 You're set and you don't need to do anything. So welcome to the Tuesday, September the 4th meeting of the Montpelier Design Review Committee. For anybody who's not here and been here before, we are advisory to the Development Review Board. We will listen to people's applications, vote on them and move them forward. I will let staff and members introduce themselves. Liz Pritchett, Meredith Randall, staff. Stephen Everett. Eric Gilbertson. And unless anybody has anything to add, do I hear a motion to approve the agenda? So moved. All in favor of the agenda? Raise your hand. And we will move to the first application for 39 Northfield Street. Andrea Cohen and Matt Chapman to construct landing and stairs. Come forward and have a seat and introduce yourself. My name is JC Myers, Myers Construction. I'm a carpenter, builder hired to extend the stairway or the steps to create a landing in some stairs so that they can get to the street in an alternative way than the current situation, which is a pile of gravel. Probably get pretty slick in the winter. As I mentioned to Eric earlier, this project is basically spurred by the city's changes to the city sidewalk levels. They brought that down to them. They had to bring the parking area down and the city dumped the pile of gravel so there was some sort of access, but now you need something that is going to actually work. So it's pretty simple. It's a three by three landing built out of pressure treated material. We are going to go with the same, the current stairway has a, they basically sandwiched the lattice work between, you know, and it has a top, just has a 15 degree beveled top rail. There's, I think, photos of close-ups of the actual rail. So we're going to do that. It's going to have a railing down the steps. It's going to, we're going to pour a paver at the bottom of the steps, sidewalk pave, and as near as I can calculate at this point, you know, because really, I mean, it's pretty, I know where the landing is going to be, but I don't know. There's a lot of ledge and stuff in there, so, you know, there may be, it's hard to say exactly where the stairs are going to land. It could be within, but no, within a foot or two. My point really is only that if I do approach the sidewalk with the paver and it actually does reach the sidewalk, then they'll put an expansion joint in there between that and that sidewalk. And of course, the paver will meet the specifications of the city, three to four inch. You're not going to cover it, are you? No, no cover. No, it's just a stair and an open landing. No cover. Yep. That walk-along way to shovel is for instance. Yeah, that's quite a stairway. I did some work on that house last summer, and I went up and down those stairs many times carrying compressors, and there's no other way besides up and down those stairs. They assume the treads will be solid? Yeah, everything's going to, they'll be, you know, two by, yeah, two by, probably two, two by six, you know, probably make a pretty comfortable stair, six inch, you know, 12 inch treads and six inch risers. And you thought of using any steel grate treads? That's a possibility. This is what the customer wanted. She wanted to see it, pressure treated, you know, so, but I would be, you know, happy to say to her, see if she, yeah. You never have to shovel them. Yeah. You can put that in as an alternate, and you can, at the option of the homeowner. Yeah. So pre-assembled stairs, or just the treads themselves? You just ordered the treads, you can get them from Capitol Steel, they're a little pricier now because of the tariff. They designed to go right on a two by 12 stringer, like a cut out stringer? You don't even have to cut them out. You can do, they have some that you just use a solid stringer, which makes it more sturdy. Yeah. And then the tread comes with, the side just about an inch and a quarter with two slots you to just put carriage bolts through and bolt them right into the side of the solid stringer. I'll look into it. And they might, you know what? Very rugged. Yep. And we've had icicles fall on them. We've had everything beat the Jesus out of them, and I've never, I haven't had to shovel stairs in 10 years, and I haven't shoveled once, and that was usually. They're not slippery, and they're winter time? No. No, you get galvanized, and they have a little, they have a little texture. Like cork? Yeah, yeah. It's like it's rich. Yeah. It's rich. Where are you getting those? Car steel. Car steel? Car steel. Montalier. Yeah. It was capital steel. Capital steel, I guess they call it. Yeah. Everybody used to call it cars. Capital steel, down in the three mile junction road, I think you're going to go to the train station as soon as you make the right turn there. They're on the left. Yeah. Again, they're a little pricier, but you know, if you need five or six of them, you don't have to ever worry about them. Well, you're going to pay some for labor to cut out those stringers too, and cut all your treads. So there might be some, I don't know, it might be comparable. Worth taking a look at. Yeah, I'll go, I'll check it out. And then last, the other thing is, beating snow and ice off of wood treads. Yeah. Invariably, you beat them to death. Yeah. And then every, I've found that if they lasted five or six years after you, you know, took that hatchet and beat the snow and ice off of them, after about four or five years, you had to replace them anyway. Probably not very good for a very long time. I was the Facilities Director for the Central Mont Camille Land Trust for six years. And now we used to do, what we used to do with wooden steps is we'd put a rubber mat on them, a textured rubber mat to protect them. Yes. Now that helps a lot. And so that would be another, you know, option. I think you're, you're making a good point here that they will take a pound. And I say that. Two by will take a, quite a pounding before it completely disintegrates. Just with the steel, with the steel treads, I probably saved in excess of $500 a year shoveling expense. Just going, because it's so quick. Well, you don't have to do anything. Yeah. It's not when ice just goes right through. Yeah. I mean, never shoveled. Didn't shovel once, not once. I'll suggest it to her for sure. And again, you don't have to. If it's approved, if it's pre-approved, then we don't come back. Just as an option. Yeah. Sounds like a good one. Any other comments, questions, suggestions? Those stairs are no good if you go barefoot though, probably. If you go barefoot in the city, you're taking your chances. I think if you go barefoot in the city, you're taking your chances. You might get an indentation as opposed to splinters. Yeah. If you can handle the sidewalks and, you know, you probably handle the steps, gravel driveways. So again, we can leave that as an option. The landing itself could even be steel. We've done landings as well as stairs with the steel. I'm going to leave a few of my cards, so in case, you know, I do a lot of like renovation and repair. Right. So. By the way, the steel comes as either a painted steel or a raw steel or galvanized and a galvanized doesn't rust. Right. It's forever. It's forever. There could be, the limitation could be the cost. I'll check it out and see what she says. Look at it. The overall value of the material might be worth it. Look at it. The lifetime cost wouldn't be as high. Look at it again to make it. Yeah. Yeah. Especially with the stairs coming right down to where the city plows, because I know that's why you bumped the stairs back from the sidewalk. Yeah. Because the city was concerned about the city plow beating up the stairs. Yeah. No, I think we'll be well back from the sidewalk. I think the little sidewalk plow won't have a problem there. We'll keep it back from the sidewalk. I don't think the stairs are going to land probably three or four feet from the sidewalk. Right. That's just from looking at them. I think that. And we can, we want a nice comfortable tread and riser, you know, so it's easy to walk up the steps, but we can steep in it a little bit if it looks like it's going to impede on that, or where it's going to make snow removal difficult. Yeah. But soon even there's a set of criteria, and I'll just read through them. And it says preservation of reconstruction of the appropriate historic style of the proposed projects in the historic district, or involves an historic structure. This proposal is acceptable. Harmony of exterior design with other properties in the district, acceptable. Compatibility of proposed exterior materials with other properties in the district, acceptable. That he proposed landscaping nonproposed in this application, prevention of the use of incompatible designs, buildings, color schemes or exterior materials, acceptable location and appearance of all utilities. Any additional lighting proposed to the stairs? None. Okay. None. There is, there is a, if you look at the, I think there's some photographs of that bottom of the stairs there. Mm-hmm. If you look at that, there's a, the steps continue off for about two feet to the right of the stair, and there's a little box, like a little closet type container. Mm-hmm. That, that's all going to be removed. Okay. So the, so the steps will come out that, so the rail, because they'll be on the other side of the rail. Yeah. I don't want the rails there. Okay. So that part will be removed. No, that's fine. The other thing that you can add it at a later date if you need to, they make some little solar lights that go out. Right, yeah, yeah. So that. Little LEDs. After their LEDs. Yeah. And after sunset, they'll light up the, like the treads and the, the platform. Mm-hmm. If they want to add something like that, that's not an issue. Recognition of and respect for view quarter and significant vistas, including gateway views of the city and state house, except for that. And again, the option was the stair landing and stair treads may be either pressure treated wood construction or galvanized steel grating at the option of the applicant. All in favor of the application with that option. Raise your hand. Thank you. And I'll let you sign that above my name on the lower left there. Okay. Thank you. And you are JC Meyers. Hi, I'm Jason Meyers. I mean, M-E-Y-E-R-S. It's M-Y-E-R-S. M-Y-E-R-S. Okay. Yep. Okay. Thank you. So is there a, is there a, I don't know what it goes to. It's the. Go back to planning. Right. And Audra will issue a permit. Okay. We'll be at that as well. No. Okay. All right. Nope. There's no other, no other hearings. Okay. And this shouldn't, there's no big issues. This should be. Okay. All right. So there's no, there's no delay between the, the issuing of the permit and the actual construction start time. There's a appeal period, I think on this a few days, but. A few days. Okay. That's great. All right. Thank you very much. Okay. Thank you. Good luck with your project. Right. Just give you a detailed. Last question about this one either. Nope. Either. It's very inconspicuous tucked in behind.Club. Is it going where that tank is right there now. That's technical. Is there much? They're much going to remove that. Right. I think that's the little generator. Looks kind of nice. Looks like generators going to be around the corner on the side, but I assumed they'll. they'll have to because that's the location of the generator. They're going to bury the tank, aren't they? Oh, I think so. Yes, a