 All right. Good evening, everyone. I would like to call this meeting of the City of Montpelier Development Review Board to order. It is 7 p.m. on March 1st, 2021. My name is Kate McCarthy and I am the Chair of the Development Review Board. And to get everybody introduced, what I will do in this Zoom environment is I will go around and say people's names, give them a chance to unmute themselves and say hello, starting with Vice Chair Kevin O'Connell. Here. Hello. And Joe. From here. There's Joe. Hi, Joe. Rob. I'm here. Hi, Rob. Roger. Hello, everyone. Hello, Roger. And then Michael. Good evening, Kate. Hello, everybody. Thank you for being here. And we are being recorded and recorded by and streamed on Orca Media. We're also joined by Tammy Furry, who is our recording secretary and staff, Meredith Crandall. So thank you all for being here. Let's get underway with the staff review of our remote meeting procedures for which I will turn to Meredith. Okay. Give me one second. I want to share my screen for anybody watching via Orca so they can get the login information. All right. So if anybody is watching via Orca Media and decides that they want to participate in the meeting versus watch it, you can log in using this link here, which will take you directly into the Zoom meeting. You can also call in using this phone number and use the meeting ID number here in bold. If you have any problems accessing the meeting, please feel free to email me and I will do my best to help you that way. So, if you're having difficulties while you're, once you're into the Zoom meeting and you're using the video conferencing features, you can message me or through the chat function. It would actually probably be sent one to everybody, but you can also send it to just me. I hope asking you to please keep on asking technical issues and keep any federal issues or substantive issues to the actual recording. As Kate said, the Zoom meeting is being recorded and streamed live via Orca Media. Turning on your video is optional. All public testimony will be taken verbally and please keep your microphone on mute when you're not speaking to reduce background noise. If you're participating by phone, you can use star six that allows you to mute through Zoom and we'll actually see the little image that shows that you're muted. If you sign in, you're not on right now. Right now, we don't have any members of the public other than an applicant. But if somebody does sign in and wants to talk on a particular matter, let us know what that is when you log in. Or I'll assume it's the only application we have on tonight, but you never know. And you can raise your hand if you're on the phone using star nine. I'm going to skip over some of that participation information. Do a quick little thing for anybody watching via Orca Media. This link here will take you to the city's agenda and meeting materials website. And you can use that page to navigate down to tonight's meeting and pull up all of the agenda materials that were submitted ahead of the hearing as of last Thursday. In the event, the public is unable to access this meeting. And I find out about it, which will probably be an email. It will be continued to a time and place certain. If you're having connectivity issues, try turning off your video or closing other applications that will sometimes then let the sound come through better. And again, if you're having screen share issues watching the screen share, you can use this link to get to the same materials that we're all looking at. Please note that all votes taken during this meeting will be done by roll call. I'll hand this back over to the chair. Very good. Thank you, Meredith. So what I would like to, Meredith, would this be a good time for you to make me host and peek at the other meeting while we're doing the approval of the agenda in the minutes? I should, if there was anybody there in the waiting room, I would be happy to do that. I'm sorry, I didn't realize that was on mute. Yes. That's okay. I saw your hand. And you have people waiting for you because that meeting again was supposed to start five minutes ago. I understand. Okay. All right. We'll rely on those emails from Zoom to let you know if there's someone in a different meeting. Okay, I'll carry on. So the next item on our agenda is the approval of the agenda. Is there a motion to approve the agenda as printed? Motion by Kevin. Oh, is that a motion, Kevin? It is. I'm sorry. I didn't realize your hand. And is that a second from Roger? Yes, second. Very good. Is there any discussion? I'll call the roll. Kevin? Yes. Joe? Yes. Rob? Yes. Roger? Yes. Michael? Yes. I also vote yes. So we've approved the agenda. Thank you. There are no comments from the chair, which is the next agenda item. So we'll move on to reviewing and approving the minutes of January 19th. The last time we met, it's been a while. Oh, that has been a while. Are there any changes to the minutes as printed? Okay. Is there a motion to approve the minutes of January 19th as printed? So moved. Motion by Roger. Second by Rob. Thank you. We'll call the roll. Kevin? Yes. Joe? Yes. Rob? Yes. Roger? Yes. Michael? Yes. And I vote yes as well. So we've adopted the minutes of our last meeting. Very good. Thank you. With that, we will move on to our first and only application for the day, which is for 54 Liberty Street, a proposal to build a new garage. And we are reviewing it for slopes, the slopes provision of our zoning bylaw as well as because of the request for a nine foot retaining wall, which is over what we would, what is the standard amount. So usually I hand it over to Meredith and she gives a summary and then will I'll hand it over to you. I'll swear you in and have you tell us a little about the project, then we'll walk through the staff report. All right? Good. Great. And I'm, my view of the screen is telling me that the only person here to be heard on this is, is well. As of now, Don was trying to get in, but it's just on standby. I mean, I pretty much cover everything. Okay. All right. Very good. We'll stay tuned for Don if necessary. All right, Meredith, is there anything you want to add? I mean, steal your thunder there with that. Okay. I mean, as you said, the main issue here is steep slopes. I did get some clarifying information that belts going to bring in. And I'm going to suggest that maybe he try and bring in at the beginning of his discussion, including about the height of the retaining wall, because it appears I may have misread the engineering drawings about that wall. And we will and I weren't able to figure that out between the two of us and email. So that's one thing to note. And yeah, I mean, steep slopes are the main thing that I've highlighted in my staff report. There are a few other questions here and there. But I think that with the new information will is going to provide that he'll clear up a lot of those situations, those questions. Great. Okay. Thank you. So Will, what I'll do next is swear you in. If you wouldn't mind please raising your right hand. Okay. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth under the pains and penalties of perjury? Yes. Thank you. All right, please go ahead and introduce the project and Meredith referenced some some new information about the retaining wall height. Are you also going to be presenting information now about the post construction grades that the Department of Public Works asked about? Yeah, I mean, I think there's some of that that is addressed in the staff report that essentially we're sort of really not changing any grades. We're kind of just the bill side is sort of maintaining his current status. We're just shifting, you know, taking apart a completely failed garage, shifting it over to within the setbacks and sort of bringing the existing natural grades back to sort of the way they were, sort of having a routine parking area on the west side of the garage. I think the main element that Meredith was mentioning about the retaining wall is that it's a nine foot wide retaining wall, not necessarily a nine foot tall. It'll sort of step down and sort of wrap around as needed. So that parking space is, you know, eight feet wide by 18. I think forget what this specifics is, but, you know, enough per the zoning regulations for the appropriate size. I can share my screen if I can here. Let's see. Does that work? Could I just ask a quick question before we can continue? Sure, Kevin. Yeah. Is there an existing garage that's going to be removed? It is very failed. Yeah. Okay. I just wanted to clarify that. Okay. That's it. Pretty much tucked right up to the property line, you know, to the point where the concrete contractor advised me not to stand in there. Right. Can you all see this being here? Yeah, I just have another question here before we get started. Do you think that you could send this to Meredith and have her send it around? I did send it to Meredith. Okay. The most recent, you know, there's been a lot of blue of different. I don't know. It just might be easier for all of us to be looking at the same thing when it's not being shared. Yeah. Yeah. I did. I did email Meredith this, you know, final updated site plan. But yeah, it shows the location of the garage, you know, essentially footprint foundation 26 wide by 22 deep. You know, parking for one car. Yeah. And then. Yeah, this is the retaining wall area on the side of the, on the property, the west side, whereas this is the retaining wall that will sort of be stepping down. Sort of capture that slope. But other than that, you know, as you can see this, sort of the existing grades will sort of be, you know, return naturally. And so, you know, I think that's the reason why we're doing this. We're doing this. We're doing this with this retaining wall and the step foundation. So we're not really changing any of these things. Other than what's necessary for construction. So may I just restate that and make sure I understand it. So the place where the. New garage is going. It's currently sloped. But you're making it. You're making it flat for the garage. No. I think that at the north side of the garage will be a full nine, you know, full retaining wall part of the foundation, then it will step down to be sort of at grade on the front side. This, this will help you sort of clarify it a little bit better. Okay. You can see the sort of stepped up hillside here. And then this is, you know, quite cool. Conceptual. Retaining wall showing how it sort of keys into the hillside. And so. Okay. I believe that the. One of the application. Papers shows the existing condition of the garage and how it's being in the hillside. Some, some existing site photos. Okay. Good. Well, that, that helps us get oriented. Is there any other overview you'd like to provide or other images that you want to share to. Orient us further before we dive into the zoning criteria. I mean, I think here's the another document that was provided from the homeowners that shows the 2004. DPW permit for connecting the, you know, this is, this is sort of related to Kurt's main comment. And so his comments were from the sort of the first round. I mean, the back story is this project was supposed to happen last year and then obviously delayed for a year. So there's comments were in relation to the, the first draft of the site plan. And mainly the storm water from the patio and then the gutter down spells. Tying into an existing footer drain for the house. So we got the DPW documents in 2004. With Tom McCartle signature. And the conditions for inspection to connect to the storm water system. So I also emailed this to Meredith as well. So this is now part of the official record. But we will be dealing with that appropriately. And that's, that's popular way. Okay. So what you, sorry, what you were showing us from 2004 was it, was that a permit or an application for a permit? This was an approved. Okay. Here's the very instruction and access permit. Okay. The previous owner. With a contractor and scope of work, you know, connecting to the CD 28. I'm assuming that's the. Stormwater. Laboring. Manhole. Yeah. Do not inspect until DPW inspection. Okay. Well, let's talk about. Let's talk about that a little more when we get to the stormwater criteria in case there are circumstances that lead to a reevaluation of the