenient to have a construction staging area planned within the A1 footprint parking lot area rather than going between building C1 and B1 to that main construction staging area. So I'm recommending that there be a staging area planned for A1 and that it be secured with fencing, including some privacy screening and designating contractor parking areas. So it's convenient for construction access when A1 is under construction. Thank you. And for public safety. And public safety. OK. OK. Alan Bryan, the stage is yours to comment on staff's proposed treatment of area 1. OK. Let's see. Emily, can you scroll that down so we can go the other way? We can look at the picture in the top, right? Yes. So on this area 1 infrastructure and staging, we're almost in. Feel free to come up at the point as well. It fits for convenience for you. OK. I think I'm good on this one, but on the second area and third here maybe. We generally agree with staff's comments there. And we agree almost entirely with their approval condition for area 1. We will build the aid spaces on the east side of Cottonwood Drive with curb. We will build the concrete sidewalk connection that's green, which is just circled, and will paint both crosswalks. So it's very easy for pedestrian to cross the road and get to the sidewalk in front of community bank. What we are asking you not to require would be the paved temporary sidewalk in red. That's the only thing we're asking for in this one area. The reason being is, one, it'll be very temporary. Once construction on A1 starts, it will be ripped out. And it will be half, for sure, have to be closed. And so we'd rather just wait and build the final sidewalk with the construction of the A1 building. While that sidewalk is waiting to build that sidewalk, we will build the crosswalk connections. And we can sign that. So pedestrians cross the street and use the sidewalk in front of community bank. So pedestrians in the project will still be able to get to route 2. They were just asking that temporary path not be required. As far as the staging area, we're willing to update the plan to designate a staging area for A1. We think that's a good idea. We'll make sure it's outside the setback as required. And we will, we can designate areas where our contractors will park and make sure they get that plan. And we will, for sure, make sure vehicle circulation is not blocked during construction. The only waiver we're asking for on that is we're asking that you just not require it to be a fenced in staging area. You know, the reason being, staging areas are kind of dynamic depending on what part of the building construction you're in. They can be smaller or bigger. And this area is where we're trying to be, we'll be trying to build a building and a parking lot together. And so to build a fenced in area within that space is going to be difficult. And it is visible from the road, but we haven't seen too many projects in town be required to do that. But the other conditions for staging area we can certainly comply with. OK, DRP members, questions. Has anyone done a sidewalk study, you know, a pedestrian count to this area? You know, the justified putting in this temporary walkway. I mean, how many people are on the sidewalk? Has anyone done a traffic count? Traffic count? Coming out of a building speed. Who are you addressing? Either our people or their people. Has anyone done a traffic count to say, you know, do we have 100 people walking on this thing every day, 50 people, 10? OK, so at second first, if there's been any assessment of traffic counts, pedestrian traffic counts? None formally. And I mean, we only have anecdotal reports. When I was out taking photos, I have seen people walking on the sides of the street that don't have curbs. We saw a woman this evening walking on that side of the street without a curve. But the town has not done a formal study. And they're probably higher priorities in town if we are going to be doing one. OK. We don't get one either. Yeah, and I don't know if this has come up, or maybe this comes up later. There's a second connection along the pond, sidewalk connection, highlighted yellow on this drawing on the screen. Originally, we're going to ask that that not be required until the A1 infrastructure is built. But Al and I have since talked and said, yeah, we're willing to build that connection. That's Emily was recommending it. And we'll agree to that. So you will still have two sidewalk connections on either side, which is asking that the temporary one in the middle not be required. OK. Just to clarify, the reason that you do not want this temporary asphalt path, then, is that going to be used as an entrance for the construction vehicles you're thinking? I mean, is that one of the entrances? There won't be an entrance. But what it'll end up being is the foundation, which has to go in first, will be done right on top of the track. Yeah, so the foundation, it's a footprint. But we really need to excavate really 20 feet beyond that to make a safe space for the workers to set up forms and pour concrete. So everything 20 feet beyond the footprint of these buildings will be dug down to the basement level. And so that means losing curb and sidewalk. Whatever we put in within at least 15 to 20 feet of that building footprint, we will be losing. And it will have an ecological impact to things. And you're not concerned about putting this curb cut in parking spaces that's far enough? We're concerned about it, because we will lose them. Yeah, we're trying to ease here. But we're wasting, we will be wasting. That will be a waste. Yeah, it will be a waste. And so in the spirit of negotiating and compromising, we said, well, they are in the front of the project. They're, you know, we'll agree to those. And then maybe ask the board to waive the ones on Connerway, which are not going to be used as much. But certainly when the building A1 is under construction, those eight spaces will be closed and probably