new underground propane tank. New 500 gallon propane tank below grade. It's a supply of the new generator. Plus anything else in the building, I assume that they have this gas. Well, gas is really good for generators because it doesn't go bad. Those gas powered generators are great. I've had people install a couple of these. People live off the grid. One person was in Colbert, New Hampshire, way up on a hill. And he checked with a power company to see how much it would run to power lines from where they ended a half a mile down the road. And it was going to be somewhere between about $80,000. And so what he did was he installed one of those generator. It was powered by a little Honda motor. He put that up there. He had a 1,000 gallon tank for heat. It's a secondary home, but 1,000 gallon tank for LP. And it's for heat, refrigerator, stove, heating, and the generator. Well, you can use a lot smaller generator. Now, if you get one of those Tesla batteries, you can charge it up. You can put solar in. And then the generator only comes on when you need it. So he could put some pretty machine systems in. He didn't have the Tesla, but between the solar panel to supply all of his electricity when he was there. And everything was efficient inside LED lighting and LED television. And he filled up the tank with LP, 1,000 gallon tank. And after two years, he asked the guy to come back and deliver it. And the guy came up and delivered 200 gallons of propane. And said, don't call me for four more years. What? What? What? Which one? Which one? That's funny. Four years. And he missed those until usually at least until 1.06, but then there's a 7 o'clock. Yeah, you could put together some LED stuff. And he could put together some pretty sophisticated thing. I have a friend that just runs his generator when he's doing laundry and stuff like that. So he put in a smaller system. And he just runs a generator when he's doing something that uses a lot of electricity. No emails? No emails. So I can try and call them if you want. We can just move it to the next meeting. Can we do it? Yeah. You want me to try and get them all to see if they're on their way, or just continue it? I'm fine. Let's just continue it. I mean, this is not anything that is time sensitive. And I'm almost willing to say we can approve it without people here, but I don't think we should do that. So OK. I think somebody should either show up or let us know that there's an issue. And can ask if we can approve it without their presence. And again, it's pretty straightforward. I don't think we have any. It's not like something where I've brought something in extras. And it doesn't sound like it's any emergency situation. OK, so we'll move that forward. And has everyone looked at the August 20 minutes? Yep. I'll move them. All in favor of the minutes? Raise your hand. Minutes are approved. And I'll leave this with you. That's the form for the 149 main. Well, we will recycle those. And does anybody else have anything to offer at this point in time? Nope. Do I hear a motion to adjourn? Second. Second. All in favor of adjournment? Raise your hand. Meeting is adjourned. Thank you. Thank you. Clipped right through that one. Yeah, I'm doing it. I'm sorry. It's an easy one. Good evening, everyone. I'm going to call this meeting to order for the City of Montpelier Development Review Board. My name is Dan Richardson. I am the chair and the other members for my right are Rob Goodwin, Kevin O'Kill, Deb Markowitz, Meredith Crandall, staff, Kate McCarthy, Tom Kester. And we have a new microphone placement. So that'll take some getting used to. The first order of business is approval of the agenda. Do I have a motion to approve the agenda or any additions that people wish to make? So OK, motion by Kevin. Do I have a second? I'll second. Second by Deb. All those in favor of the agenda as printed, please raise your right hand. We have an agenda. It's OK. Let's count. The next, there are no comments from the chair this evening. But the next item is the minutes from the August 20th meeting in attendance were myself, Kevin, Kate, Tom, and Rob, who are eligible to vote. Do I have a motion for the minutes or any addendums that people wish to make? Yes, Kate. I would like to make a spelling correction on page 2. Charlie Hahn is Hone H-O-H-N instead of H-A-H-N, just to make sure we've identified him correctly. Other than that, they look very good. And I'll note that it was spelled, I think, correctly further up the page. That's correct. Yeah, we missed one. No, not to Mr. Holmes that evening. All right, so with that correction, do I have a motion to approve the minutes? Motion by Kevin. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Rob. All those in favor of the minutes that are eligible to vote, please raise your right hand. The minutes are approved with the addendum. That brings us to the first item on our agenda of business this evening. And that is one granite street. If the applicants for one granite street are here, please come forward. Can you state your name for the record, please? Peter Merrill. So Mr. Merrill, I'm going to actually put you under oath because we're going to take testimony. So if you raise your right hand, you have the right. You solemnly swear or affirm that the evidence and testimony you're about to give for the matter under consideration shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth under the pains and penalties of perjury. I know. Very good. So let's start out. We're actually going to have Meredith Hart, the zoning administrator, give us a brief overview of what we're looking at tonight. And then Peter, I'll have you give some testimony in support of your application, OK? So this is a request for minor site plan and conditional use approval for one new art studio and the expansion of a current art studio in the building, which is one granite street, the National Closed Bend Factory Building. The space right now is former manufacturing space. That's what it's classed as. And the big issue for the board is the authorizing the conditional use. That's why this has come before you. Art Studio is not a listed use in the regulations. So you'll see in your packet that I have included a determination that Art Studio is closest to light manufacturing in this instance. And then you go from that to the conditional use criteria, which are outlined starting on the bottom of page 13 in the staff report. So that's the big issue. And then there's some questions about parking, bicycle storage, and landscaping. But the big one is the conditional use. So Peter, why don't you tell us about this application? Well, I have two potential tenants that have seen a second floor, which was formerly manufacturing. And they're looking for an Art Studio. It's about 900 feet. Faces Granite Street with six windows that way and a couple of windows facing southwest. They just kind of like the ambience of the old building. We're not trying to change anything. We're not changing windows. It's got old hardwood flooring. It's typically what you see in a manufacturing building. We've got to do some retrofits, insulation in the walls, which is non-existent. And we may change a heating system for that area. That's about it. And just to be clear, this Art Studio, would this be any type of show or retail space? No, it's for two artists. And they're not going to have the public in any way. Where is the parking going to be for these spaces? Meredith figured it out. Well, how much existing parking is available that's not otherwise committed to either existing tenants? Well, there's a lot of combinations. We have shared parking. Some uses of the building are only there for 15 hours a week. I rent spaces to the Hunger Mountain Call, which can go away when we really need parking for eight hours a day for a couple of people. I mean, there's a lot of choices. We're in particular, though. I'm just in, maybe Meredith can help you. Do you want a copy of the parking plan that you gave me? Yeah. Yeah, so one of the spots would probably be either number 12 or number 13. And the other one would probably be maybe 20 or number one. And those parking spaces aren't otherwise spoken for by tenants? One of them is a rental for Hunger Mountain Co-op. Like I said, that can go away. The other parking is more or less shared parking. The 1, 1918, 17, 16, that is shared parking for the movement center on the third floor. Like I said, during normal hours, 7 to 5 o'clock at night, they probably only there for 15 or 20 hours a week. I mean, my concern is I just want to make sure that we're not double counting parking spaces that you know you're not. I know you rent to Claire Construction that you're not giving them spaces that you're not counting. Yeah, let me explain that. Actually, one of the potential artists is a member of the movement center. So she would be using one of those spots when she is at the third floor. She's one of the teachers on the third floor. Right. But I mean, the problem is is that we can't just look at who the specific tenant is going to be because that tenant may fall through and have another artist friend of hers who's not part of the movement center would need that parking space. So you're identifying parking space one and parking space 12 as the likely. Right. And then to satisfy you, we could get rid of two longer mountain co-ops spots. How many spaces were you requiring again? So based on my calculations from the regulations as to how much is required based on the uses, the intensity of uses that I identified, they only are required to have nine off-street parking spaces. That's total for the building. Total for the building based on the two of the studios not having any customer traffic, the Clark Woodworking shop and third floor art studio having minimal customer traffic and the movement center having high visitor turnover. And then there's also a commercial office showroom with limited customer traffic. Because these aren't places where you've got people coming in and out non-stop like Allen Lumber. And so that works out to nine off-street parking spaces required. Now the parking space is one and then 16 through 20. We can't count those as off-street because they're actually in the public right away. So that leaves them with, I think I've, what? Did I say 13? Yeah. That leaves them with 13 off-street parking spaces. How they actually divvy them up, how they actually divvy up is really kind of up to them. OK. So I guess I'm less concerned about the idea of renting out these parking spaces. No one's using them. But for purposes of zoning, making sure that we have these minimum numbers as required. I mean, you obviously want to provide parking spaces to your tenants because that's how you retain your tenants if they need the parking spaces. But at the same time, we were not suggesting that you need to assign a parking space and not use it. Or it's just that for purposes of zoning, as long as a tenant finds it, they would have the right. OK. So you're anticipating these would just be these two artists coming, no commercial foot traffic, no, I mean, it would be essentially almost more like an office that they would come in with their painting or artwork and then depart. Right, no shows. I mean, that's what they told me. That was the question, really. Well, that's why I just want to understand, I think, in part because one of the first questions we have to, besides the parking, we