 So this is the meeting of the town of wilson development review board for Tuesday, May 28th 2019 Call the meeting to order at 7. Oh three We've got three items on the agenda tonight the Vermont hotel group requesting a discretionary permit revise make some revisions to a previous Permit we've got a master sign plan for our em development company and a sur ticket of appropriateness First order of business is Normally a public forum If there's anybody here that wants to make comment on any item that's not on the agenda now is the time I'm guessing not giving a huge crowd that we have Good So we'll move ahead to DP 18 dash 0 6 point one Vermont hotel group LLC request a discretionary permit to revise the building facade color materials roofline and site plan for proposed four-story 92 room hotel at 34 to 82 Blair Park Road in the business Park zoning district Please come forward So if you could state your names and addresses for the record and address Sorry, thank you Great excellent Great, so normally we have staff go first. Okay. Take away So this is a request for a discretionary permit to amend a previously obtained discretionary permit for a new four-story 92 room hotel and Blair Park on The subject properties on the corner of Williston Road and Blair Park Road Some might know it as the property with the building that has the post office The building is proposed for the south That property and this is an application to amend a discretionary permit I'll note the project history this began with pre application review involved 2017 and proceeded through discretionary permit review and approval in April of 2018 Just take that nine and turn it and the applicants were coming up on their deadline to file final plans But as the project evolved wanted to make some changes So the application before the board tonight is to consider those changes and in our staff report We've quoted some by-law guidance on when there's an amendment to an existing discretionary permit What's the scope of review for the DRB? So to be clear the scope of review is what's changing in other words Items such as the fact that there's a four-story hotel the location of that building on the site Elements of its design that aren't proposed to change those are all considered settled and the board would be moving forward with reviewing just the changes to that original approval and the staffs provided the board with Approved and proposed plans for comparison So to go through really briefly What's on the table here? It's still a four-story 92 room hotel The the hotel gains a incentive on its height because at least 30% of its parking demand is happening Underneath the building in a structure The amendment in question is looking at changing the roof line articulation a little bit changing some of the exterior treatment and colors And the way that the stone base is Placed on the building There's a little bit of different site work out front Just grading up from the bike path To the entrance requiring a terraced walkway with an ADA compliant ramp steps and some landscaping There's still an entrance to the hotel facing route to with the what the board asked for a year ago The stepped facade in other words the building's not at its full height right out on route to it's at a lower height And then steps up as it moves away In terms of traffic staff doesn't expect that any of the changes proposed tonight would change traffic generation on the property Traffic impact fee would be assessed by In terms of parking the site amendment does remove one of the subsurface parking spaces Which reduces the total number of spaces on the site to a hundred and twenty nine That number is still in compliance with the bylaw requirements based on reductions available under shared parking analysis And there is still the required number of handicapped spaces short-term bicycle Long-term bicycle spaces and end-of-trip facilities otherwise known as commuter shower and locker facilities There are some required landscape buffers that are still being met on the site This is essentially a street tree section on the street facing frontages of the parcel and a nine-foot wide type 3 or informal plantings buffer on the side yard, which is between the hotel and the Ashley furniture building So there's a description in the staff report of exactly what's in the type 3 buffer If anybody's in Other than the changes to the building the staff noted some fairly significant proposed changes to the site So there was quite a bit of landscaping in the approved plan both in the drainage swale along the Williston Road Frontage essentially landscaping that like a rain garden as well as some extra landscaping in the parking lot median Williston's bylaw does have a parking lot landscaping requirement as well as some guidance and requirements on Trying to make runoff and erosion control features As rain gardens an asset to the site staff does believe that originally proposed Served those demands of the bylaw better than the proposed amendment which which Subtracts quite a bit of that landscaping and would recommend the board have a conversation What the board feels is a We have no changes to the municipal water or wastewater sewer service We have utility shown we have snow storage and solid waste Bylaw This project is subject to design review. It's in the design review district So when it was originally approved it did receive Historic and architectural advisory committee the changes as proposed and shown to the board tonight were also reviewed by the