 Good evening. Welcome to the South Burlington Development Review Board for Tuesday April 19th. My name is Dawn Filibird and I'm chair and with me from the DRB are Jim Langen, Stephanie Wyman, Quinn Mann, Frank Coakman, and on the phone, Dan Albert. And with us from the staff, the city staff are Marlekeen, the Development Review Planner, and Delilah Hall, our zoning administrator. This meeting is being recorded. Thank you all for participating and there are a number of ways to participate in this meeting. One of which is to be here at City Hall in person. Another is to attend virtually and you can also call in if you want to. If you are attending virtually, we ask that you keep your microphone muted and your camera off unless you are actively participating in an item that the board is reviewing. And if you participate during public comment periods, turn your camera, turn on your camera and raise your hand and you may unmute when recognized by the chair. The chat function is for administrative matters only. So we ask that you please avoid chatting with each other because it's actually not part of the public record. We ask that you sign in. If you're here, there's a sign-up sheet in the back of the room and if you are attending virtually, you can send your contact information to Marlekeen at M-K-E-E-N-E at southburlingtonvt.gov. That's a new address, a new email address. The old one will still work, but I thought it would be good to start getting used to using the new one. But please let her know you wish to participate and you can send that through chat or through email and on the phone you can send it via email. That way if you ever wish to take any action on one of the board's decisions, you will be recorded as a participant. So let's move ahead with tonight's agenda. First of all, emergency evacuation procedures. We're in the auditorium at City Hall. There are two sets of doors in each in back of the room on each side. To exit the building, you simply go through those doors and either turn right or left to get outside. So now I'll ask if there are any additions, deletions, or changes in the order of items on the agenda. Hearing none, we'll move ahead to announcements. And we have an announcement of a new member. We do. Oh boy. John Stern has been appointed to the DRB. That appointment is effective May 17th. Rachel will be taking over the remainder of Jim's term. Jim has a lot going on in his life, which I completely understand. So we'll welcome John in a couple of weeks. And I just want to acknowledge that we will welcome him, but we'll also miss Jim Langen's participation. His legal expertise and perspective has always been valuable and I've really enjoyed serving with him. Like, so thanks for all your good work, Jim. OK. Um, are there any announcements? Oh, we just announced any other announcements to be made? No. OK. So are there any questions related to the I'm sorry, are there any questions from the public that are not related to tonight's agenda? OK. Let's move ahead with the projects we are reviewing tonight. So the first project is number five on the agenda and it is SP 22003. It's a site, a continued site plan application of our HTL partners, LLC, to modify a previously approved plan for 10,000 square feet of automotive sales, service and repairing business building on an existing 2.61 acre lot. The amendment consists of constructing a 3,155 square foot building expansion at 1795 Shelburne Road. Now, it turns out the revised materials were not submitted prior to the packet publication. So the recommendation is the board continue the hearing to May 17th, 2022. I would entertain a motion to continue that hearing. So moved. Thank you, Frank. Second. Thank you, Stephanie. Is there any discussion? All in favor of approving the motion to continue the hearing. Say aye. Aye. Opposed? No. OK. Good. Number six on the agenda is site plan application SP 22003 of the City of South Berlin to amend a previously approved plan for multi-unit residential complex known as Stonehenge. The amendment consists of redeveloping an existing stormwater swale by removing soil materials within an existing class to wetland and buffer at zero Stonehenge Drive. Are there any disclosures or conflicts of interest? Recusals. Who is here for the applicant? Hi, come on up. You can go there or you can sit in the chair. Just make sure that your mic is on. Tap it. There's a push thing on the front. There you go. Hello. Yes. Hi. My name is Christine Jinkers. Hey, Christine. Thank you. So we have actually tonight is a little bit unusual in that the projects we're looking at are draft staff reports of findings of facts and conclusions. And so you've all had a chance to review the ones that relate to your project. Christine, what do you do you have anything to add to your project? Not beyond the information in the packet. No. OK. All right. And board, are there any questions for Christine about the proposal? Or if you want me to give you a summary, I could give you a summary. Yeah, I'm sorry, I should have given you an opportunity to do this. Little