 So, welcome to the September 18th meeting of the development review board, the city of Montpelier. We are going to let Meredith review the remote meeting procedures and then we will proceed with our meeting. Do you want to introduce members first for just. I'm sure. Tradition. Okay. I'm a little unsure about how to do this. Not only am I to my right. But. There's no. So. Is there an audience that I would just pick how it works on your screen with whoever's showing up at the top of your way down. Kevin. I'll call the board member. Right, Brian. Brian Jones board member. Joe. You there Joe just. Yeah, I'm here. Okay. And Michael, I believe. Michael was a tech board member. Thank you. All right. Yeah. Okay, so a quick little overview. This is the stuff you're going to see on the screen is more for anybody who might be watching via Orca media. If you are live streamed. There is some information for everybody who's on remotely to just pay attention to so. And of course I just misplaced my little cheat sheet. There we go. So for anyone viewing tonight's development review board meeting via Orca media, you can participate in tonight's discussion via the zoom platform through either video or telephone access options. So for the video options where you can see everything we're seeing and talk and ask questions, you want to type this link into your web browser, and then I'll let you into the meeting. Alternatively, you can dial in using this phone number. And this meeting ID put in the meeting ID when prompted, and I will get a little notification and let you into the meeting. If you're having problems getting into the meeting over zoom, please email me at M. Randall at Montpelier hyphen vt.org. For those attending via zoom turning your video on is optional. And actually if you're having bandwidth issues we suggest that you turn the video on zoom off and then usually the sound and everything works out okay. For everyone who's attending please keep your microphone on mute. I'm not speaking this will reduce background noise for everybody involved. And please reserve the chat function for troubleshooting or logistics questions. If you have a question or comment about an item on the agenda, please raise your hand either physically, or by using the raise button on your toolbar. And then, when the chair is called on you, you, we ask that you please state your name. And if you are someone other than the applicant or somebody representing the applicant please also state your address for the record. And we don't have a lot of people so I'm not familiar with that. In the event the public is unable to access tonight's meeting it will need to be continued to a time and place in place certain, because this is right now the only way to access the meeting. All right, I will hand the meeting back over to the chair. Okay. Has everybody had a chance to review the agenda. I'll make a motion to approve the agenda as presented. I'll make a motion to motion by Kevin. I'll second it. Seconded by Michael. Great. I need to our meeting we have just one application in front of us and it's our request for demolition of a historic barn. The applicants Tucker Hayward is Tucker here. Nope. So Adam Krakowski is going to be on representing the application tonight. Okay. So Adam's here for that. It's a 12 J street the application number Z 2023 one zero one three or one zero zero three. And if you want to do just a very brief introduction. And then we'll maybe Mr. Krakowski speak. So, like you said, this is demolition of a historic structure. So that is the main reason this is here before the board because I don't have the authority to approve that kind of a demolition project. Unlike most of the demolition projects that have come before the board in the five years I have been here this is not demolition of a part of a structure with a rehabilitation plan or something along those lines or or in addition. It's just the demolition of the building in its entirety. And as you see in the application package, that's actually something that has been supported by our building inspector our fire chief and the Montpellier's Historic Preservation Commission. So this is a very different application than the board has seen before for these kinds of situations. This, this seems to fit be much more of a sort of a health and safety situation. And so, you know, the key is that the board needs to make its analysis under that section three zero zero four. And that's laid out in the staff report for you. Thank you so much. And maybe you would like to give us a kind of a brief overview of the project from your perspective. And I would also just if you there wasn't a lot of information about your sort of credentials, regarding this like what your experience with either restoration or demolition or whatever it is that you your expertise that you're bringing to this. I wonder if you could speak ever so briefly about that. And then maybe talk about the project a little bit. Sure, my name is Adam Krakowski I hold a masters of science and historic preservation from the University of Vermont. And I work in the preservation field as a furniture historic woodwork and art conservator and handle projects at historic sites around the state including the Vermont State House. And Tucker is a friend of mine who had asked me this summer to take a look at the barn at his property at 12 J Street. I used to be a neighbor of his, just up the street on Loomis and had moved over to Plainfield Vermont five years ago. And Tucker had asked me just in terms of the woodworking and the historical structure to give me. Yeah, he asked me to give my thoughts about it and looking at the structure and I looked at it, both before the tragic flooding in July and then I did look at it again in August with him. And, even