lost. And then the path around the stormwater pond. And I look at this as sort of the face of this project right now when people are driving by. Not so much what's going on in the back, but the front. And do you think you can get that to a point that it looks finished, like with sidewalk? And is there any lighting plan along that sidewalk that will be going in? I believe there's some lighting there. There is. That's why there's poles out back in the backstaging area. We've bought all the light poles for the site. So it's for the first part of your question. Yeah, we will. And the conditions of approval at the end, kind of talk about this, we will agree to build the entire connection to route 2 path along the pond. And we don't think we'll lose that, because we can put that herb in and that sidewalk. And we'll keep the equipment away from that. Far enough from the foundation. And it's far enough away from the building. Yeah, the lighting plan that was approved for that area does have lights. But they're not directly on the sidewalk. There are more lights in the parking lot that have been designed to light up that area as well. So it'll light up the parking lot and the path. Yeah, there's the. But if you were to finish the path as part of this phase, like we're proposing, the lights would not be offending and tossing further phase, right? So if you look at this plan behind you, OK, over here as well. So the only light that will not be put in the construction now would be this light here. Or the one in the island. This light, OK, instead of it would be in. It's like these spaces are built. Oh, OK. Yeah. And is that like a bench area that's proposed there or something? That's the dumpster area. All right, dumpsters. OK. All right. All right, so those two circled lights, one is then. One would take place during the future construction phase. Correct. Correct. OK, that's pretty close to Wilson Road. So there's a fair amount of just ambient or urban light there. Yeah. OK. So right now you don't have any time frame on able. Well, so the issue of the expired permit, that is something we've been talking to Matt and Emily about recently. They said they were going to get a legal interpretation on that. And I don't know if it came back. You have to get it. You have some time to turn it. Don't know if we heard back. OK. Specifically from the attorney on that. So yeah, what was kind of unique about this is our permit to build A1 included A1, B1, and C1 and Cottonwood Drive. It was essentially a building permit to build everything. And that issued in 2019, or I may not have that exactly right. But so we've been working under that permit for the past few years. And there's never been a period of the project where we stopped working. We've always been out there working for the past five or six years. And so yeah, we have not dug the foundation for A1, but all the main infrastructure for this project is in. So whether it's expired or not, it sounds like it's as easy as just refiling an administrative permit application. So it could be essentially queued up, ready to start, because forever along how that administrative permit takes, which I think it's like a 15-day permit. Are you considering an alternative design on that building based on form-based code being now enacted? We had looked into it, but it sounds like it's going to be too difficult to comply with form-based code with the way the infrastructure around it is already in and approved. So certainly the phases 3, 4, and 5 will be a form-based code. But my understanding is even the use as a two-story commercial building wouldn't be allowed without a residential component in there. Is that true? Well, it's always tough answering those questions, because we're threading the line of vested rights and making modifications. So the form-based code does have some provisions. If you have a non-conforming building, you can make a certain amount of change without needing to comply with the code. And then there's a second level where if you're changing between 20% and 50%, then you need to comply with some standards of the code. And if you're changing the building more than 50%, then you just got to come into full compliance with the code. This is a unique scenario where we have an approved, invested building envelope. We have approved and vested final plans for the architectural design of the building. So it's a unique situation, and it would require knowing more about if A1 were to change, how much it were to change to be able to give that good answer of can it continue to be as an existing building with some slight change, or does it have to come into code, and to what extent. So it's hard to know without knowing how much A1 is going to change if it can be approved or not. It would require an assessment from our attorney in more detail about what does it mean when a permit expires if some activities under that permit have taken place, like building some of the streets, but a discrete element like a building footprint has not started, and if that can be easily renewed or if it were in weird form-based code, non-conformity vesting world. Yep. OK. So we don't plan to change too much, if anything. Yeah, A1 fits in there perfect. It was designed around that footprint. That discussion, that side of the story, is going to expand the scope of the envelope we're here tonight to do. So can I throw one more question up here? Yes, absolutely. Curious if you ever considered continuing that walkway all the way around the fund, if it was even possible? So actually, the bike path will go down just along the road. OK. So it's about half, or more than half of it as is, right? It's just that east side where there's no path along the pond. Is that right? Yes. But it's all grass and it's a no. Well, so if you look at this drawing, Nathan, there is a sidewalk that goes on the west side of the pond. And it's kind of hatch gray and blue. That's the sidewalk. And then on the west side, there's a line