historic and architectural advisory committee They did not add any special changes This time around their transmittal though is enumerated in the staff report generally finding compliance with the elements of chapter 22 design review and You can see the recitation of all of that Just making sure I don't gloss over any and they just mentioned Bylaw to have an airlock that's doubled sets of doors for major building entrances just because I Also Did pass this around for review by police fire and public works We had no comments from police the fire department of public works departments did provide memos of comment and those memos are attached and Compliance with their recommendations is recommended by the staff as a draft condition of approval So the staff has prepared recommended findings of fact conclusions of law and conditions of approval for this amendment as proposed by the applicants and again just calling out that All the changes and make sure there's an understanding of what those are Great, thanks Matt So as some as Matt mentioned this is an amendment to a previously Conferred permit so we're just looking at the changes to that end I think it would be great if you could very specifically kind of map out exactly what those changes are for the board So we can understand what was there and what you're proposing Sure, we can start. Let's start with the building changes. Okay, I'm gonna have Bobby go first as the architect Okay, you know what has changed since the original application Okay, so building changes There was there was a roof line change and you can The most notable change to that is on the front where you have more of a hip roof Was the front of the hotel rather than just a straight gable Interrupted is there is there Where in our materials what was approved? What was it? Yeah, so the packet There's a loose sleep page with the landscaping plan previously approved and let's start with the floor plans a couple pages and has the Previously approved 11 by 17 Elevations and also perspective renderings So the bound the bound copy here is proposed the bound copy. Yes is the Staple So so what you've got on the board there is the that's the new that's the new what you'd like us to review Yeah, yeah So the changes are on which facade that we're looking at right now Oh the facade facing the parking lot and the facade facing Ashley's furniture The the facade facing Ashley's furniture is a bigger gable now. It was a smaller gable. No, it's just bigger it kind of in cases that entire Bump and that's pretty much it for the roof line changes. We're just those two facades So on the parking lot facade It's really a change of kind of extending that center portion Further up Yeah, that like a hip roof on there now. Yeah, it's like a hip hip roof on like knee walls kind of Look great The next thing will be some minor material changes that took place on the hotel as well Before we had Wood panels that wrapped around the corner of the bump out on the parking lot facade and now they're kind of like stone pillars on each Corner each side So that would be a minor material change going from panels to that stone. Do you have any 3d view of that? Yeah There we go, okay, yeah, yeah, I thought I thought so so that this actually a nice It's actually a good view of that because you can see And that's the same material as those on the base. Yes, great, right and The same material that's on the retaining wall that you're going to talk about in a minute Yes, it looks like it on there on the rendering, okay The other change would be color changes Which you can see on the drawings. We have kind of a brown siding tan siding below that and then kind of tan Panel above the wood panels as well the faux wood panels So there were some color changes that took place Before it was kind of gray and now it's a warmer color scheme okay, so on On this sketch here, which is the new proposed portion. I see a very a very colorful Facia on the edge of the roof that doesn't was that on there before no, so that would be another color change where they have red facia and red Window trims colors coming at the request of the tenant of the perspective tenant that was driving the there was some back and forth But yes, these are the colors that they would prefer How close is the color that's represented here to the true color that? Well the colors that we selected in the renderings are the colors that we took right off of a manufacturers website Do you have any actual samples? Yeah, so the red trim might show a little vibrant in the renderings Just because it's kind of taken out a very sunny day in the rendering so It might be toned down a little like a brick red or It's not like a fire engine red or no, it won't be fire engine. This looks pretty orange on this I've also my experience is that the colors that come off of websites are notoriously inaccurate and unreliable well Let me I'll go back and rephrase that we have samples in the office And we were able to take the color off the actual sample chip but why don't you go why don't you go through and finish summarizing the changes Okay Sure, why don't you go ahead bring them up And the siding here and this is the Okay All right, so these are the these are the horizontal lines on the building these are very helpful It's a very different color than we're showing up on it. Okay Good you have the do you have the same thing for the the remainder of the various colors So there's actually four colors here several colors Who's the bark This is these are show texture, but