context, please. OK, sure. Yeah, of course. Yes. Well, this is a stormwater swale in the Stonehenge neighborhood. It's three hundred and twenty feet of existing swale connecting to the stormwater pond in Shemansky Park that was constructed in twenty seventeen. And when that pond was constructed in twenty seventeen, this whale was not touched. It's in a class two wetland. But the culvert under the road was left at the same elevation. And over the years, the wetland elevation has come up. There's invasive root mat species. And what kind of species? There's a giant reed. Sorry, there's giant reed that have a lot of roots that the water is no longer flowing from the culvert to the stormwater pond, and it's backing up in the neighborhood and in folks' car boards and puddling and icing concerns. So we're proposing to go in and clear the swale out like about a foot of depth to restore the drainage. And that swale was constructed in nineteen eighty three when those condos were constructed. So it is in a class two wetland and we do have a got the permit from A&R to there is an impact fee. It is impacting the wetlands. Thank you for questions. Marla. Yes, Dan. Yeah, is this all is this all are we is the city allowed to do this kind of project given our new regulations around in wetlands or is there an exemption for such projects? So yeah, and that's the regulations as they apply are in the draft decision. OK, great. Thanks. Any other questions? All right. Are there any members of the public who would like to provide testimony about this project? Hearing none. I will entertain a motion to close the hearing. Actually moved to. OK, go ahead. I'll move to close the hearing for application SP dash twenty two dash one three. All right. City of South Brompton. Thanks, Dan. I'll second that. Is there any discussion? All in favor of proving the motion, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? OK. Thank you very much. And you can stay because the next one is going to represent as well. OK, good. Thank you. OK, number seven on the agenda. Very similar project site plan application SP twenty two zero one four of the city of South Burlington to redevelop a stormwater swale by removing soil materials within an existing class to wetland and pardon me and buffer within Schman ski park at thirty three Andrews Avenue. So are there any since it's a different project? Anybody I will just explain is actually the same project. It's the first two hundred and fifty feet are on the property owned by Stonehenge and the last seventy one feet are actually in the city parcel. OK, of so it needed two applications. OK, sure. The same project. No disclosures or recusals. OK, good. So I guess the overview is the same as it was. OK. And so I've drawn a line just showing the right of the line is the first project and left of the line is the second project. OK. So questions or comments from the board? And can you orient me a little bit? Where's the what buildings are those there? Those are the Stonehenge condos. And I think it's the bike path there in the lower left that goes through the park. OK, thanks. Right. Yes, the pond is like the top left of the sheet. And this is the bike path. Right. Yes, yes. OK. And where are the help? Which direction of the tennis court? So that's not a landmark for the park. A little more to the left then. Yeah. OK, got you. Oh, that's that curve right there near the basketball court or something. Yeah, just before I think. Yeah. Yeah, OK, thanks. Other questions, comments? Are there any members of the public who would like to comment? Hearing none, I would entertain a motion. Let me go. I'll make a motion to close the hearing on SP22014. Do I? Pardon. I was just going to second, but I jumped the gun. No, great. Thanks, Frank. OK, any discussion? All in favor of approving the motion, say aye. Aye. Opposed? Aye. Great. Thank you. The motion is carried. Thank you so much, Christine. OK, number eight on the agenda. Site plan application SP22011 and conditional use application CU2202 of Poly Construction, Inc. to amend a previously approved site plan for an animal shelter. The amendment consists of replacing a section of five foot high fence with an eight foot high chain link fence at 142 Kindness Court. Who is here for the applicant? Would you state your names, please? And first, let me just say any recusals or conflicts? Oh, OK. Go ahead and state your name, please. My name is Sam Jarvis, and I am with Poly Construction. OK, you're muted. You're still muted. I know what's going on. Oh, there you are. We can hear you, but not loudly. You need to be louder. Oh, that's my computer. If I choice Cameron from the Humane Society, President and CEO. OK, thank you, Joyce. Sorry. Sorry about that. Can you increase your volume? I'm trying. I have a little problem here with my computer lately on this, but maybe that's better. A little bit. So go ahead. You can go ahead with Sam. I'm going to grab my earbud. You know, I didn't swear to him. I didn't swear to him. Oh, Christine. Yeah, I didn't swear in. OK, sorry about that. I just