that kind of moves around. And that's like a footpath. So yeah, that's. Just describe what you mean by footpath. A footpath is just you walking along the top of the berm of the pond. It's like a trail. Dirt. Yeah, dirt. Yeah. OK. Grabbled or anything. Yep. OK. You could walk it. You could walk through there. It's not really just a trail. I can't roll it or plate it. No. Not there. So it would be nice to go all the way around. That's all I'm saying. Yeah. We'll make sure we move the top of that so that it's always walkable. Thanks. Yep. OK, any other questions? So aside from the permit, what are you thinking for a time frame for anyone? Did the permit and everything good? Are you talking a year, two years or a year? Probably one to two years max would get started on it. Yeah, like I said earlier, we were hoping to achieve at least 50% of one of the floors with a tenant before we got started. We had a couple of people that were looking into it. But I hate to say it. When we built buildings 2 and B1 and B2, nobody came until they could actually see it. Once they see it, then they come. We may have to start it without too many tenants signed up. But bank financing these days, it's getting tighter and stricter and obviously harder to pay back. So. OK, any other questions on this phase? Nope. OK, Emily, go to the next one, please. Oh, no, I hit X on the wrong PDF one moment. But it reloaded. Here we go. So area 2, this is the overall construction staging area. Originally, a smaller area was shown along Connerway across the street from building C1. In May, we noticed that construction vehicles were bringing sand and fill into Cottonwood Crossing. There was a lot of stockpiling. The size and height of these stockpiles and the quantity of earth moving equipment and other building materials, like pre-framed walls and floor sections, didn't match up with the construction activities at this time, which were C1 had a foundation and was framed out. And no work was starting on the A1 footprint. So over the summer, we were in conversation with the applicant. And we researched that this construction staging area would require an amendment with the discretionary permit at the DRB. It couldn't be something that we approved administratively. Since that original application date, and as we noticed at the site visit tonight, they've been working to reduce the size and location of the stockpiles. A lot of the equipment on the site has been removed. We are recommending that final plans show a perimeter security fence with gates that gates that get locked when construction hours are closed. And then it have a privacy mesh or slats on that north side where it's adjacent to Conner Way. As I'll discuss later, this security fence will be adjacent to but not encroached on the temporary permit sidewalk along that south side of Conner Way. So if people are parking on that south side of Conner Way, they can get in and out of their cars and walk around. And then the construction fence would be just to the south of that. The equipment, stockpiles, and shipping containers, as shown on the plan, complies. The next page shows that original stockpile land area on the right side, what was permitted, what the conditions were over the summer on the left, and then in your packets, you have their much tighter area. It shows a silt fence around the edge, but we're recommending a security fence. I will say on the security fence, it's something that Chapter 17 gives the DRB to require. It's not been that something that the DRB has required in many circumstances before, but Williston is starting to enter an era where construction sites are no longer just one big, vast parcel. They're getting smaller and tighter where buildings are being constructed near occupied buildings that have residents, customers, visitors. People have never driven to an area before. Kids living in the area. So the staff recommendation is that security fencing is going to be more and more required as these construction projects go from one overall project to something that's partially occupied. So that's recommendation for area two. Thank you. So yes, so our application has a construction staging area. Obviously, we need a space to stage, but we understand that it should be an organized area that doesn't overflow from where it's tend to be. So what we've proposed, and you saw at the site, we've already done a lot of this, is kind of designate areas for equipment, for vehicles, shipping containers for materials storage. Those shipping containers are locked. So that's how we deal with our security on sites is anything that we don't want stolen. We put in a shipping container that can lock. And then we've proposed that the sand and topsoil piles be shaped into like a berm feature. So they won't look like a giant stockpile. They'll just be these long berms that are four or five feet tall, and they won't look like a giant topsoil. Even though the material is still there, just shaped differently. And we've worked with Emily to designate two stabilized entrances, one off the square, and then one opposite the garage entrance to the C1 building. And everywhere between those entrances will be a silt fence. That does two things. It helps us with our erosion control from washing into the street, obviously. But it also provides a barrier where truck to vehicles can't come into the yard in any place they want. They'll have to go at either one end or the other. And so that should make that area more orderly. So we're happy to designate that area and include things like the contractor parking that's being asked for. And the only waiver we are asking on the storage yard would be the security and privacy fence. We don't need the security because we use the shipping containers. And this section of Connerway is also a dead end at this point. The area can still be visible, but it's set back from Williston Road, blocked by the B1 and C1 buildings a little bit. When we rent these apartments out to