need to know the traffic. And so based on your representation that this is not a retail or commercial space, these are really at most two tenants, at most two car trips per tenant per day so that we can understand that vehicle flow. And I simply wanted to get you on the record to represent that as part of it. The next issue I wanted to ask about unless someone has another question about traffic or parking. Some horses don't need to be hit anymore. Bicycle access. What kind of bicycle access does this site have? Don't have a formal bicycle access. People have, they come on a bike on occasion. We don't have a designated building for them. They put them into an entryway that we have on not Stonecutter's wayside, not Granite Street side, but opposite number 13, where number 13 is. There's a fire tower there that accesses the three floors. There's a space in there adjacent to the stairs where people have foot bikes. I mean, we don't have anything formal, but people have brought bikes before. So that would be inside. There's several places outside where railings, metal railings, or a bike could be connected to that, so it would be secure. That's what we have. We didn't have any zoning to tell us to put bike access in. Just people had bikes. They came and they used the space. So do your tenants currently use, some of your tenants currently have bicycles? No, I mean, I'm just going back 10 years. On occasion, you'd see somebody with a bike and it would be tied up to a railing. It wasn't in a way. It wasn't in a parking spot. But you're also saying that you've permitted tenants to bring in bikes inside? It wasn't an issue. I mean, we weren't told to have a bike placed like we are now. And to be clear, part of this is the new, it's not required now. However, the reason I'm asking and maybe pushing a little bit is, this is in close proximity to the bike path. There is a massive bike path extension project going on. Certainly one of the things that the city has tried to encourage is bicycle traffic and access. And so I just, I mean, I'm satisfied that what your representation is, people have used bikes. There's places for people to park bikes. There's no formal bike rack, but there also hasn't been a lot of bike traffic either. That's right. So the next issue is planting. And this is a particular question. Could you give a description of what your site looks like? Particularly, my impression driving by is that there's a great deal of paved area and it's not a lot of green or brown space. There's a few weeds that have sprung up between the paved space and the building. I don't know if we're gonna be counting those, but Meredith noticed the other day, I think he talked about our one-story office building. That's adjacent to the river. There's a lawn out there. I mean, we've been mowing that lawn for 40 years. It's about, it could be four, 500 square feet. It's like 10 by 60 or so, it's just there. Now, I don't know if that counts as green space. And there's vegetation on the bank down to the river. That's probably, there's probably 1,000 feet on there. There's all kinds of trees, lilac bushes going there. I know they're on the end of the building and you can't. It's not like having shrubs all the way around your building, but it's on the property. But at least, if we look at your property from, and you're referring when you say this green area, you're referring to this area between the office building and really the Winooski River. No, there's about 10 feet toward the river before you start going down the bank. I didn't draw this picture here. I think I got this from the city. So they're kind of showing the river closer. Where in fact, there's like a sandbar down on the river now, so we gained another 25 feet out into the river. But actually, mold space right there, there's five or 600 feet that we mold. That's flat before the river bank starts to go over the river. Sure, but. There's a picture right here? Yeah, so, Peter. There does appear to be trees in front of the property between the building and the Winooski River. You do have trees there? There's lilac bushes right on the edge where it starts heading down, which is a river bank. But there's an average of probably eight feet from the building before the river bank starts. Flat area, and it's like 70 feet long. So the picture that's. That's the space right here. These are lilac bushes right here that are probably kind of overgrown into that lawn a little bit. Yeah, those are massive lilacs. My goodness. But this green area here, is that the only green area on your property? Or are there other, I mean, apart from the weeds that are coming up between the, in part, we're just to give you a sense about where I'm coming from. So you can understand, I think in director answers, you know, under the new zoning bylaws, we're required to look at the landscaping. And there are certain goals that are articulated in the zoning bylaws to effectuate the landscaping plans for all properties. And in part that deals with the planting, but I think if we make findings on this, it requires us to have an understanding about what we're screening or what we're seeking to screen or not screen or incapable of screening. And so it's really important to understand, you know, what is the property look like? And so we have a good sense that between the Winooski River and your buildings, there's this line of sort of calm volunteers, the, you know, wild growth trees and they haven't been planted or necessarily maintained. And then you have a strip of lawn. Are there other green spaces? Between, I don't think it shows you, but Allen Lumber Company and I, and I just kind of share a space between Allen Lumber Company's building and the end of our office. We have our office right by the bridge and it extends down to a garage on the other end. I mean, this is like 70 feet long. There's a space that's probably four foot wide by the length of the width of the building, which is 25 feet. The water falls off Allen Lumber Company's roof into that area and there's, they used to be poison ivy in there, but we got rid of that. But I mean, it would grow in there in that space. Whatever you put in there. It would have to be water tolerant. It'd have to be water tolerant if their runoff comes out for their, I presume. Right, whatever's in there is water tolerant, right? So that's that space here between the office building and Allen Lumber. If I'm, you know, granite streets here, get the space in. But I just want to make sure that I have the right understanding, which is that for the rest of the property around the factory building in front of the office between Allen Lumber and the parking area and in front of the building itself on either street, we're really talking about pavement. Pavement, right. And that's long standing pavement. That's not something you just freshly created. Right. Okay, so I think that's helpful. And is it, what kind of landscaping are you proposing with this? Not any. I mean, Meredith put it pretty bluntly, but, you know, are we gonna have to remove pavement? I mean, we're pretty much parked up against the building all the way around. I don't foresee an easy solution to that. You know, you've got a third of an acre of land there and a lot of it's building and parking and, you know, there's no, there's really no wiggle room. Any other questions? All right. So then I think it makes sense at this point unless to go through some of the conditional use criteria and standards in particular. Yeah, let's talk about the capacity of the community facilities and utilities. This section requires us to make findings that the applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed development shall not cause a disproportionate or unreasonable burden on the city's ability to provide community facilities and utilities, including one local schools, two police fire protection ambulance service, three street infrastructure and maintenance for park and recreation facilities, five water supply sewage disposal and stormwater systems and infrastructure. And I think, unless the board feels strongly that the local schools, the police fire protection ambulance service, the street infrastructure and maintenance and the park and recreation facility are really not affected by this application. I did wanna confirm the water supply for this space. Is that city water and sewer? City water and sewer. Okay, and are you adding any capacity through this change of views? Maybe one sink, a cleanup sink. Okay, into the existing infrastructure of the building. So I'm not seeing any other impacts unless anybody wants to explore that. Moving then on, the next issue that we have is traffic. The applicant has to demonstrate that the proposed development will not have an undue adverse impact or effect on traffic in the area, including volume type and timing of traffic generated. Let the traffic generated by proposed development shall not unreasonably and disproportionately contribute to a reduced level of service, affected streets and that reasonable measures have been taken to minimize and mitigate the amount of vehicular traffic generated by proposed development. I think the evidence here shows that it's a fairly de minimis, if not a precisely de minimis impact on this. What is the space being used for currently? Are we talking about this one used for another or is this empty space? No, this was formerly our close bin assembly area and the packaging of close bins and the assembly of close bins. The last 10 or 12 years we've been making, we get into injection molding about 15 years ago because we had to have plastic close bins, but more recently we've been making medical parts for diagnostic equipment. So that's injection molding. We had three machines in there now, there's only one and that one's going out of that space. So kind of winding down our injection molding operation. So how many people are we talking about that would run these machines or working in this space that you're now shifting to a different? Probably one full-time employee. So really when we talk about this, and I just, I think it's important to understand that when we're talking about the impact of traffic not only is it de minimis, but really it's not two people, it's one person because you're replacing, you already have one person coming and this person's going to essentially fill their space. Unless there's any questions on traffic, I'll move on to 3303. That's the character of the neighborhood standards and that requires the applicant to demonstrate the proposed development. She'll not have an undue adverse effect upon the character of the neighborhood. So this is the industrial section of that riverfront, the granite you're right next to the granite sheds and right next to Allen Lumber. And nothing about this. In fact, I understand that this is, we're classifying this as light manufacturing, but this in effect is probably going to be more closer to like an office type use. Because your testimony is that you have an artist coming in. I explained this to the artist about how they're being put in this box that says light manufacturing, they didn't care what you called it. I would think they'd be pleased about that. So the second criteria is architectural compatibility. New development shall be architecturally compatible with the neighborhood. This is not applicable because you're not talking about changing any of the exterior features. This is