realized I didn't swear in our previous testifiers. So would Sam, would you and Joyce, would you please raise your right hand? Does this testimony you're about to provide tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of perjury? Yes. Thank you. OK. So we have a draft staff decision findings of facts and conclusions that you've read. We've all read it. But why don't you please give us a five minute overview of what this is a pretty simple project, but what you're doing. Yeah. So what we're the plan is to remove the existing chain link fence at the back of the Humane Society. And the section that you're seeing is in red is currently at five feet high and the rest is already at eight feet. But we're going to replace it all with an eight feet chain link fence. It'll very closely match what's already there. It's just the height difference. Thank you. So my question was and this is relevant to nothing, probably, but why is that our our animals getting out? Yes. Can you hear me? Yes. Yeah. Yes. We found the need to increase that. We've got large animals that we, you know, large community animals that are relinquished that we house and they are able. Some are able, but particularly athletic ones are able to get over that five foot fence. OK, good for them. It's kind of part and parcel of a little improvement in our turf, you know, what we've currently got there for dog yards. So it's been needed for some time. So the fence, yeah, eight feet will do it, we think. OK, you're not taking giraffes in, I assume. We aren't. We aren't, but you never know. Thank you. OK, questions, comments from the board. So I've had a conversation with the city planner about this regulation and how it's sort of a strange regulation because eight foot fences are required to have DRB review and the intention is to make it very difficult to have an eight foot five high fence because the idea is that you don't want an eight foot high fence in a residential neighborhood. But nobody really asks for an eight foot high fence without good reason. So the amendment I've suggested is to maybe allow it for commercial properties without DRB review, but then require a DRB review for residential properties. So you may not see this again. We'll see how it goes. OK, sounds good. Questions? Any more questions? Are there any members of the public who would like to provide testimony? And we did have one question for them in the staff report. OK, how did I miss that? I think it was on the first page. There's a cover memo. We do have a question for you. One page per year. There's like a cover. No, I'm on the wrong project. Very first page. That's not the first page. OK, there we go. OK, oh, that's right. The additional parking for the bikes. You need one additional bike parking space. Didn't know what their existing bike rack provided bicycle storage for. So we needed them to clarify that so that we could write the decision appropriately. OK. And did they? No, no, not yet. So tell us what your thoughts are about our interest in having you add more bike racks. Or I'm happy to to respond to that. I'm assuming that that's because the city plan requires that, correct? Yes, I see. We actually have one. It's it's uninstalled and that was intentional because no one ever used it. And we still have it at fit for bicycles. And I've been at the Humane Society for four years and it's I've never seen a bike in it. But we do have it. The concrete pad that it was on now houses a shed that's our community pet food shelf. So we would need to and we can do this easily if if certainly this permit is conditioned with that. We would need to put a little slab down or find a part of our paved driveway to to put a new rack that has more than four and, you know, happy to do that. OK. I don't know that anyone will ever use it. I mean, that's the that's kind of the larger, more disturbing point. But our staff doesn't don't ride bikes to work. And most people don't use them to pick up and drop off animals. Yes. So we do need a little more information about where you would be proposing to put it. It has to be on a stabilized surface. And we just need to be able to be really specific in order to write it as a condition. So Delilah has your plan up. Where are you thinking? Yes. So I'm looking at this. Where are we here? Very close by to where it was, which is I'm trying to find out this is the drive. Where's the driveway in right here? Let's see. Where are we? That hill. OK. Yeah. So where it was is where my cursor is. Can you see that at the corner? No. But you can enter to our right. Right where you are right where you were. Yep. Just up a little further. That's where it was. And that's where it would go. You know, that would be the proper place for it. So. OK. So you put it near. In that vicinity. Yes. OK. Yeah. And then it does have to meet the dimensional and quality requirements of the LDR. So if you have one of those, it's like looks like a ladder turned on its side. Yeah. Those aren't right. It has to be. Yeah. OK. That's not what we have. We have something that looks like a bicycle. I don't, as I said, I'm not quite sure. It's been around for a while. So I think that'll be a yard ornament and we will get a new one. So if if the board could provide me with some guidance as to what's required, we're happy to oblige. OK. So there's no way for us to grant a waiver given that their past bicycle rack has not been used. No. No. OK. And actually, we're working on some improvements to Queen City Park Road for bicycling. So hopefully maybe your volunteers will like to volunteer. That's a big hill to go up, though. It is. And it's a fun one to go down. Yeah. Oh, the driveway. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I bet. All right. Thank you. You're welcome. Comments, questions from the board. Any comments from the public? I would then entertain a motion to close this hearing. Like a motion to close the hearing for SB 22, that show one, two. Thanks, Dan. Sorry, not wrong. That was the wrong number. Sorry. Oh, we get the wrong number. SB 22, that show 11. Right. Thank you. Second. Pardon. Pardon, Madam Chair. Can I get a clarification? I'm just curious if this is so is the case closed until we install the bike? I'm not quite clear on exactly what's required of us. So the board is just closing right now. They'll issue a decision. They have up to 45 days, but you've seen the draft decision. So they're obviously going to try and do it much, much faster than that. Right. Once that decision is issued, there is a 30-day appeal period. If you want to move faster than that, just reach out to my office. You do have the ability to waive that. But if you waive it, obviously, you can't appeal the decision as it's written. So you want to read it first. And then you can get your zoning permit to change out the fence. Great. Thank you. Yeah. So we've had a motion. Did you second? Thanks. Okay. Thank you. All right. Any discussion? All in favor of the motion signified by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Was that you, Dan, opposing it? No. I'm sorry. Yes. Okay. Okay. Good. All right. Thank you for showing up tonight. And good luck with your project. We'll be in touch. Okay. Agenda number nine, site plan application SP22012 of Burlington International Airport to amend a previously approved plan for an airport complex. The amendment, pardon me, consists of rehabilitating and constructing an expansion of the existing Taxiway A at 1200 Airport Drive. I see Larry is with us. Welcome. And any disclosures or recusals? No. Don, I have a disclosure that the company I work for often works with Jackie to Jess, but I don't think that will hinder my ability to be impartial. Okay. Thank you. Larry, would you raise your right hand please? Is anyone else going to be testifying? Is anyone else going to be testifying? Jackie here. Okay. All right. I'll raise your right hand please. Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of perjury? Okay. Thank you. So Larry, why don't you or your staff give us a very brief overview of the project, please? Sure. Sorry. All right. This is basically a mill and overlay of the existing Taxiway Alpha, which is the parallel taxiway to our general aviation runway 119, the shorter runway. The mill and overlay will go from Taxiway Charlie to Taxiway Golf. We are putting a 20 foot shoulder on one side to meet current FAA standards and geometry requirements because we're rehabilitating the whole taxiway. It's pretty well worn. We're also doing some minor upgrades to stormwater infrastructure to include some chambers because we have a little bit of additional impervious area. We have chambers, infiltration chambers. It's maintenance and safety project and that's basically it with acceptance of the fact we're adding a shoulder both from safety or from maintenance standpoint, snow plowing makes it easier to snow plow and also it's today's standard with the FAA. And that picture shows it real well. Okay. I'm just calling up the report. At this point, does anyone have any questions for the applicant? Okay, let's, let me just look through the staff report, the findings of facts and conclusions or decision. Doesn't look like there are any questions. Did you guys have any questions? No, I went through it thoroughly, Marl. I'm fine with everything you have there. Okay, thank you. I think we'll take public comment. Okay. Are there any members of the public who would like to comment on this application? Seeing none, I would entertain a motion to close the hearing. Motion to close application SB 22012. Thank you, Quinn. Do I have a second? I'll second. Thank you, Jim. Okay, any discussion? All in favor of approving the motion, say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. And we have, is there any other business hearing none? The minutes of April 5th. We're not available. Are not available, okay. All right, so I would entertain a motion to- Oh, we don't need to move. We don't need to move. Okay. And the meeting, however, if Dan, you could stay on the line. We can end recording and kick out everybody else and issue some decisions. Great, so we off the recording? Not yet. Okay.