tenants, obviously we let them know that across the street there's going to be construction projects for at least the near future. So these units are being rented with that known right up front. And so we're happy to work with the town. We're just asking that the private security fence not be required. The area numbers, plugins. We didn't require the security fence when they put this in originally, right? OK. Emily, area three. Area three. So this is phase three on street parking. The staff recommendation here, and this is the portion of parking along Connerway. Across from Allen pools and spas near Maple Tree Place housing condos. So the staff recommendation here, along the southern side of Connerway, install a temporary curb with a white fog line. Include signage that says no parking and additional no parking signage near the fire hydrant. And that this temporary curbing would continue along the traveling edge and then between the one way lane and the six angled parking spaces. So there are some angled parking spaces planned for that center square. And the recommendation is don't do the street parking along phase three. Don't do those six angled spaces along phase three until phase three is under construction. But include a temporary curb and signage to prevent people from parking on the side of the street blocking the hydrant. And then not having vehicles parking in that center square will reduce pedestrian safety conflicts with vehicles in the center square, including construction vehicles coming in and out of that entrance. On the photos, I do show a woman walking. We have observed instances where people are walking on the side of the street that doesn't have a sidewalk or a curb. Thank you. So on area three, that area is directly against phase three of our project. That phase three is going to most likely be redesigned to meet form-based code, which will have those buildings directly on the street. So we're just asking that we not be required to build those spaces now and rip them up, which actually staff agrees with on this area three. So we appreciate that. I guess we would like a waiver on the temporary curb. We're not clear on what the temporary curb is kind of materials being asked for, but we don't really understand the need for a temporary curb for an area that we're going to be working on in the near future. There's roads everywhere in town without any curb, and there's roads with curb on one side and not curb on the other. So we're just asking that that temporary curb not be required. We haven't had anybody park on that side. It's pretty clear that the parking spaces behind the building and on the side of the building are being used. But you saw tonight even that not even the street parking that's on the building side was being used tonight. It does get used occasionally, but nobody has parked on that gravel side at all. And we'll put the white line down. And one of the, I think Paul said, it would be a good idea to put maybe a red line where the fire hydrants are in lieu of that white line just to make sure that people don't park there. But there is no parking there. We'll put the signs up. Yeah, I think that's important. That was in the approval condition for this area is that the area should have no parking signs on that side of the street. So the spaces aren't required. Still have no parking signs so people don't park on the shoulder. And so we're certainly willing to do that. And like I said, in a few years those spaces will be built and the sidewalk will be built. So we're just talking about this period between now and then. Is there a soap fence along there now? Like I can't remember. We're over there. Not on the area three. I think an area four, which is next, there is. Not in the front road. It is on the backside. OK. But anybody walking to Maple Tree Place House can certainly can use the sidewalk on the north side. That connects through with crosswalks and all the way through so you can literally walk all the way to Maple Tree Place with staying on a sidewalk. Yeah, one question. Does Wilson Police enforce red line areas that I indicate no stopping? The reason I ask them, instead of putting a white stripe down that side of the road, they put a red stripe down the whole front lane. Which would indicate anyone stopping there is automatically eligible to be ticketed in tow. Yes, no? OK. I mean, we're sitting there demanding no parking signs. So I'm assuming we can't demand no parking signs. We just demand a red stripe along that road, right? Same difference. I think if it became a problem, we could certainly call the police and ask them to take in anybody that's parking there if they didn't listen to us. But I can assure you that I don't think anyone's going to park here. I think no parking signs are sufficient. OK. We'll go on that. Sorry, I said we'll go on that. OK. I'm going to start the discussion on area three. Nope. OK. Area four. All right, area four. So we're jumping back onto the south side of Conner Way. And previously, we're talking about construction. Now we are talking about the finished treatment for this side of the street. So the staff recommendation is that a temporary curb be installed from that construction gated fence walking off where those future angled parking spaces would be. And then creating a pedestrian landing at the crosswalk, providing a temporary asphalt sidewalk along the parking spaces, construct the parking spaces with their curb. And that temporary sidewalk would be next to the fence for the construction staging area. The reason I'm recommending parking and sidewalks on this side of the street is because it is adjacent to building C1 and building B1, which are occupied or in C1 is going to be occupied soon. So allowing for that street, though it is a dead end, to be completed. If this area redevelops under form-based code, I think it's likely that the stabilized construction entrance would be the future access for the building where that G footprint is