just different people in the same space. You might do, I think your testimony was there were some interior changes? Yeah, it's gonna be new wiring and the two walls of this space were insulated with what they used to call a beaver board. It was just a couple of spaces, a couple of very thin layers of almost like cardboard to create two air spaces in the wall. We've taken all of that out and we're gonna insulate it. The next criteria is yards, lock coverage and landscaping. This says that new development shall maintain a sense of open space that's appropriate to the neighborhood by balancing the size and buildings footprint with a mass of the structure and size a lot. Again, this is not applicable because you're not changing anything about the building. This is just a switch in the internal use. The final one is performance standards. And this allows the board to impose conditions that seem necessary to further the purpose of Chapter 330, building performance standards about noise, glare, odors, vibration, electrical or radio interference. Waste storage needs particulate matter or airborne solids or flammable, toxic or hazardous substances or waste. And I think, so I read in your application but I just want to make sure we're clear for the record, these are not, these artists use largely non-toxic materials. Right. And how will waste be disposed of? I think most everything is water-based. But I mean, you know, if trash and such do you have dumpsters on site? We do. Okay, so this would just go into the normal trash that's existing for them. And then, I mean, there's nothing inherent as far as the art creation of art that would necessarily trigger a noise or glare, odor, vibration, electrical or radio interference. No. They're not a particular type of artist that uses some large electronic device or HVAC system inside it. No, they've been asked already. All right, is there anything else anybody wishes to ask? So I just want to clarify. So they're essentially painters, is that what you're saying? Yes. Like painting on canvas, that's what it is? Yes, large canvas. Okay. Any other questions? If not, I'll entertain either a motion or discussion. I think we have to make a discussion before motion about the landscaping issue. What's the pleasure of the board? Let me just suggest that I think this is a similar type of situation to the 27th School Street, which is that we've received testimony that any requirement that was based strictly on the perimeter of the building would be inconsistent with the lot and certainly the current conditions. I'm just one board member and I'm just gonna, you know, I'll let anyone else express, but it doesn't seem like this use triggers the need for any type of landscaping change, nor does there seem to be a need for that type of shift in landscaping, given that it's an industrial site and has limited capacity on its best day. Okay, and I would agree with that, Mr. Chair. And we have to keep in mind that this is, this is in effect a reduction in the intensity of use and we want to, I think, unduly burden the applicant with improvements that would way outstrip the scale of the logic of the building, willing to look favorably down the line. Mr. Chair, within that increase of one occupant, I don't necessarily agree that it is a de-intensification of the use, though, I agree that it's, as far as traffic and things like that, though it's painters instead of machines. From what is allowed? I mean, clearly it was used as a... From what is allowed, right, I thought you meant from what is currently taking place there, which is also allowed. I would, given the need to balance the reasonableness of landscaping requests with the clear purpose of the landscaping and screening provision, I would value and appreciate discussing this in deliberative session as we did with the previous example last week. I am also just one board member, but that is, that would be helpful to me. And I guess I would agree on thinking about deliberative session for this, in part because these new landscaping provisions are tricky as they apply to these pre-existing uses. And I agree with your statement that we need to be reasonable and take into account the particular a lot, but as a board, we're also creating precedent. So I think it makes sense for us to talk about how we wanna talk about this because other applicants will come forward and we wanna make sure that we're consistent. Is that a consensus of the board? So I'll enter. Well, let me ask, is there any more information that we require from the applicant at this time, or do we feel comfortable, does each board member feel comfortable voting on both minor site plan and conditional use review? Yes. Okay, so what I would accept is a motion to close the evidence and move into a deliberative session. So moved. In the actual reason why we move into deliberative session is to discuss I think the landscaping requirements and ultimately the approval of the application because I don't think we can make a motion to approve the application until we've resolved that landscaping issue. So we will close the record, move into deliver session, presumably discuss the landscaping and out of that then approve or disapprove the minor site plan and conditional use review. Is that consistent with everyone's? I just, for the record, I will vote to go into deliver session, but there's one board member, right? And they don't see that we need to do something. Okay. Duly noted. So there's a motion to go into deliver session and close the evidence, I deb, do I have a second? I'll second that. Second by Rob. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of going into deliver session, closing the record, please raise your right hand. Thank you very much, Peter. We should issue a decision shortly. We're just gonna discuss this and Meredith will be in touch. Let me leave her. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. The procedure we typically do, deliberative session at the very end for all, for any and all. We do it in the middle. We can do it in the middle. Sorry to though, is it? No, we can take it up at the end if we wish to. Certainly given the scope of the next project, it would make sense to keep that moving forward if the next project is here. Yeah, yeah, yeah, that's the theme of the evening. I guess with the school, I was expecting a, you know, large crowd of children. We got bigger problems. Okay. Putting this, I'm not gonna solve the problem. Okay, no, I just don't have anyone down the stairs. State your names for the record and then I'll swear you in before you give a test run. Paul Gauvere, engineering ventures. Andrew LaRosa, director of facilities for the Montpelier Rocksbury School District. Great. If you raise your right hand, you solemnly swear or affirm that the evidence and testimony you're about to give for the matter under consideration shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth under the pains and penalties of perjury. Great. Why don't we have Mayor DeFond to give a, just overview and focus us on what we're doing because this is a minor, notwithstanding the very voluminous application materials. This is a minor site plan review. Our scope is somewhat limited. So it's a minor site plan review and request for a waiver of the footprint maximum. It's extensive revisions to the Union Elementary School Playground, including some renovations to the entrance on the playground side for ADA accessibility and that's where the footprint waiver comes in. The major issues, you've got the footprint waiver and then the other really big one is the development on steep slopes. So other than the footprint waiver, the only reason this is coming to DRB is because of the steep slopes we can't kind of planning approve that. So those are your two big issues. There's also some minor things noted in the staff report in red about height of some of the accessory structures that we didn't have confirmation of. Some issues with dumpster location, bicycle storage, landscaping maintenance and an issue with the sign wall, but really the big issues are steep slopes and footprint waiver. So Paul or Andrew, I don't know which one of you want to take the lead on giving us a presentation. Sure, let me talk about what we're doing there. Talk about the intent. Well, why don't I talk you through the overall project and I'll highlight the issues as we run across them and then we can go circle back to the more specific. So the Union Elementary School Project, which has been in the works for some years, consists, I would say first and foremost, a lot of it is to do with stormwater and stormwater control, which Paul will address later. Basically, we're rehabilitating the upper playground what we refer to as the upper playground, providing handicap accessibility up to that playground and the play structures. And then in the lower courtyard, the inner courtyard dealing with some stormwater issues as well as getting appropriate play equipment for that age group that's pre-K and first that will be used in that area primarily. So we're getting appropriately sized. We're also doing bank stabilization along the back retaining wall and again, stormwater treatment areas. The vestibule will be about five, 600 square foot handicap accessible vestibule, which will be on the northeast corner. That's one of the existing end of the system. With regards to the slope issues, questions, we have the existing slope in this area, which is below the 30 degree that we're basically just sliding this direction. It's the same slope that's already there, but we're widening it. Currently the fire lane runs here without bringing the fire lane closer to the building. So we have to ship that bank over there We're reducing slope over in this area. One of the areas of concern was over here where we're actually adjusting the slope. If anyone knows Union, it's a pretty steep bank over there. Near this area where it is becoming, I'll let Paul speak to the severity of the slope change. There's actually stormwater treatment that is actually taking place in that area. The other question was footprint. We also, I think in the packet, we had a diagram that had all these different areas of concern. In this area where we are affecting the slope, it is for maintenance and improvement of the retaining wall. So it's primarily this area and this change here. I think one thing I would point out is we look at the slopes and we look at this area right here, which looks like we're making it quite a bit steeper. These are one foot contours, just space within existing two footers. So really, spacing here and the slope is essentially the same in this area. That might be a little misleading when you look at that. Yeah, as Andrew said, I think one of the primary reasons that this project came about is because there's some serious drainage issues and it's just too much of a mess for the kids to use. Spring, this is like a 2016 project in our office. I've had a chance to see it for a while. You can see why in the spring. It really needs help. So what we've got going on, other than the things Andrew mentioned, it's correct that in order to accommodate the best of you, we push this back a little bit. We're pretty similar here. And we do want to improve the local field, which is really kind of a dust bowl or mud one or the other heading on in the season. So with this, we have stormwater treatment here, which is a gravel wetland treatment