though my overview is always to save a historic structure, my take on looking at it, I did not enter the structure due to my own safety concerns. The building is listing at a significant angle with essentially the rundown of the barn. My estimate of it would be a night around a 1925 1930 carriage barn, and it's there's remnants of what looks like stalls next to the carriage barn with a simple shed roof. And the barn itself is just simply a very basic stone and very shallow stone foundation. And then it's essentially the damage that I I observed in person was that all four sills of the structure have rotted through. Essentially, the rafters and the decking in the the actual cladding of the roof is rotted away and exposed to the elements. There's what I can perceive as significant water damage to the second floor. And then there were definitely rotted joists that I observed standing on the first floor of which is actually a dirt dirt floor on the first floor, looking up into the rafters. And while some and I would gauge about 25% of the structures intact. This would clearly be a rebuild versus a restore situation where some of the materials could be salvaged to be reused but there there's no way to honestly restore this structure and maintain its historic integrity. What you would be looking at the exterior of it is a board and baton construction running vertically. I believe that the left barn door is missing entirely. And with the list that's occurring with another property directly in its at its angle. There's this the structure would be could be in. I would estimate the short term cause further damage by collapsing or falling over into a neighboring property. And with Tucker, what his plan for the site was that he was going to have it removed and simply seed with grass and was talking about possibly putting some trees in in terms of erosion control. He, he told me he has a second permit I believe with the town or the city in regards to repairing his sewer line that was damaged in the front of the house and he does not have at this time any plan for any future structure. You know that it's really at this point he wants to take the barn down due to the safety issue that's at hand. And that's a pretty complete overview I think. So they're in just looking through them. You know the guiding ordinances and the materials on staff report here. It seems like there's a first the first course. That there's not, you know, there's the. Tunnel use standards. There's not going to be any changes of use. There's going to be increase in pervious surfaces. So that's a good thing. And it does look like there is a demolition and site restoration plan. You talked about trees for erosion control now. I mean, look in the application like that. That that grass was sufficient that just to receive that area. Yeah, that would be that would be his plan. You know, he, he made a comment. You know, at one point that, you know, he has an apple tree. And, you know, it was just like, oh, maybe I'll put another apple tree and I don't know, but it was his concern was to make sure that there was, you know, the runoff because the property is sloped down slightly. And that's at the back of the property that he would, you know, his plan was immediately to sow with grass. And then just, you know, whatever was needed or recommended he would, you know, he would abide by. Do other board members have questions before we start working through this application. Anything that struck anybody off the top of their heads or if they want to get out there. The one thing that struck me is that is so the structure so far deteriorated that I would think that the building code just on a safety concerns would would be sufficient to allow the demolition. It's what's known as an attractive nuisance. Yeah, I mean, being a 14 year old kid running around there, I could just imagine that would be an awful lot of dangerous fun. Yeah. Okay. So, I don't know if you put it on the record earlier, but can you just go over quickly the town offices and support of the demolition of this. Uh, property just so that we can get them listed on the record. We forgot to swear in witnesses. Okay. We're going to back up. And so Adam and Jim Jim's a neighbor. Yeah, so both Adam and Jim. I hope you've told the truth so far, but I'd like you to raise your right hand right now. And some dissuade the truth to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth and it contains and penalties of perjury. I do. I do. Great. Thank you. And my apologies for missing that stuff. First meeting is the chair. Not my first meeting running a meeting, but. So yeah, I think you could just list, you know, who you contacted and basically, I know. And the historic commission, I know didn't have a form, but I think they should be included in that. Yeah. So there was Michelle Michelle Savry. She is the city's building inspector. And then there was also Robert Gawens. He's the city's fire chief as well as a health officer. And, and he and Michelle work together to determine the safety of buildings they work together if, you know, post fire or anything like that. And then on the historic preservation commission, the members that were in attendance were the chair, Eric Gilbertson, who has worked for preservation for as a historic preservationist for decades and actually helped run the state of Vermont's barn preservation program when it began again, decades ago and their grant program for that. And there's also Paul Carnahan, who worked for years for the, I think it was the Vermont historical, the library, the head librarian for the historical society. Thank you head librarian for the month historical society. And was it. Sorry, I'm trying to refer it was Yana, who was the third member on that night. So Yana is not a historic