we call that smooth And the bark is the the dark the dark and the ash and the lighter one and this is the ash in here This one's a new right I Rendering on this drawing So is there well you're looking to is there a change the material or just a color Just a color color the only material change of those columns at the corners, correct I'm gonna go back there was another material change with the wood the faux wood paneling and I believe it Do you have the previous one We we brought it up one more one more floor The wood paneling so that was a material change wood paneling. Where is that exactly on the parking lot side? No, look at that Yep, we brought it up one one story there. Okay good Great So anything else on that I'm gonna keep asking to you say for sure no No, are you sure I'm sure okay All right, so those are the roof line changes and the color and material changes on the facade. Yeah. Hey, what else? There was some windows that moved Around on the lower levels. I don't believe Mark, do you know if we lost any windows? Yeah, we lost one window on the lower level on the back the middle. Yeah, it is that I'd say is to Over over over on the bottom level 12312345 Two windows two windows on the first floor are there are there any on the second floor. Oh, yeah, there's a whole row Yeah, so three three over there, too. Yeah, is that is it was that due to a loss of units or? Your windows in one unit We actually have 91 units. Yeah, 92. Yeah, 91 units now, but I'm not sure if that's Which facade are you looking at We're looking at the facade facing Ashley's furniture east the east elevation Well, they've the interesting thing is there's windows here that aren't here. It's a stairway This was directly There's there are a number of windows that are not on here a lot more than one or two One on each floor. I see I see both of the rows on the On either end are gone Yeah, there's a one on the and then a little gable. I'm looking at the east elevation So if you take the colored area in the center, there are five there are five windows each floor On the top floors, but and the and then the old one there were three windows to the left of that and now there's only two and To the right there were seven and now there's only six So there's three on the left here One two, do you guys have different plans in us? There's 14 columns of windows Oration and not having the windows in that Those are gone these are actually Those might be a little updated Well, I'm not sure which which plan should I be looking at this is the most right, but this one we don't have I don't think Oh, this is the engineers A200 or a 2.0 dated March 19th This one shows it This is that one more more it's more similar to The original one with three three windows over here But these have disappeared over in this and then you're saying this is a stairwell at the center of the building or not Yes, all right. Let's let's move on. We'll we'll have to deal with this at some point. Um, no I Mean we're we're we're actually, you know, we're supposed to be looking at the stuff that was submitted a chance to review So it's really difficult when things are changed kind of during the hearing But at this point you're telling me that There's only three windows that have been removed and those are the ones in the stairwell plus the two on The first floor And Four on the stairwell one on each floor Okay, okay 214 plus three and others in the stairwell All right. And so then the other clarification that I'd like is How many units are in the hotel? proposed at this point 91 and there were 92 permitted So Matt does that that doesn't change anything in terms of use or Other pieces. No, is that a non material change? correct Yes In two two different ways. Okay. Good All right, what else I think that's it for building changes Yeah, but that may be beating the debt the other dead horse Which is the fact that the plans are looking at a different than the plans were looking at the west elevation basically like tucked in here It looks like the room shifted or something with others windows there. Oh Yeah, note that change one less column of windows One more than was permitted or one more than was submitted to us more than was permitted on the west Elevation, so you moved one set of windows from the east to the west Okay Fair enough. All right So and then I'm my understanding is there were some changes to the south facade as it Building massing or a site work standpoint Probably the illustration that best the photo that best illustrates the changes to the I Don't think anything Nothing changed in in terms of the the building other than what Bobby described with colors The entry So that changes the relationship between the finish floor elevation and So rather than have sort of a flat Entry patio. We did a terrace retaining wall with a diagram That is the change But it was still right around the corner. There's still a porch overhang Is the building height change? No so In 3d space that the ridge of the roof stayed in the exact same spot And you just brought the floor up and it's still down to the ground Yeah Did it affect it did affect the entrance at the the parking lot entrance Raise the grade at that entrance and dispersed it across the site get a little more space to do that Okay We're still proposing the gravel wetland as before and the gravel wetland plantings are Plugs of grasses and wetland wet loving plants that help with the storm water treatment They're included in the storm water detail What is not on this current plan