shown. And then I have some photos that show Conner Way from last week. It's the same area three, really. Area three, same argument. We don't want to have to build those spaces only to then dig them up and rebuild them. And in this area, even more than area three is because our staging area is next to this area, we rather would not have those people parking in those spaces at least until some of the future phases are complete. So we can do a white line with no parking signs, like we did in area three, and we can dress the shoulder of the road up so that it looks good. But for now, we'd like people to park in the parking lots or on the other side of Conner Way. Area five, so this is the central square that was originally included in the phase one infrastructure. So staff is recommending that the temporary pavement markings be painted and maintained regularly. This applies not only to the square, but all parking crosswalk markings throughout the development. We're also recommending that it be completed with final landscaping stamped concrete and the mountable curb within one year of this approval. The photo is similar to what we've seen on site where the pavement hatching has been striped in to denote where the mountable curb will be in the future. But the recommendation is to finish it out within a year. What we would like to do is agree, if we could say, two years just to put as much light on that stamped concrete as we possibly could. Again, it's an expense that we're going to have to pay for. We just don't want to pay for it twice. And we think it's very important for the project as well because that's kind of a focal point of things there. And obviously, by putting the grass in there and putting the permanent signs in it, it spruced it up quite a bit. We know that the truck traffic is going to really pound on it. It's not like a delivery of hot puffs. It's construction equipment still. So if we could buy two years, get it done within a two-year period, at least it'll save an additional year. Yeah, I mean, obviously, this is important to the town being the center of the project. But it's important to us as well. But the way it's a one-way tight traffic square. And there's going to be a lot of trucks needed to build these future phases, especially if we're looking to have four or five-story buildings. And we wanted to look nice as well. So I guess I was asking for a two-year window on that. I think it would be fine. And I think at the end, you'd end up with a nicer finished product by just waiting an extra year. Do you have any questions? No. Yeah, I've got it on there. Sorry. OK, area six. OK, this is the last one. So this is the crosswalks within the Maple Tree Place housing along Conner Way. The staff recommendation is that the raised crosswalk be completed within one year of this approval. So they've painted in the temporary paint. The recommendation is that the raised crosswalk go in within one year. Thank you. We'll agree to that. I think that's it. I went over the last few sections that give the overarching bylaw requirement. What follows are the findings of fact, conclusions of law, and conditions of approval. I've bolded the text and the conditions of approval. And all of my recommendations relate to mainly condition number 17A through F and conditions 18A, B, and C and condition number 19. Brian, do you want to? Yeah, so I talked to Emily a little bit about this for the meeting. We read the conditions of approval and are generally in agreement. We certainly agree with 1 through 16 on 17 and 18, which is really the sequencing of all these action items. We have kind of got a red line copy of condition 17, which it's pretty simple. Uses Emily's original language, but just strikes the things we've asked for, not be required. And maybe that helps you take it or leave it. But I figured I would pass that around. I think that's helpful. OK, yeah, and what you'll see when you kind of read it is that things we've agreed to, we left. And then a few things that we're asking be not required to struck, which could still see you. Some of ours would be really happy, but is there anything in there that you think doesn't make sense? Yeah, it's your decision. That's what we're going to talk about. Yeah, either way. Yeah. The only one, because I was following along, I have this copy with me. 18A, you were saying? Oh, the square? Rather than striking out that section, it would just say within two years instead of one year. So that was the decision we just made on the way in. Al said, hey, it would complete the square, but would like a one extra year extension. So that red line was what we would talk about this afternoon, but seen as it was important to the town, they're willing to put that in. OK. Any other recommendations you guys would make for the next project? Do you want to build a nice project? Yeah, we want to be able to be able to do that. Quality of instruction, the site is very high. It's a thing, I think I'll speak to the DRV. He said that, you know, you've got to elevate the bar, along with any cross standards within Wilson. And so you are going to be commended on that. And so we'll work through this. At this point, I want to open it up for the public to weigh in with any comments or questions or thoughts or perspectives. No raise hands? No raise hands. OK. Do you have any members in the last comment or thoughts? One last quick one on this could be for staff and for you guys that raise crosswalk when you turn off maple tree on the Conner Way. It does seem like very close to where you turn off. And I just have to concern people who are going to turn off, and they're going to just stop abruptly and get rear-ended. And I don't know if there's a better way to do it. I don't know what that answer is, but it's just looking at this. I think that's concerning. Yeah. Well, so that's the area that they built when they built maple tree housing in. There's a sidewalk on either side that connect there. So I think there's