system. Tended treatment, basically treats the portion of the fire land and some of the walkways here, areas here. We have a fire retention area of the rain garden that's currently talked about. This actually is pretty small and it's modest. It treats some of the sidewalks right around that area. And then we have another rain garden, or sorry, another gravel wetland in this area. And if you're familiar with the gravel wetlands, it's kind of a horizontal filter is the way I think about it. So it's a high-performing treatment system. It doesn't require a lot of elevation difference, which just kind of makes it kind of a go-to. A UNH data gives it a really high-performance and moves on a phosphorous sediment. So for this scenario, we're really limited in elevation at these points, at district points, it's a good option for us. So how does that work with the horizontal? Does the water flow through it on sort of a continuing slope or? So coming to the top of the system and then it goes through perforated risers. So it goes through a perforated riser into the gravel media, which is open gravel media and it flows horizontally through that. And then gets picked up at the other end by a perforated pipe and then discharges. So we have the opportunity to kind of control the rate and then the, you know, because it's a long slope path, it's a long slope path. You get a lot of settling of particles and some adhesion to the media. So it's a good way to practice, especially for sites like this that have some of the strengths. And where does it discharge into? Does it discharge into a storm water drain or? We're going back, basically the whole site right now just discharges into the stream system at the points here. And we're still having that. What we're just doing with more control and treatment ahead of that. General the site is, the drains on the site is pretty similar, except for the fact that we're introducing treatment and we're also stabilizing some of these areas. The things you mentioned, the tanning wall work, the existing is a concrete crib, kind of it's an interesting style, it's like Lincoln logs, but it's concrete that's our geotechnical engineer. So it's stable. So we're trying to reuse that. We can't break the school budget any more than we have. But if it's stable, so we're just going to clean that up. On the side, we're adding a bit of gabion wall. This is like, this is I think less than four feet. Gabion is a wire basket filled with stones. This end, some gabion and then in the dumpster area, trash area, we're bringing in sheet pile wall. So this, we have a great differential like 7.2 is the highest in the corner, 7.2 feet. We're moving into that bank a little bit. So we're either going to temporarily sheet pile it and then put some of the retaining wall system in or do permanent sheet pile. So we're doing permanent sheet pile here, given the use and the location. What is a sheet pile? Steel sheet pile. So steel sheets are kind of W-shaped, corrugated. It's kind of the inside of a cardboard box that kind of shape and they lock together and they drive them down. In this case, the sheet piles rely on the buried portion to restrain the earth above it as opposed to like the gabions are just by weight, it holds it back. Is that sheet pile what you see at construction sites when they're digging, dangling and then they're off and removed after they can rest in that case? Yeah, so often we do that. In this case, we wouldn't necessarily prefer to use that, go out the site for the aesthetics, but it's steel and being in the trash area, which is kind of a good use and it saves us digging more of the soil. Soils are expensive, they're rid of the urban site and so really less disturbance in and less work on that is better. Clarification point on the gravel wetland. Does that sit on the surface or is it a structure that is being ground? Yes, right. So there's a depression, so that'll hold some of the. It's probably in here somewhere, I forgive you. Sheet 3.1. So there is a depression that holds the water until it filters through and then there's a layering so there's a top, top is a growth media. So it's a planting media, which is kind of a, really has to be kind of a sandy top soil mix, you know, aiming for kind of a low phosphorus mix, something that'll still grow plants. And then there's a trope of course, which is a layer of stone that's fine enough to kind of keep those materials separate, keep it out of the lower material. And then beneath that is the gravel, it's like an open grading gravel. That makes sense. I was picturing gravel rectangles around elementary school students and just how irresistible that would be. Well, that's one of the reasons that we went with, another reason we went with the gravel well in is. That's my concern. Standing water, we don't really want standing water in this kind of location. So it would be very temporary if it comes in. It was a social more than an engineering question, so thank you. If you go to LA 301, there's more of a peeling image of what it's going to be versus an engineering, no offense. I could be offended by that. Nobody wants to look at the engineering plan. Thank you, Andrew. Thank you. It's the image with the parsley on it. Anyone? Okay, great. Thank you. So just to go back, I know slope stability was a big question here, but really, I think the areas we're working on, the exception possibly would be above this wall, which has some instability already. Everything else is that we're trying to rectify some current instability. There's a spot in the bank here where there's a little bit of slope washout. I think that's because of the water moving underneath this material. So we have under drain system going around here to kind of collect that subsurface. Yeah, there's photos in the packet in between. We're talking about, yeah. Existing bee that looks like a washout behind the basketball hoop. Right. Is that what you're talking about? Yeah, so that's an interesting one because there was a slope prepared down a while back and it's a layer. So it's a more coarse material on top of the tight soils underneath. And I was really puzzling on that one until I got out there when it was wet. And I think the water's going through the top, running along the bottom on that top material, the top material, and it's washing out the sand from underneath and then the grass is falling in. So we have to pick that up, pick that water up with the under drain and then stabilize that area. Meredith, I do have some information from the landscape architect. We'd like to answer a couple of your questions. We can, I think. All right. I think it may make sense to go, let's start with the, I think, and I'll be happy, or not so happy to be corrected, but I think the easier one, which is the expansion of the building footprint and the footprint waiver. The current building footprint, I think the applicant has indicated something like 31,000 square feet. And it's well in excess of the 3,000 square foot maximum in this district. So we're already above. And you're seeking to increase by 439 feet, square feet roughly. So about 1.4% of the total building envelope you're adding. So my understanding is zoning bylaws, as the staff has helped out, is that there's no limit in the waiver that the board may grant for building footprints, but we do have to follow the process. So the question is the board must make findings that the waiver if authorized shall not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or district in which the property is located, substantially or permanently impair the lawful use or development of adjacent property, reduce access to renewable energy resources or be detrimental to the public welfare. And the proposed lands development is beneficial or necessary for continued reasonable use of property. So what I'd like to take testimony on is, the purpose of this vestibule extension that's being built. Currently, the only handicap accessible entrance to the building is down, excuse me. Excuse me, can we have a drive, will you? Is down here. And currently, the elevator is over here. Next summer, hopefully in the spring, we're actually gonna be installing a new elevator here. So the idea is that we provide intact accessibility right off the sidewalk as quickly as possible without tearing up the historic front of the building and getting it right to where the handicap accessible elevator would be. Okay, and that's really the entire purpose of vestibule is for ADA accessibility? Yeah, pretty much. There's some thought that it will be used as foul weather enclosure before people, but fundamentally, now it's an handicap accessible accessibility. I was gonna say, if it's a foul weather site, it doesn't seem all that large. That's why I say I don't think it's gonna be used as one all that much. Maybe the after-school program or something of that nature. But most of the kids are picked up out on a little bit of the street anyway, so. And is this being, I mean, obviously, I can see why the school might be interested in making the site more friendly for ADA, for people with disabilities. But is this being driven by any type of federal or state mandate? I don't believe anyone has told us we had to do it. I think it was just being good citizens. Okay. But I mean, but I have not heard that, that we've been cited or forced to do it now. It was part of the overall, just making the building more accessible. Modernizing the building. Modernizing and making it more accessible. And the reason to put it, I mean, the current handicap accessible entrance that's at the back. Yeah. Will that change? Will that still be handicap accessible? I will, yeah. Okay. But this is just something that's gonna be that much closer to the elevator. Yep. And currently, if somebody accesses that existing handicap entrance, even if the elevator was relocated, if I'm remembering correctly about Union Elementary on the first floor, they still have to go up a ramp and the spirit of ADA and I'll leave it at that is you would be telling a student, you have to go back by the entrance that everybody else is using to go use the other entrance. And that, because where the vestibule is going is one of the main entrances into the building. Yeah. And especially at recess. And with the vestibule, will students, will other students, it won't be simply for disabled students, it would be for all students. Correct. Most of the students, unless they're down at the, unless they're down here at lunch, which a lot of Mark are let out from lunch to go to recess or the recess into lunch, everybody else will head out the straightest V-line they can to the playground, which is this door. So they'll largely use that entrance and exit as they did before. Absolutely. And will there be any limitation as a result of this additional vestibule as far as anything that's being done now that won't be able to be done because of this addition? No. Are you losing, I know that there's a storage barn currently where the. No, that's been moved to Union. We're actually, as part of the vestibule project, there is a small little storage area. So you moved to Main Street Middle School. Okay. Permitted and everything. There is going to be a small outdoor storage area that a snow blower can be stored in kind of thing, but not, it's a relatively small room. And that's what was stored in that barn before it was a snow blower? Yeah. Yeah, that and probably some