are some of the other plantings that we have proposed Plugs hoping that we can revert to L 101 that was originally approved And use those plantings using those plantings with the island as approved a year ago And we can Bring those back because it sounds like that's a more approvable so Bear with me here. Yeah, I Look at the new Which I know is in here So on the on the 2018 plan that was approved There were gravel wetlands between the parking lot and this in the pedestrian path there were yep That's the same and that is not changed In addition to those gravel wetlands and the and the planting plugs that are part of that. Yeah, you were proposing Additional Landscaping which is what I see on this plan right and we had the four species that didn't end up showing back up on here were red choked cherry summer sweet sweet firm nine bark and elderberry and Well in an attempt to clean up the landscape plan We wanted only the rain rain garden plantings to show up on the storm water detail and So some of the plants that we wanted end up being turned off on this landscaping plan So I so are there any landscaping pieces from this plan here? From last year that are not proposed At this time Look, I don't believe so that parking the parking island kind of just do west of the portico share Yeah, those plantings would be proposed as before. Yep It's essentially a a clerical error here to have turned that layer off. It was yep I think it looks cleaner, but we it looks cleaner It might look better on the paper They show up in a place that isn't represented to you, so I think we should revert back to this plan for the approval It may that may show up as a condition That's a good so Otherwise if those are all still on there Are there any changes to the site plan other than those that ramp in the entry sequence on the south end? No a question Landscaping at so that so the ramp is now added along along the bike path But it looks like the plantings are on top of the ramp in In this drawing the landscape drawing is that just because that's where they were that's where they landed in the previous iteration yeah, those those all fit those are all intended to fit within the the island between the sidewalk and the The ramp and the sidewalk They're just not shown there, right? It's the same number and the same species so when you make that change on that end are we losing any seating area or Other gathering space. It's now a ramp. We have a little bit I think before there was about eight feet between the building and Where the planting started and now we have six and a half feet And I'm talking about along the south elevation The other thing that has changed is that on the old plan there used to be The brick pavers went all the way from the south face of the building up to where there was an entry door Sort of in this bump out That's behind the plantings that are along there. Yeah, so what is in that space over the Parking underneath. Yes Great for the night sign that tells people what it is Any other questions on that Um Just a question and I may have missed this the first time around but the parking layout At least on the previous round of plans had a whole half of them were compact spaces that's still the plan A lot of compact spaces In the basement floor plan now versus the whole row Yeah, that's we lost the space with columns and repositioning so now they're full full spaces saved for two The question I have was simply one of count it appears in your narrative that you're switching from 40 spaces in there to 39 But I I've counted the spaces on the new plan and I come up with 40 every time I Was looking at this one here Yeah, my understanding is Is it a full parking lot Was there a full I mean, this is this is the old layout right here The elevators oriented the other direction, so there's no I didn't see in here a layout of this scale It does look it looks a little it does look slightly different than what I have on here and there is a note on here This says this is not necessarily the most Up-to-date set, so the 39 spaces will still comply with the percentage they need As if it meets your needs it appears to meet the zoning any concerns well lost of a space The only thing I was wondering about was the green color mentioned green so I was wondering If you have a sample of that Was it brown before and change the green I think it was it's always been gray like gray We're keeping it a light gray Like right or the roof is gonna be like right or green like gray. Oh, okay. I said ring before So these these these two renderings are intended to be the same Not intended to be a color change on the roof, right? Well, did you have a chance to look at the comments from the fire department and public works? Do you have any concerns? No, we can comply with their conditions. Have you talked to either of those departments? yep, we've been in communication with public works and We've met with the fire department as well, so their their comments will be Yep gone through active 15 it's been approved it is getting there. Yeah, we have I think the public notice period has passed, but we're still we haven't gotten the final permit yet Anything else you wanted to point out to us? We're removed on the backside So that's why I think that's why they appeared to switch from one side to the other great. Thank you Anything else? Any questions from the audience? No, thank you, thank you for listening to this Great You guys all done? Y'all said okay, so let's close this hearing at 750 748 DP 19-23 REM development