preservationist, but she has lots of experience with historic buildings here in Montpelier. She's a property manager who deals with the restoration of lots of different commercial and residential buildings here in Montpelier. So the three of them signed off on a letter to the board, supporting the demolition of this building as having lost its historic integrity. Great. Mr. Burke, did you want to contribute here? Hello. Yeah. Sorry, I was unmuting. That's okay. Yeah, we're, we're on the main. Oh yeah, thank you. I was just going to ask for your address, but go ahead. We're, we're at 185 Main Street, our backyard backs up against the backside of his barn. If you look at the pictures that were in the application, the, the side with all the siding falling off is faces our backyard. Our concern, I mean, we've been worried about it for quite a while and watching it slowly collapse over the past several years. So our concern is that it's going to fall over partly on our property. I've got a spruce that I planted in 1995. Shortly after we purchased the place and, you know, if it collapses onto that corner, it's very likely we'll take out that tree. So we would, we would prefer to see it gone. We don't have any. Okay. I think that's a good point for the board of the application. Yes. Great. Thank you. So I think that I think the critical point for the board members tonight, which Kevin has addressed somewhat is that we would provide a clear and substantial benefit to the community is what we need to look at. Certainly that the safety seems to be paramount that that is very much in danger of collapsing. Certainly seems like a clear benefit to the public and I have a barn fall on them. Other thoughts about that. Other board members. Hey, sharing this Michael. Hey, I'm curious to know if anyone can speak to what the bond looked like in 07. When the property owner. Purchase the parcel. I've known Tucker since 2010. So I can only attest to 2010. And as far as my recollection, you know, the barn had been missing the barn door from that time. The roof on the carriage side, the three, I believe it's three stalls. If you're facing the barn to the left that are still standing. Two of the roofs have had a the shed roof had completely collapsed in the third one had started to fall in. I know as long as I've known Tucker he had kind of a covering on the already deteriorated roof. And in my honest professional opinion that from the point of purchase in 2007, the roof was already deteriorated to to an extent. Was there any attempt to sort of salvage or restore the building. The only thing that I am aware of is that Tucker did have a roof or come in and do a patch repair on the side I believe that's facing Mr Burke's property. As well as also on the front facing into the property. And I do not know at what time that was the case. And I had moved away from Montpelier in January of 2018. And have sporadically, you know, been been at his home and a lot of times due to my work schedule it's in the evenings. I see that point. And has there been any attempt to delist the building. Not that I'm aware of. So just a comment on that delisting that process would need to be something that the Historic Preservation Commission would do because it's a building that's listed within the National Register District. It's not a single individual listing that the property owner made. And so when the property was reviewed in 2016, which was the last time that it was updated. The carriage shed at that point was still considered to be in good enough condition to stay on the, the register, but it's also that was something where I think it was just viewed from the street so there's not a great street view of that. You know, it was that was sort of a quick drive by, because they were looking at expanding. And if the barn hadn't been easily viewable where the damage sections were from the street they wouldn't have seen it that was more of a windshield survey. So anything they delisted in 2016 those are mostly properties that were really easily viewable from the street because that's, that's all they have the authority to look at. Yeah, I mean I could just speak from my perspective with the town of Stowe and I'm deeply embroiled in several historic structures which is sort of beyond the scope of this but we are we the town of Stowe are in the process of having a building he listed, at least from the perspective, and it's not as onerous as you might think. And just my, I'll be transparent my general concern is allowing a building that's listed or at least part of a historic district to deteriorate to the point where then the only recourse you have is to remove it. And then you sort of lose the evidence and significance of the barn. And as somebody works for the municipality I understand that is incredibly time consuming and complex to deal with historic structures. However there's a boatload of money out there to assist folks. And so I just have a general concern about this and Meredith, can you remind me. I feel like we've dealt with this with a shed at one point in the last three or four years with a historic shed or a barn that was in poor condition. And I thought we had. Not voted to demolish that. There were a couple different ones that you're thinking of. So there was, there was a shed attached to a barn, and the shed was allowed to be demolished to then be able to relocate the barn to save the barn because the barn was the more significant historic structure that did end up getting appealed. But then the court decided it on the grounds of the benefit to the community of saving the bigger barn to be able to just destroy the small shed. There was another one where there was a shed attached to a building and the building was going to be renovated. And there was a determination