toys and it's been cleaned out for a little while. Anybody have any other questions about the vestibule? Okay, great. Why don't we move on and we'll come back to whether we need to grant the grant with the waiver, the footprint maximum. So a couple of just sort of into the weed points. On your diagram, C3.0, which details the sheet pile wall. What kind of height are we talking about? And first of all, maybe let's just orient everyone where this sheet pile wall is going. Is that what we were talking about before over by dumpsters, right? That's right here. Okay. Right in this area. And how high of a wall are we talking about? Highest is 7.2 feet, it's slightly less over here. It drops off. It is hard to read in the small prints, but on the plan it calls out a top and bottom wall. So if you were looking at an approval, it's... No, and not that it's easy to find. Sorry. But it is like it's there as a basis if you want to have it as part of the approval. So it's seven feet tall at its maximum. And is that a uniform height throughout the wall or does it... It's essentially seven feet across the backside and then I think it tapers down to where I can't read it on this. It tapers down on the side. So the next issue is the swing set climbing net structures. Yep. How big are these? Yeah, I can give this to Meredith when we're down here, but... So I got this from the landscape architect. The explorer dome climber is 13 foot four. The swings are eight foot four. And the nest, which is the structure in the back, I mean, slope here, is 11 foot four from the deck elevation and 17 foot one from the lowest elevation. So that's from the lowest grade adjacent to the top of the roof. And so the demolition, and I've seen that there's a lot of demolition that's occurred already. But let's just be exact as to what has or is being demolished on this site before construction commences on the new structures. So... All the current play equipment has been removed. I've had been a few miscellaneous long kind of ground things, but all the existing swing sets, jungle gyms, parallel bars, whatever you'd call them. I've all been removed, the city has taken them. I believe they're being stored up at Hubbard for now for reuse in the coming years. Okay. And that includes both the kindergarten, first grade playground in the back, as well as the sort of upper grade playground off of Hubbard Street. But no part of the actual building itself is being built. And as you said, the storage barn has been moved as well. And that's not returning. No. So let's talk about the steep slopes. And if I understand correctly, and I'm just gonna restate this to make sure that I'm understanding and correct me if I'm wrong. Along the back of the building, right there, yes. Are you changing any grading of the steep slopes or just simply stabilizing? This is just a kind of a surface repair of the tanning wall. So the way the wall is set up, the relies on geotextile's gonna hold some stone back. Basically, we're putting that back together. The wall's basically staying back as it is and going forward, or maybe being restacked a little bit. But grades are the same here. Same thing here. I think we're just replacing the section that's really deteriorated on this end, the gabion, which is the stone-filled baskets. So that's not changing either. On this side, really the only spot we're really making great differences. Slightly in here, but really primarily at that cheap out wall, we're pulling back to create some space for the trash area, to free up the fire lane. And that change in the steep slope is strictly to enlarge the fire lane? Is that? Just wall stabilization. Just wall stabilization? Yeah. Okay. And then the other areas around, on the, I always call it the upper playground. Well, either of those, so where are we changing the steep slopes? Slope here is just getting pushed back. That's really not a great little slope. In here, we're generally doing small fill, but it's essentially the same. A little bit of reworking, I think it's right in this area, it's very small. Here again, we're pretty close to matching grades here, or extending fill out, but again, it's more of a stabilization process. And including these seat walls, that's all part of the kind of a way of stabilizing this and stepping things along. So you're terracing some of that steep slope for those, so you're moving the amphitheater up there, right? The amphitheater is, and the function is out here. So the intent is not to make anything steeper, but it really is kind of hitting areas or working on areas that are already a little bit muddy and surface unstable. In this area, it's being reworked a little bit. These are essentially the same slopes, and this is not the steepest part. It is pretty steep, but it's not the steepest. And again, it looks steeper because we've got one foot contour showing next to two, so it looks like there's more going on than there is here. And about how much of a square foot of land are we talking about with the disturbing the steep slopes? You still have that diagram? Okay, I wish you could see. Yeah, if you could break the numbers. It's not completely clear in here on how much of it is 30% greater, which is a really big issue. So this is the plus for this, and this, you know, I mean, technically, some of the walls, technically, are 30% greater. This is that big area. Yeah, that's primarily, this is actually getting a deduction. Right, but what is the... Oh, I see what you're saying. You know what I mean? It's disturbing some of the slopes and the regs. It doesn't say one way or the other. Yeah, it doesn't matter what you do with it. You're doing something with it. Right, so I would suggest that's probably close to the 30%. Yeah, it's parts of it. That bank is pretty steep and close to that. We're looking at C.0, okay. And when we're talking about the part that is likely 30 degrees, 30% rather, we're looking at this part for 4.821. Nope, it's not, that area is actually slightly flatter. Close the line to 2.9, yep. So technically, the way the regs are written, even the retaining walls, because technically they are greater than 30%, there is no exemption in the regs for man-made retaining walls, which is something that's getting fixed. So slope includes human-made structures and naturally occurring slopes. The human-made structures to hold back the bank when you're taking those down and then putting up new ones, technically that still falls within the, you're not supposed to do it, which is one of the things we're working on. And reducing slope doesn't, same thing with the production of slope. Yeah, you're quote-unquote disturbing them. So it's not very practical the way it's written right now. You can't see all those things until you start using them. Yep, and some of us weren't here when the regs were being drafted. So there's a lot of site work and sounds like it will lead to some long-term safety improvements as well as erosion and stormwater and all of that and some fun things to play on. When a big project like this is undertaken, what are the monitoring processes after completion to make sure that it takes and settles in and does everything that it's supposed to do? There are a lot going on in this area. I'm curious to know how that is monitored for time. There are requirements for the, again, this is at least the hard surfaces, I mean, will be the hard surfaces, but you're thinking primarily I think about the landscape elements and how the grass grows in. There is a requirement in the plans that the landscape contractors is responsible for 90-day maintenance following instructions. Plants have a one-year replacement warranty that came from the landscape architect. That's less what I'm asking about than the ongoing stability of the structures once the slope is modified. I mean, the plantings I know can be part of that, but making sure that the walls are sturdy and remain sturdy. I'm just very curious, as a resident and a parent, how you keep an eye on that, maybe? Well, I'm gonna jump in and say the walls are gonna be secure because they were designed by an engineer. Oh, good answer. With regards to the ongoing maintenance, I think that the district and the community has seen what happens when you let a property go into disrepair and it wasn't all that long ago that there was underdraining put under the playground and it's sort of forgotten about. So I think that after the community makes this kind of investment in this playground, that community will not be shy about letting us know when they see something that doesn't look right and we're not gonna be shy about maintaining it and correcting it, whether it's grass that's getting beat up from too many little kids' footprints will change a pattern or whether it's a piece of soil that's sloughing because of some sort of underpinning that wasn't correctly. As far as staying up designed by an engineer is important and I agree that physics is to be trusted when done correctly. But I guess my real question is, is there stress test? Is there a way to make sure that the walls were indeed not only designed correctly but built correctly? I'm amazed that in Montpelier we've got so many steep slopes and houses doing what they're doing. They've done it for a hundred years. That's great. I'm still curious to know just how you ensure that it is sturdy over time. Is there an annual inspection after you've built a major wall like this? What do you do? I'm assuming. Go ahead. Yeah, I mean the wall we build is again designed by engineers and then the geotechnical engineers designing that wall will be oversight, some oversight during construction, bureaucratic oversight, so we'll get built for plan and then I think the ongoing maintenance is really going to fall on the school department. There'll be a one-year inspection before the warranty period for lack of a better term is we will all get together the engineers and the contractor and we'll take another walk around. We can say before that one year is up to say, okay, is everything functioning the way it's supposed to. I presume that this functions the same way that an engineer works, say like with a building when you remove a retaining wall and put in like an I-beam or something that there's calculations behind it, studies of the soil. And so there's some thought and of course you're a professional licensed engineer. I understand that it's designed with consideration for those things. But I think you get the gist of my question that there's the one-year inspection is there the five-year inspection, the ten-year inspection in addition to the maintenance which we know will be important. It sounds like maybe that's not a matter of practice in the way that I'm thinking of it right now. It's good practice. And absolutely as the facilities director for the school district, something that we probably should get written down and make it part of our daily routine with all our projects and all the buildings. Thanks for mentioning that. It's not within our jurisdiction to say and check it every five years, but I express it as a community member looking at the whole of the project. So how much of this, and I'm looking at C.0 is driven by erosion control concerns? I would say, I'll be most of it. I don't, of course I didn't bring that key with me. Which one are you looking at? I'm looking at C.0, which has the color. Which I should have grabbed. Which you're welcome to take mine, if that