company requests a discretionary permit to establish a master sign plan at existing commercial site at 296 Avenue D in the industrial West zoning district We'll open the hearing at 749 You could say your name and sure Doug gulat from Lamarow and Dickinson engineering Okay, this is a request for a discretionary permit It's for a master sign plan at 296 Avenue D in the industrial zoning district West The outfit is proposing a master sign plan because the site has multiple commercial tenants Signs on the wall that individually will be in excess of 24 square feet apiece Which can only be allowed in the master sign plan special findings that allowing such signs Is in compliance with the goals of the Wilson comprehensive plan and statements in the by-law which in summary are that Signs ought to look like they fit on the building and bigger buildings might be able to have bigger signs than 24 square feet sometimes So there is a table prepared by the staff showing a total proposed amount of signage on the site of 104 square feet The building elevation that faces the street is 90 feet wide and 14 and three quarters feet high 8 of that which is the by-law site wide maximum for signs is 106.2 square feet So the applicants proposed master sign plan does come in just under the 8 site wide limit And you can see there a number of proposed wall signs at Three at 16 square feet four three at four square feet. Um, and then one more at 16 and one more at four A couple of small three square foot window signs And a single existing freestanding sign of 32 square feet that make up that total so we also Exempted from the calculation the building number signage which the by-law does not require to be counted in the site wide total So that said the applicant Rather the staff has prepared recommended findings of fact conclusions of law and conditions of approval That would approve the master sign plan with special findings exactly as proposed by the applicant and I will stop there Anything to add to it? Nope. No, we're fine with the recommendations of approval Any questions from the board? Well, um, there'll be any lighting on the Street sign On the freestanding side. Yeah on the freestanding side, uh, I don't There's nothing There's nothing proposed and I to be honest with you. I couldn't tell you whether there's a light on that or not now But nothing is proposed to change. Oh, so That's an existing sign. Yes. Yes So no changes to that there's a Well, for what it's worth, there's a photo of it on the plan and there's no lighting that shows up even though it's cropped fairly tightly to In fact, it's not I'm fine Any comments or questions from the audience? We've finished up, right? Okay, well, then let's let's close this hearing at Uh, 953 I'm sorry, 853 All right, thank you though. Yeah, thank you Third and final agenda item. Uh, we have hp 19 day zero two Which is ap 19 day zero 184 nephanial oval v Her Is that right? Requests a certificate of Appropriateness and administrative permit to replace a broken french door on a first floor apartment at 38 slate barn drive In the national register historic district of the village zoning district. Good evening So, I guess nephanial oval v 38 slate barn drive wilson vermont So, yeah, we let the staff go first, but I'll be you'll get a chance um, so Folks on the board are familiar. This is the slate barn house more or less across the street from the town hall complex It's in the national register historic district and thus Things that would normally either be just maintenance items in other parts of the town or able to be permitted Administratively are required to come before the drb for a certificate of appropriateness you're putting on your national park service hats and Doing the doing the duty of the federal government in providing historic review in this federally designated district In this case, you have the replacement Of the interior components of this french door Making the open The part of the door that's capable of being open wider And the applicant is showing that he's going to retain the screen door That actually makes up the exterior appearance of the door Just like it is and so you have some pictures on your Staff reports. I have a color one on the ipad here if anybody's interested and I think it's very nice screening and staff This was also reviewed by the historic architectural advisory committee I got it And the hack did find that the project complies as submitted And has prepared a draft certificate for the board. So i'll stop there So yep Exactly that except Um, I did actually find a door which I believe this schematic is in there. That's the same size as the opening So it's not even changing the width. Yep So it's not changing the width. It's not changing the style Wet width. Nope same opening last sizes So the the there is a difference with the glass in the original door It's two panes of glass And then the bottom section is wood, but in the new one it is three panes of glass Which is covered up by the exterior screen door. So So the screen doors are are staying. Yep They're not changing color or anything. Nope. Just i'm going to take them off and put them back on These doors are going to be They're pine Are they going to get painted or Oh, uh, they come primed and they'll be painted white. So, okay, which the original door is on the iPad Great Any comments from the audience? Does uh, does the applicant need to submit new drawings for the actual door then that's going to be Rather than What's been proposed right the two