probably enough room for two, maybe three cars to stack if somebody was crossing there. But again, there's not an awful lot of traffic. I think that was built mostly because they had a laundry dryer room on the other side. And they just wanted the people to cross, to be able to cross and be safe crossing that right there. So I think if we put the raise in there, it would be a little bit of a traffic calming. But it shouldn't stack people up, because it's not that much for that to be in traffic. Yeah. And so that was one of the things we didn't really have a lot of control over designing location when we approached them. And as if there's anything they needed, would like to see with our project, that was what they said. They said there's only one building with washing machines. And so the residents from the other buildings have to get to that building and they cross the street. So they wanted that crosswalk. OK. So we are going to close D316-05.1 and 758. Thank you very much. Yeah, thank you. Thanks for your time, Chris. OK, next up is DDP 24-02 in the pre-app of Malcolm Wheeler. Wheeler, can you come forward? Good evening. Good evening. Your name is? Malcolm Wheeler, 699 Knothville Road in the Middle East. Thank you. Is that OK? OK, so this is a request for pre-application review for a three-lot subdivision to create two new units at 699 Knothville Road in the ARZD. There's currently one home on the parcel, which is located at the sort of very northernly end of Knothville Road. And then beyond it, there's sort of the last house on the road. And then beyond that is a town-owned parcel of land. Staff is recommending that the DRB take testimony, discuss any issues, and then allow the project to proceed to growth management. We didn't receive any comment letters on this proposal. In terms of the zoning district, subject to a minor point which I'll come to, we anticipate compliance with the dimensional standards. So things like heights, lot sizes, road frontages, and setbacks. Just to go over that minor recommendation here, two things both relating to the building envelope. Firstly, the building envelope shown on the plan for two new lots is 0.62 acres. You're probably aware that in the ARZD, we do limit building envelopes to half an acre, which is to accommodate the clearing for the new home, any accessory structures, and the parking. And then outside of that, you're limited to sort of underground parts of septic systems, the access driveway, and utility lines. So those building envelopes are marginally too large. So we're just recommending they get reduced in size. And the second thing also to do with the building envelope, at the moment, they're very close to uphill road. They do need to be pushed back to 25 feet to comply with the setback requirements as we don't allow much development within the setback. That will also benefit the eventual occupants of the units, so they'll have more space for lawn or whatever. So this is not an open space development, as the parcel is less than 10.5 acres. So we don't have to protect open space on a separately plated lot. WDD 31.9 sets out a range of criteria. Most of those are dealt with in a range of criteria for new lots within this zoning district. Most of the criteria there are dealt with under other chapters of the bylaw. One requirement is to minimize visual impacts from public ways where possible. The new lots are screened from the nearest public ride away on Old Creamery Road. There may well be some visibility from Further Hill on Sunset Hill Road, which is a lot further off. The Conservation Commission did not raise any concern with the visual impacts of what's being proposed. In terms of growth management, if we complete the application tonight, it would be eligible for growth management review next year, just as a sort of informational for the DRB. We should focus on the current bylaws, but the select board is planning to hear an amendment to the growth management chapter of the bylaws sometime in October. If that passed in its current form, that does exempt people proposing up to four units on an existing lot from having to go through growth management. So essentially, if that was passed by the select board that you wouldn't see this again at growth management, they'd go straight to discretionary permit. However, for the purpose of tonight, I think we should focus on the current bylaws. And if you're minded to pass it, recommend they go to growth management. On-site infrastructure, the sort of usual recommendation on wastewater and well water. There's an overhead power line that runs through the parent parcel and also serves the adjoining parcel to the North 729 Nob Hill Road. We're recommending underground connections for the two new lots from that. Density checks out. It complies with the requirements of the bylaw. In terms of landscaping, the property is heavily wooded or for single family units in the ARZD, we do apply the 15 foot setback on the side and rear yards and then the 25 foot setback that we talked about earlier from the street. And then two last points, conservation areas. You can see from the drawing there that it's mapped the strategic wildlife habitat area as we are recommending an HDA. Another one for you, which is that the select board are also holding hearings on the process for HDAs as part of that package. A minor change there, which is that goes through the town would essentially control the preparation of the HDA and the applicant's expense. So again, if we just focus on the current bylaws, but that's just something to be aware of. The property is also mapped for scenic viewshed. But as mentioned earlier, the conservation commission didn't raise any concern over the impact of the viewshed. And then lastly, just to iron out any confusion on what it caused. We essentially, when we went to conservation, we got a recommendation to provide a trail easement. We had a good conversation there about the trail easement and subsequent to that, I