will help. So really it's only the area close to the fire lane that you're pulling back to expand the fire lane for public safety purposes that are, it's not dealing with erosion control and stabilization. And those are in that person, what happened here, where you just attached this to the fund? Okay. And Meredith, DPWs reviewed the proposed changes and grades and project. Did they have any further comments than other what your packet indicated that they seem to approve? No, this was when it comes to the slopes, they were in approval of all the work. I know that for erosion stormwater issues, which are all part of this package, there's going to be some continuing discussion about the kickball field, which is the square to the northeast about how to deal with that drainage area. But other than that, they were good with everything else that's being proposed. Yeah, the comments from DPW were that there is an existing drainage system. I just found one other piece of that as before this meeting. So it's there, it was just been buried all this time. And you'll be, the debate is whether we reuse it or not. I think one of the considerations is having a metal grid drainage grates in the play area, which is kind of a knee buster. So I think, you know, we had planned on kind of putting a kind of more of a subsurface system and I think we're going to stick with that. Yeah, I think so. Tom liked the new design of bringing across over the top and dropping it down into those drains. Awesome. And just so I understand I'm going through some of the staff comments. Sheets C2.0, C2.0, C0 erosion control plan. That is. And we do have approval from the state for that under an extra general permit. And for that matter, I don't know if you had them. There's, we have two operational stormwater permits for the site, both issued and current. I can give you copies or you probably want PDFs. Whichever. You can give me copies tonight or you can send me the PDFs for us to throw in. Either one is fine. I have them with me. Then there was a picture and I just, again, I'm moving forward unless anybody had any further questions about erosion or the steep slopes. The sign wall that you're planning on installing, where is that or the wall with, I think, some carvings on it? That is currently has been removed from the project. If it's going to be, as you probably know, there's been a lot of cross savings that's gone. But it would be on this wall, correct? That's where they get the section. If there's a donor or a volunteer that wants to put on it would be in this area. I would just caution the city learned that the hard way that who you put as a donor may not resonate well with the community. I think we learned that, yeah. With the granite park that was put out front and a number of different businesses put donated money for it, put their name on it. There was a public uproar and they had to build granite facing to cover those names out there. I don't think, I think, like I said, I think we learned that one I think there's a thorough floater. I don't recall who it was, but we absolutely would. I love that the version I had had donors on it. Yeah, no, it was just inspirational messages, but. But so is the wall still being built and there's just nothing on it? Okay. And that may be a later project at a later time. And, okay, so it's nothing that we have to review at this time or consider. All right, I'm going to move into the site plan standards. And the first issue that's come up is the question of bike access. I know there's existing, or existing bike racks. Will there be bike racks incorporated? Currently, this is not the plan for it, but this area here is going to be paved and we're going to be have bike racks there. Whether we bring back, currently we have, I believe there's three of them. Again, that was a cost savings. We've had very nice sculptural ones that were set into concrete for right now. We're going to keep this area paved and bring, and I believe that there's a group that's applying for a grant from the state for bike racks. So the plan will have bike racks. Okay. And is it going to be just in that one location? As it stands now, yeah, because the rest of it is grass and hilly. So that's kind of the spot that kids can ride right up to. Okay. Let's talk about the landscaping. And what are the plans or plantings? Not as extensive as they were four months ago, but still quite extensive. I would say that the, the LA 201, that's the materials. That's materials. 201 is the materials, the hardscape. 300. Here we go. There we go, yeah. The 400s, the LA 400s, key itself, the planting key is on the 402. What are we talking about for sort of a total, oh, here we go with the tree planting key on 402. So it's 402. Yeah, there's quantities on the key. So it looks like, yeah, it's a series of shade trees on the back and with interspace within the upper playground area, some perennial plantings along the edges. Again, I'm not a tree guy necessarily. So we will freely admit that we don't have the one shrug per five linear feet for the thousand linear feet that we have, but we're hoping that we can count the hillside and its vegetation and the trees and plants that are up there towards that, that remember relative to the function of being a playground. So as opposed to a forest where we lose children. So I'm understanding from, I'm counting 22 new trees and then looks as if you're keeping about 12 for a total of 34. Yep. And then all the trees on the hillside. All the trees on the hillside, as well as all the shrubs on the hillside. And it looks like I'm just going from the staff report, which I think is called from your report that there's 20 existing shrubs and you plan to plant about 111 additional shrubbery. Yeah, probably. I think that's counting the grasses. I honestly didn't count everything. I pulled that from the application materials. 13. I didn't, to be honest, I didn't recount everything. 32. No, that comes from the shrub key. It looks like it looks like there's like 13 cornice. Arctic fire, 22. So a couple of dogwoods, some sweet fern, witch hazel, sumac, elderberry, silky willow. Looks good to me. I think that grasses could be construed as shrubbery as far as meeting the purpose of the landscaping to enhance the appearance of the built environment. Well, create shade now, provide a landscape buffer, screen land uses, the grasses accomplish all those things. They do, but there's actually definitions in the regs about what, there's different categories of shrubs and woody stems. About the shrub categories. Sorry. I wish it would make everything so much easier. I believe we have that discussion during the Nymph application. Monty Python trip. What happens with you? Okay. So essentially, we're looking, do we have a total count as to, if we were to go with the five per linear square feet of the, I think I calculated it as close to a thousand linear feet of building. Yeah, so it is required 200 shrubs and 34 trees is what's required under the regulations. What is being proposed right now is 34 trees and 131 shrubs being planted, plus you factor in everything that's already on the health side. So, you know, they haven't gone out and counted every single one, but my estimation is that we're at or near 200, probably more. And there's a standard condition that we usually put for landscaping that if a plant dies that you replace it with, within a year, a reasonable amount of time. You'd have no problem with that condition. If you plan a new tree. I would say that that would certainly be the intent, but I can't speak for the school district and the taxpayers, but absolutely. I mean, the intent is that we're going to maintain this and absolutely we're going to maintain to the best of our abilities. If you're going to put that condition and maybe I suggest that you allow to put a different species in case one doesn't survive for a reason. I mean, I think we give a certain amount of flexibility to the applicant as to the nature of that, but there's a requirement that you maintain the shrub that, you know, this is particularly important that, you know, if there's a dead boxwood, it doesn't just sit there as a dead boxwood for year after year. Yeah, absolutely. For the safety of the children, we're not going to allow trees that are dead to lay there and rot. And we're not going to let things get overgrown. Yeah, absolutely. Good. Although my son is willing to use a saw. There's good reasons for that rule. Okay, so let's move on unless there's any further questions about landscaping. There is one question about the dumpster location and any fencing that you're proposing or not proposing about the dumpster today. Well, the location is selected in the way it's being installed. It's really hidden on these sides already. So if there was a question of screening and up here, what do you feel about that? I would rather, well, I'm not sure it's up to me, but the idea is that the dumpsters now that are kind of sitting right out there are now going to be pushed back into the corner. Unless it's a requirement, I'd rather have the custodial staff give them the direction that nothing should be leaning against a dumpster that a dumpster should be clean and you should rake it out around it every now and again and don't turn it into a dumpster, turn it into a blue box that's sitting there and it's clean around it. So barring an actual requirement to put a fence up there around it. Rarely do they, they may look good the first day, but they're not gonna be as people go in there and smash it against snow banks trying to get trash out at two o'clock in the morning and things get broken. Well, it does 3205D, it does talk about, does talk about the idea of outdoor storage and keeping any materials, goods, equipment, unregistered vehicles or other items not for sale in an unroofed area for more than 24 hours may be allowed in its accessory use in accordance with following. And particularly outdoor storage area should be fenced in and screened from view from the street and surrounding properties. So that's at least, Meredith, that's what you're suggesting would cover the dumpsters. And- I mean, it's part of it was also not being clear exactly, I know you have the squares here from owner or however it is. In that spot, can those be seen from the road easily from there? Because I'm not sure exactly what we've got for the hillside there. Well, are they effectively already screened? Mostly screened. If you drew a line from dumpsters, very little of it, a very small area where you can see it from on the road, but it's not to say none, but- It's fenced in and screened. That's where I went with 3205D. But it's not clear from here if the fencing is to act solely as the screening, or if it's fenced in to keep people out of it. Otherwise it would just say screened. Well, let me ask this question. Currently you have like a big blue dumpster. Recycling and a trap. And then there are the compost totes. Are those still there? Well, I just started district on July 1st, so I'm not a hun- And my son has been out of the school for a few years, so I don't recall where the totes are. I suspect they're- I just, I recall having dropped my daughter off for years and throwing my banana peels away that the compost was located on the corner of the building closest to School Street right there. They were- Oh yeah, there was a couple of them. They had been there. I don't know. Have those been