pane versus a three pane door? Um, he is proposing the three pane door Right. So if that three pane drawing is accurate, that's fine. We just want the record to reflect what was actually approved So as long as you've got that that's fine I thought you said you'd since found one that had different dimensions No, so the the one the schematic that you have is the door that is the right. Yes That is the right. That's the shop. All right. Yep And then the difference being that the the proposed door has three equal size panes of glass Versus two that are probably a slightly larger and Then the bottom And there is there is there is some difference there um It's the difference between what appears to be a standard cost a standard door versus something that's going to have to be custom made to match exactly Yeah, I mean the the door that's actually proposed is custom made as well. It's Yeah, why is it that you don't want to have the solid panel at the bottom? It just did cost a lot more money Thank you, if you're honest All right Okay Thank you for your patience tonight. Yep Close the portion of the meeting for dp or hp 19 202 at What hours is it seven fifty eight? Thank you, and I'll be moving into a deliberative session Great. We're back. We're out of deliberative session at 8 36 So Do I have a motion on dp 18 day zero six point one the vermont hotel group llc requesting a discretionary permit To revise their building Yes as authorized by w db six point six point three i jill spinnelly Move that the willis in development review board having reviewed the applications submitted and all accompanying materials including the recommendations of the town Town staff and the advisory boards required to comment on this application by the willis in development by-law And having heard and duly considered the testimony presented at the public hearing of may 28th 2019 and the findings of fact and conclusions of law proposed by staff For the review of the dp 18 dash zero six amendment one and approve this discretionary permit subject to the conditions above And I would like to add some additional Conditions This approval authorizes the applicant to file final plans obtain approval of these plans from drb And then seek an administrative permit for the proposed development Which must proceed in strict conformance with the plans on which this approval is based So the first amendment is that the findings of fact shall be amended to reflect But the structure will be a 91 unit hotel rather than 92 units The second change is that the applicant shall provide a proposed color and material sample board with final plans Third the final plans shall show air locks at both main entrances Fourth the final plans shall incorporate the landscape plan l1-01 dated april 10th 2018 And finally uh add a condition that the final plans shall accurately reflect all proposed changes Do I have a second on that? I'll second it Dave Turner seconds that Any uh Any discussion on that? I I'd like to note that those last three are conditions 21 22 and 23 Just for the record Is that good with your three or second? All right Good so All in favor Opposed none So four eyes zero nays Motion passes Next time do I have a motion for dp 19 dash 23 rem development company requests a discretionary permit to establish a master sign plan at the existing commercial site at 296 avenue d As authorized by wdb 6.6.3 I david saladino moved at the wilson development review board having reviewed the application material submitted and all accompanying materials Including the recommendations of the town staff and advisory boards required to comment on this application by the wilson Unified development bylaw and having heard and duly considered the testimony presented at the public hearing of may 28th 2019 Except the findings of fact conclusions of long conditions of approval proposed by staff for the review of dp 19 dash 23 And approved this discretionary permit for a master sign plan This approval authorizes the applicant to submit final plans obtain approval of these plans from staff and then seek administrative permit for future development Which must proceed in strict conformance of the plans on which this approval is based Great do I have a second I'll second it big turner seconds that as well Any discussion All in favor All opposed None so four eyes No nays motion passes do we We do we do entertain a motion on the For the certificate of the program So I'd like to Get a motion for uh hp 19 dash 0 2 as authorized by wdb 6.6 point 3 Hi david turner moved at the wilson development review board having reviewed the application submitted accompanying materials including the recommendations of the town staff And the advisory boards required to comment on this application By the wilson development by-law and having heard and duly considered the testimony presented at the public hearing 2019 Accept the recommendations and approve hp 1902 This approval authorizes the applicant to seek administrative permit for the proposed development Which must proceed in strict conformance with the plans on which this approval is based Great do I have a second Jill seconds that Any discussion All in favor I for eyes No nays motion passes Thank you very much Do I have a motion to accept the minutes? As written as written Don't second on that I'll second it Dave Turner seconds it You're seconding a lot I'm second, I guess Any discussion good all um in favor I for eyes no nays Minutes are approved I have a motion to adjourn Motion to adjourn, please. Thank you