that the shed itself was not mentioned in the description of the building. Yeah, and so the shed was allowed to be demolished because of the poor condition and then it was determined it itself did not really have a historic nature. So, you know, and the, the in Montpelier because Montpelier is a certified local government. The Montpelier Historic Preservation Commission is the entity that would be involved in doing a removal of something from that particular historic register listing. And they, they have at least three of those members, the three that were able to get wrote in support of in this particular case, a demolition, a reminder that we are trying to amend this demolition provision. The flood has sort of held that all up. There was a draft from Mike Miller on my desk actually I saw it the Saturday before the flood I did not pick it up and bring it home. So it got washed away. And since then we have not gone back to that but that is one of the provisions that may be folding into the zoning changes that the planning commission is going to be considering over the next several months to make this process. It's more of a multi step process I think where, where Mike's Michael's concerns will be more clearly addressed is my hope. Yeah, Michael I actually had the same thought and looking at the application is that it's like, it is kind of shame that that that building's gone you know it's a carriage house how cool is that. You know, but, you know, I just, I guess I just wondered where the kind of the intersection of where somebody can afford to do it or not afford to do it like financial hardship and then, or just leave it until it just falls in, you know, into, into disrepair. And this can only be, you know, rebuilt instead of renovated and I, I, I, I, I was having a hard time trying to figure out what an appropriate regulation for that would be like how do you address that problem. You know, it's interesting that you say that there's a lot of money out there for that. I mean I know that, you know, that's, that's always tricky to so I think it's a very good point you know and I can see where there would be a concern that people would just didn't want to renovate or expend that energy or time or money that they would just let it drop, you know. So I don't know does the historic I mean does the historic mission go through and reevaluate periodically. So I should just be clear that, you know, I am a municipal employee, I'm not a private citizen in the burden on private citizens to maintain upkeep and restore historic structures is not I mean it's significant. So I have the benefit of being part of a municipality. And I think this is a larger problem than than just Tucker and Adam in this particular building, you know, we as a society determine that this is important, and then we don't provide any technical support or financial assistance to maintain something that we think is important. So it's a it's a strange catch 22 for folks like Tucker who I'm guessing at no point in the past 15 years had the financial capacity or the ability to manage grants to restore this carriage. And then we turn it into a multi use building. So this isn't about Tucker or Adam. This is more about just the process of dealing with historic structures in Vermont. Thank you. I think that's really good. Um, other concerns from board members other perspectives questions. And, all right. Adam, Adam has his hand up. Yep. Okay. I'm just adding to what Michael had said in the application Tucker had included his in his particular case his yearly income from the last five years and in his capacity, my opinion he would not have been able to and what I can attest to is, I live in the field Vermont and I have a significantly sized bank bank barn that's dated to 1860, and I had significant damage in the flooding occur, and I just went through the SBA FEMA and SBA process and in needing new roof. And that was that was damaged and foundation on two walls. I'm staring at a $26,000 SBA loan to just shore up those that damage where I because of my background and also my income I'm capable of taking that burden on and also want to preserve that property and I do understand that it, for many it's a significant burden to do and for the SBA loan I would, I would have made my best attempt to shore up the building under my own means but you know thankfully in a blessing in a way, you know with the SBA loan I'm able to do the foundation properly as well as a new roof, you know appropriate. Thank you. Anybody else further comments might we entertain a motion at this point. I'll make the motion to allow for the demolish demolishing of the barn at 12 J Street. As presented. There's a motion by Kevin. Any seconds out there. Second. All right. Discussion any further discussion points we should address the main points that we may have missed. Okay. In which case, we are going to do a roll call vote. Kevin, how do you vote. Yes. Joe, how do you vote. Yes. Michael. Yes. Brian. Yes. Okay. So we are all. All right. So we are all passed as well. So that is unanimously passed. She did not log on. Did he have Meredith? I don't see him. Okay. All right. So we are all. Just a quick clarification question. If that's okay. I would like the decision to include some of Michael's commentary about the city's consideration of historic buildings and trying to, I mean, it's just a little commentary thing, but about trying to find ways to help home owners be able to retain. I think that would be great. You know, to get that recorded. I think that's a really important part of tonight's process. So yes. And I know that's something that the Montpellier's Historic Preservation Commission had included as one of their goals to work into the new city plan for the historic resources chapter on for the city of