had spent a bit more time looking at the official map and the recommendation is that the DRB focus on official map in this case. So what you can see there is the two maps side-by-side, official map on the right, the primitive trail map on the left, or proposals that affect the, well, sorry, I'll start again. For land that contains infrastructure on the official map, applicants are required to provide either that trail or an easement. As you can see, that does not go down into the parcel on the official map. For the primitive trail map and the town plan, it does go down into the parcel and sort of links to the top of Knop Hill Road there. The upshot here is that the DRB shouldn't be requiring an easement there. But because of the way the bylaws are phrased, the applicant could pose an easement, the growth management score points. So it's sort of optional for them to improve their chances at growth management. And I've amended the Conservation Commission recommendation for the DRB to think about when making recommendations. So that's it. What follows is the motion and the recommendation. Thank you for hearing the recommendation. Yeah, thank you. Yeah, thank you. Yeah, thank you so much. At this point, no. Do you have any other comments? I'm merely trying to split off some land that I've lived on for 30 years or so, part of some of the state planning and things and create two wooden buildable lots. In Wilson. Do you have any other questions? At this point, do you intend on providing a trail easement? At this point, no. Okay. That Knop Hill is public road. It is, Knop Hill is not a public road, no. I'd love it to be and I'd probably be happy to give you a trail easement if the town would take over the road. Good job. Have you had an official survey done of this block with the term size of? Yes, I have. It came out at 10 or not. The lot was larger when I bought, excuse me, I hadn't resurveyed because I thought I had more than 10 and a half acres. And the new survey said that I had about a 10th, a little bit more than a 10th, more than what the original deed said. So it was recently surveyed within the last six months. How does the WPWP15.2 require you to have a sufficient groundwater? How do they demonstrate sufficient groundwater under this period? That is controlled by the state. Essentially, we require them to submit their waste and well water permit with the discretionary permit. So they probably have to do tests and demonstrate to the Department of Environmental Conservation that they can meet those standards. So we're just curious to say again. Anything else? Any last comments? No. Any appointments or comments from the public? I have a couple of questions, if I may. All right, if you would state your pain and try to photograph it, please. Sure, my name is Ryan Miller and I am at 729 Knob Hill where the, if you look in all these little drawings where the little square out of the big square, I'm welcome. So we're concerned or questioning neighbors about how this is going to impact us. Should I, can I go ahead? I'm sorry, I don't, this is new to me and a lot of this feels pretty legalese and I've talked with Malcolm about it but I also just want to get sort of what's officially going to get baked into this. So do you mind if I ask some questions? Okay, thank you. When it says the height is 36 feet but is subject to approval, how do we determine what like is it 36 feet and that's what we're going with or does that will impact our views at our house? So, so I think if you could address that question, please. It would be a maximum limit of 36 feet that they'll be, they can build up to that height should they so choose. One of the things that they do do is they need to push their building envelope off the boundary. So that will mean it won't be as close but I guess it means it won't, it may still block your view, I don't know. And that's allowed, they can just build up and block the view if they want to and there's nothing we can do about it. They are allowed to build up to 36 feet, the bylaws don't, they don't protect your view. They don't, okay. Also, so on the setbacks on this map, is the blue the new, is the blue what you guys are proposing or is there setbacks beyond that? And the blue square, the proposed lot. Yeah, up there. Sorry, so we're up at 729 at the very top. So, yeah, so that's what was shown as the building envelope that I'm drawing around in blue. Yeah, so, yeah, so one of the things we do is when someone has a large lot like this, which is two acres, we don't allow them to completely clear the lot. We only allow them to clear up to half an acre. So that area will be reduced in size from the current 0.62 and also be pushed back towards the east slightly to get it further away from the road. Okay, so it is going to be a little bit further from the road, the buildable lot. Yeah, a little bit further from the road and a little bit smaller. Okay, that's what the setback stuff. And then, so this new lot kind of cuts through the trees that protect our view of this new building. Would they have the ability to cut down those trees if they want to, if they're on their land? So they're clearing outside the building envelope is protected by the bylaw. So you've got to maintain your landscape buffers. So if they were to clear in the buffers that are joined your property, that would be a violation of the bylaw and they'd have to replant. Okay, so they can't clear outside of the buildable area. Question mark. Correct. Okay. Yeah. Okay, and I guess my last question is right now because it's a private road and Malcolm, you can correct me if I'm wrong but you've been maintaining from the fork on and when you're gone, who is gonna be responsible for that? Or is that just playing into our entire Nob Hill conundrum at the moment? He does. Right. The road ends at your property. It's my understanding that the road ends at your property and I've been taking care of the area that goes across my property for a number of