moved effectively? Because in some case I wanted to find a universe. So right now the compost totes are going closer to the cafeteria, which makes sense. And so we're really just talking about the two big blue dumpsters. Which currently sit right about here and we're gonna tuck them back here. Okay, so they're really tucked back into a corner. Okay, right. That's within the sheep house, they're kind of tucked into the hillside and the sheep house is above that and the hillside's above it. So they are screened pretty well on all sides, except possibly coming down the street right there where you're just pointing out. Well, and let me ask, is there going to be any type of screening trees or such planted or, I mean, there's existing trees in that that side yard, right? Correct. So- Is it true here? Correct. As if there's a straight visual shot and what you're suggesting is it's even tucked in because it is visually apparent and it's, you know, it's, I think one of the issues of the fencing and screening as I understood it was to give this, these kind of outdoor things a place, which is so that there is a dumpster area as opposed to a general dumpster area that gets moved around, you know? And I think I've seen those dumpsters move around quite a bit. And so what you're suggesting is they will have a home, a tucked-in corner and nook there, and they'll be screened from the street by the trees and by the side of the hill. They have a home now, right? Well, they have a movable home. They kind of have a pad, right? They're just sort of- And it's going to be the same thing, but moved backwards. But tucked back in behind, behind, tucked back now into a corner that we're creating that's seven feet tall on the backside of them. That is more defined than what's currently there. The language of the zoning ordinance that it must be fenced in and screened from the street sounds like a fence requirement to me. I'm sorry to say, but the plain reading of it is sounding that way. I mentioned that in part because I'm having a hard time visualizing the tucking of dumpsters and whether and how that will be effective. But if- I have a question to that end. Is there a practical way to have fencing without making it difficult to get in and out? Because I think there's also that sort of test, rational test, right? Can it function where it is and have some fencing from that road? I would say that, and Paul, correct me if I'm wrong, if we were required to put a fence, a functional fence around there, I think we'd have to push that retaining wall back. This area would have to go back this way and over this way to afford us a little bit of maneuvering space for the dumpsters themselves. We need to keep this area clear for the fire line. So we may, if that was a requirement, we would end up having to push this sort of nook further into the hillside, taking that seven foot wall to make it 10 feet long. It's pretty steep back there, so it's not a, it's certainly technically doable, but then we're really creating a nook in the hillside for these. Which is, yeah, I could see that being problematic. And that retaining wall remind me, what you're doing is bolstering something that's already there, and so you'd be constructing something new. This area? No. No, there's actually no retaining wall right here. Oh, I see, so you're putting in that. That's how we're creating that nook. By pushing things back already. Yeah, so the point of this was to get the dumpsters kind of out of view, basically, and tucked into the corner, which is partial screening. I think Andrew's right, if we push back further, we'll start building a taller wall. And also I think then we start getting a little tighter on movements to get the trash truck in there, so we're kind of just, he's able to sweep in there right now with the way it is, as you pull that back for the, it gets a little more awkward. He needs, when they do this, I suspect they're gonna have to kind of get in there. A little bit around, a little bit for there. Is there, are there fire lane considerations in that corridor? Absolutely. Yeah. Do you have a limitation as to how far out that can come? And I'm guessing, Paul, that's pretty much the minimum right there. Yeah, the direction from the fire chief and the assistant fire chief was basically, don't make it any worse, and which we've actually made it slightly better. I think we're at 16. That's where the, if you put the fence in, I think you'd be, you'd be really kind of tightly constraining that, whereas there's a little flexibility of moving the dumpsters around and that within that rectangle was shown. And a practical, and I'll speak freely here, a practical sense of that is, that is a tight corner. And when we start plowing in there and no matter what we put in there, it's gonna get damaged. It's that, for me, I'd rather push the Stodeo staff to have a nice clean dumpster area. You can see the dumpster. Is it from the northern part, from the road, or can you also see it from the Hubbard Street as well? From up here, Hubbard? Yeah. No, I don't think, Yeah, I don't think, From being up on the elevation, when looking down on it? I think we put the amount of trees in there. I don't think you'd see it. Okay. Yeah, no, I don't think you'd see it here. You wouldn't see it coming on School Street right now. Right, that neighbor wouldn't see it. You wouldn't see it there? No. You turn it head in this way. Yeah, coming down this way, once you've got past these trees and the bio-routention area, are you going to catch a glimpse of it? Absolutely. Okay, just like that portion, that portion while you're driving by would be the only time that you really would be able to see the dumpsters. Okay. And again, it would be a big improvement over where they are now. Right down, right now, they kind of sit almost facing up like that, and now they're going to be down here. So if we read it as, it doesn't have to be fence, and it was a desire to do screening. I mean, you could put a couple of shrubs in here, which would kind of break that line off. Maybe at least you get a little advantage out of that, unless that's tolerable. I think I'd rather see shrubs if it was a choice. Yeah, fences look up. And you're putting shrubs in the gravel wetland anyway, right? Yeah, there are plants and that shrubs around it. Any other questions about our dumpsters? I wanted to go over a couple of other things. What about the lighting for this project? Is there any proposed lighting? Currently, there is not. We're going to work with what is existing. We are putting conduit in. There are five, I believe, five proposed lamp posts for cost-saving measures they've been eliminated if they're put back into the project. We suspect that about probably January, we're going to be given a sort of go-no-go on a lot of items, some of the play equipment in the inner courtyard, lighting, changing maybe some of the fire lane that's along the east, changing back to concrete. That'll all be stuff that the contractor, I believe, will be telling us, probably somewhere around the new year, will be saying, okay, you got any extra money and where do you want to spend it? At that point, if those features come back in, we'll bring it in, share it with Marylith and she can tell us what we need to do and that stuff to wrap. Go ahead. I mean, if we do it, it would be a full cut-off kind of fixture, it won't be big globes. All right, but at this time, you're not proposing any new lighting? Okay. What's the timeline on this project? We're talking about that live, the last two months. Construction, given your blessing, we've talked to Chris Lumber, he's okay with to start on the vestibule. We are, our site contractor is meeting with our contractor for the vestibule to start laying out how we site lay out with regards to continuing to have access to the kitchen and all that. They're ready to go to start the vestibule next week. ECI, our site contractor, is hoping to take advantage of the Columbus Day long weekend when the kids aren't on campus for four days to actually start doing some of the heavy lifting, especially close to the building. And I think the idea is that they want to get most of the heavy lifting done before the ground freezes such that when they come back in the spring, it's a more matter of the lack of better term finishes, sidewalks, roads, plantings. And the only deadline at this point that I personally care about is opening day of school next spring, or next fall. We're gonna keep it closed all the way through let the plants and grasses take hold and it's that August 29th or whatever it is. Okay. And so part of your timeline is definitely affected by how soon or not soon this approval comes out. Is that really for the vestibule or would site plan as well? I think we'd all like to know that we're comfortable moving forward with the entire project. I think this is our last hurdle. Well, that's actually the question I wanted to ask. I'm glad you provide the answer to it, which is that this is the last hurdle or there are other approvals that. I don't believe so. I mean, we've got our stormwater. Chris is okay with the vestibule. This is it. I've asked that question several times to everybody. As I understand it, this is the last one. I think we do when we do connect with the stormwater we have to meet with Tom and I think there's another approval there but I think that's nitty gritty stuff. Does anyone have any other questions? All right. Actually, I've been curious, are you taking into account all of the sledding down the hill? Because that's all I could think about with this slope is that, you know, all the, yeah, I remember the kids on trays. I can only imagine what damage that does. I don't know. Well, that was a consideration. Oh, okay. But the sledding. There's expectation that that would still occur here. I've been talked out of doing a stone mine collection as well here. Yes, Mark. For that reason. Good. I guess in case your lunch tray disappeared. Yeah, yeah. Thank you. Okay. Anything further? What's the pleasure of the board? Do you want to take a deliberative session or do you wish to make a motion now? Into deliberative session. Okay. And close the evidence. Close the evidence, yes. Motion by Tom to close the evidence and move this into deliberative session. Do I have a second? Second. Second by Kate. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor of closing the evidence and moving into deliberative session, please raise your right hand. Thank you all very much. Thank you guys. Very thorough presentation. Thank you. Anything else? From all the permits that weren't in the application packet. Yeah. Okay. I think since I alluded to those, I'm just going to comment on some of the evidence. No. Yeah, two operational permits here and then this is the, thanks. Okay. Awesome. Thank you so much. Thank you for your help. Guiding us through this process. Getting us what we asked for. The last item tonight. Do. So let me just make that announcement and then I'll take a motion to adjourn into deliberative session. The only other business is that our next regular meeting is Monday, September 17th, 2018. Anyway, have any other new business they wish to raise? Otherwise I'll take a motion to adjourn into a deliberate session. Motion by Kevin. Second. Second. Second by Deb. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor, please raise your right hand. We are adjourned. Thank you all very.