Montpellier for a plan as a whole. That's something they're pushing to make sure is in the city plan is trying to find ways to provide more resources to homeowners, to private property owners versus just the commercial buildings. Right. And doing it before it's all has lost, you know, exactly. Exactly. That the maintenance of the buildings is as important as renovations. Yeah. Okay. Well, thank you very much for coming in. And Meredith, you want to let him know when he can expect to see you. So Adam, I'll make sure to follow up with Tucker as well. He has a direct email from me on the process, but what the next step is working on the written decision. This is a pretty short staff report. The decision should be pretty short as well. The staff report is usually kind of an outline for the decision. We'll get that as quickly as possible. Hopefully this week or next week. And because there were no conditions on the decision, the permit will get issued at the same time. So it'll be getting that written, getting it signed by Sharon. And then we will contact Tucker when those are ready so that he can. Pick things up. We'll probably have him pick them up if he's back in town versus trying to mail it. Yep. I believe he'll be back in town at the end of this week. Okay, perfect. Or next Monday at the latest. Great. Okay. Well, I will, I will make sure to email him so that when he can get that, he'll have the update. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Adam. And thank you, Jim. All right. So we have minutes to review. Is everybody had a chance to look at the September 5th meeting minutes? I did not see anything that I needed changed in there. Any other changes for those minutes? Well, I guess I'll make the motion make the motion again to, to approve the minutes of the September. Which date. September 5th. September 5th. And I'll second. And also, I'm not sure it really matters, but earlier when we approved the agenda, I was the one that seconded and not Michael. Great. Okay. All those in favor. Hi. Hi. Hi. Those against. Okay. Any other business people have thoughts they want to get out here. Okay. Our next meeting. Oh, sorry. I was just going to say thank you to. Sorry. Go ahead, Kevin. You go first. Okay. I just wanted to, when we were. Zooming online during the pandemic. We were making decisions. In the executive session. And I just wanted to bring that up. I mean, so far we haven't dealt with anything that's particularly complicated or controversial, but I think it's something we should keep in mind. Because doing it on zoom is definitely not the same as doing it. As we are gathered. In the, in the council room. Yeah. So. I don't think it's necessary for like, for instance, what we just dealt with today. This evening. I don't think there's any reason to go into executive session for that. Other than. Other than. What was that look? Other than. During the pandemic, we did everything. It didn't matter whether it was a slam dunk or whether it was something complicated. Well, I have, you know, I. I always appreciate a good executive session. And I think that it's that it's good to have that. And it's great to point out that it's in our arsenal. Yeah. And I also really appreciate as much of the process that we can do in front of the public as possible. I agree with that. It's my preference. Yeah. If we can, you know. Mary, did you have something else? Just to thank you to Michael. Because this is going to be his last meeting is my understanding. As a board member. That's right. Yeah. Put them until you're on blast right before I move to. There you go. Well, we will, I will certainly miss your input, Michael. Michael. You take care. Thank you. Yeah, no, it's, it's been fun. I'm, I'm just moving for personal reasons. No other reason than that. So I'll still be around. Causing happy can still. So don't worry. Good. You're not, you're not leaving because of the ERB. It's the unpaid position. No. The ERB could be pretty intimidating. Oh, Michael's, Michael's been on too. He's also been on a conservation commission. Yeah. So Michael. Yeah. When you see, he's lucky to get you. Um, our next meeting is going to be on October 2nd. We have any applications for it at this point. Yes. Um, so there are two that you can see on the pending applications page. Um, we have, um, a addition. Um, it's a, it's a building that's going to, an addition that is going to connect 41 and 45 college street. So it is a access edition, right? Basically it's stairs and, um, an elevator tower and ability for the students of the new school to be able to get between their two buildings. Um, that part is actually a administrative approval, but there are a couple of things that go along with it, that only the DRB can approve. One is the fact that it, um, adding that increases the footprint of the buildings beyond the, um, max usual allowable footprint. And then there's also they're requesting a, um, a fence in the back that is, uh, eight foot high fence. It's going to fence in an area for the students there. Um, so unfortunately those two things I can't do. And then there's also, um, country club road. There is an application for the conditional use of a temporary homeless shelter up there. Um, and so that would be just for this winter. Um, but so that application will be coming before the board as well. Who's the applicant in that case? Uh, good Sam. Good Samaritan. Great. Well, those both sound really interesting. So that'll be good. Um, any, uh, Can I hear a motion to adjourn? Come on Kevin. It's quiet out there. I'll make the motion to adjourn. I'll second it again. All in favor. Hi. Hi. All right guys, we did it. Thank you. Okay, everybody. Have a good evening and a good week. Yeah. Thank you. Good luck Michael. Thank you everybody. See you in two weeks.