years, not smiling, but just grating and I've got a tractor and I'll rake it. But that's all part of the Nob Hill conundrum at now. Right, so but when you and I, when we split the extra stuff, that was not, we just did that so we could get mail service when we got all the extra fill in. Right, the intention was to get Judy Gregory to credit us for that. Gotcha, okay. Okay, I guess, yeah. I think that answers my questions. Thank you. I'd be happy to meet with you, Ryan, sometime in the near future if you have any questions or you wanna walk the property here, see exactly what's going on. Yeah, no problem. And I'm happy to talk to you too, but I also just wanna make sure that whatever you're saying is gonna be codified and like legally it's not that you would lie, but just that there's no misunderstanding. I just wanna get it from two places. So yeah, I would love to talk to you about it. Right, okay. All right, thanks, guys. Okay, any other follow-up comments? Okay, last call for PR meeting, any other questions? I'll come in at the final thoughts. Oh, is there any questions? Anybody else? I don't have any questions. Okay, great. I'm gonna close with 18.4-2 and 8.16. Thank you very much. Thank you. Yeah, the other page is going to go on to the Overdose Development Group new board, Tuesday, September 0.6, 2023. It is 8.49, the board is probably delivered to session. Is there an option for 8.16-05? Yes, as authorized by WDV 6.63 by David Turner, moved the Williston Development Review Board, having reviewed the application submitted in all accompanying materials, including the recommendations of the town staff and the advisory boards required to comment on this application by the Williston Development By-law and having heard and duly considered the testimony presented to public hearing on September 26th, 2023, except the findings of facts and conclusions of law for the 18-05 and approved the discretionary commitment subject to the conditions of approval. The approval authorizes the applicant to file final plans, obtain approval from these plans, from the staff, and then seek administrative permit for the proposed development, which must proceed in strict conformance with the plans of which this approval is based. There's been several corrections due, the records and Emily will read them. Condition 17A states A-1 infrastructure. Along the east side of Cottonwood Drive near A-1, complete the street curb, on-street parking, signage, and crosswalks at the northeast corner. Complete the sidewalk between the stormwater ponds and parking lot from C-1 to Williston Road Multiuse Path, including grading from the sidewalk to the top of the retaining wall. B, A-1 construction staging. Designate a construction staging area for building A-1 within the A-1 parking area and or footprint. This staging area must be outside the 35-foot setback. Designate contractor parking areas on the site plan, including placement of on-site signage, such that vehicular circulation through phase one parking lot is not interrupted. Include a signage plan to temporary close off pedestrian access and possibly the eight on-street parking spaces on this side of Cottonwood Drive when A-1 is under construction. C, area two. Staging plan approved in location size as shown with two construction entrances at Center Square and Connerway. Designate contractor parking areas on the site plan, including placement of on-site signage. Equipment stockpiles and shipping containers only permitted in locations and sizes as shown on phasing plan. D, area three. Along the southern side of Connerway, install a white fog line along the travel lane edge. Signage shall mark the south side of Connerway as no parking with additional signage near the fire hydrant. E, area four. Along the southern side of Connerway, install a white fog line along the travel lane edge. Signage shall mark the southern side of Connerway as no parking with additional signage near the fire hydrant. No changes to F. Condition 18A shall read area five. The Center Square shall be completed with final landscaping stamped concrete and a mountable curbing within two years of this approval. 18C amended to read final paving including permanent crosswalk pavement marking shall be completed along Cottonwood Drive from Williston Road to the vehicle entrance in the square within two years. Thank you, Emily. Fifth or second? Second. All seconded. Anybody have a discussion? Yay or nay? Eight years. Yay. Paul Richardson. Yay. David Turner. Yay. Other chairs, the yay. Lisa Brayden-Harter is not present. Scott Riley and John Helmogharn have accused themselves that it's for a favored non-posed motion here. Is there a motion for DP 24-02 free app on Cottonwood Road? Yes. As authorized by WDB 6.6.3, I, John Helmogharn, move that the Williston Development New Board, having reviewed the application submitted in all company materials including the recommendation of the talent staff and the advisory board prior to comment on this application by the Williston Development by law. Having heard of newly considered testimony presented at the public hearing on September 26, 2023, accept the recommendation to DP 24-02 and authorize this application to move forward to go to the pen. Thank you, John. There's a second. Little seconded. Dave Turner seconds it and for the discussion. Hearing none, yay or nay? Eight. Yay. Paul? Yay. Scott? Yay. Dave? Yay. John? Yay. Chair is a yay. Second in favor, non-posed motion carries. Is there a motion to approve the minutes of the second approval? Don't move. All right, 50 seconds. That's it. I'll give that an eight. So Paul made a motion. Eight seconds. Any discussion? Yay or nay? Please say. Yay. Paul? Yay. Scott? Yay. John? That's it. Chair is a yay. Five in favor, non-posed one. That's it. Is there any further? Anything further before? Is there a motion to adjourn? So moved. Second? All second. All in favor, non-posed. Thank you all. We are adjourned. The adjourned is adjourned. Thank you.