way stormwater sandaled here, 16 years on. There may or may not be. Okay. So here's site plan. Great. All right. So any question, any of the questions from board or board members just general orientation before we dive in and see Rogers got his hands up. Yes. Thank you, Kate. Thank you. Thank you. This may not be relevant to the particulars of the ordinance, but looking at those pictures that those images that we'll put up on the screen, it kind of looked like if you back out of the garage in the wrong way, you're going to come crashing down into a much lower area. Is that, I mean, is that it? I'm just kind of curious about that. Looking at the picture. Yeah. Yeah. Let's get access and circulation. Yeah, let's get our bearings. You know, these are sort of conceptual. Yeah. There's an existing, you know, flat parking spot up there. These are nowhere near, you know, grade, you know, dry, you know, proposed. Grading. This is me. And then obviously I hand things off to Grenier. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Right. But if you, if you just move, move back a little bit, it looks like if you backed out of the garage. Directly. Yeah. And then you, the car would go plummeting down. Into that lower. You know, I mean, there is, there's a slight grade. I mean, but I'm simply going to be flat. And the plan would be is to create basically, and there's no way to turn around up there. You can only drive up forward and then back down. Oh, okay. I, I see the area that looks like you just plummet off. That's actually the house. Yeah. That's the house. So if I was, right, I got it. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So it's, there we go. Look on the site. Oh, okay. We're just making it a little bit more of a turn that you have to kind of get into the parking spot. This whole area right up here is essentially going to be sort of flat. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. Well, it's still a challenging drive, no matter what. Yeah. I mean, part of the reason is was that, you know, I think the homeowners a few years. Well, I don't know when it happened, but the city we graded the Liberty street sidewalk. They used to have like the bottom of their driveway was two feet higher. Yeah. A few years. And then you did the sidewalk and it dropped it down. So the driveway got even steeper. So. It's, it's challenging. I mean, it's not unusual for a month failure. Yeah. All right. Very good. Well, thank you. With that, let's, let's turn to the staff report. Will have you gotten a copy of the staff report? I have. Okay. Meredith is very good about doing that, but I always like to ask anyway. So what, what I would like to do, and I want to check with my fellow board members. I would like to. Let's go to the view where we can all see each other. Because we all have the staff report. Since we're mostly looking at section three thousand and seven and section, and then the special use standards for the, for the tall wall. I'd like to start with those two questions. And then we can go back and get any additional information we need for the other criteria. Does that, does that work for other board members? That works for me. Okay. I think that's a very rational way to go about it. Okay. Good. All right. There we all are. Thank you. Okay. So, um, Let's look. I'm sorry. I'm using two computers here. Um, We're going to start with section 30 of seven steep slopes. And in our staff report that begins on, if you're looking at just the staff report, it's page five. So, um, This has, as Meredith has summarized for us, this is, this, um, Is to make sure that we are, um, Minimize it. We have a few purposes here that we're trying to evaluate, protect public safety and property, minimize the potential for erosion, runoff, flooding, and degradation of water quality, and avoiding the increased cost of providing service to remote or difficult to access land. Okay. So we have these, um, The disturbance threshold has been met here. And that's why we're looking at an engineered plan. Um, and a hearing. So, um, The comments from Meredith, um, on page five, where the issue that I brought up earlier, which is that the proposed contours for after, um, After construction were unclear in the drawings as, as they were understood. When, when submitted. But we, we've just talked about that. So I want to, um, I want to check with board members, um, to see. If you have questions about the, the, The contours and the impact on the contours going from today state with a garage all the way scooted up to the property line. Um, to the proposed state with a garage scooted in a little bit. Um, I forget the word you asked with a stepped foundation. Um, on the. East Southeast side of it. Um, so everyone have a look at, have a look at the diagram. Are there any questions about the, what we're looking at? For change in, change in grade. So just to confirm again, the, uh, there's no grading in the driveway. Well, Because the initial plan had a proposed contours all on the driveway. I guess that's not happening. So it's just the, uh, The garage area where we're having creating. Is that correct? I mean, there is still a plan to sort of like take just the, Try to like get ever so slightly less steep incline from the street. You know, cause as I said, you know, When the city dropped that sidewalk two feet, it made their driveway significantly steeper to the point where they can't. Access with a trailer hitch. You know, bike rack or whatever. Um, so basically it's just like an ever so imperceptible, just like, You know, It's still part of the plan. And does that process involve digging up the driveway and putting it back down again? Or what, what are we looking at in terms of distance? Very, very subtle sort of scraping up the surface off. You know, there's basically just like a little high point, like up towards the house. It's really the only thing you can actually do. You know, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, it's like up towards the house. This is really the only thing you can actually do. Having looked at it with a variety of excavation contractors, you know, there's, you know, before you get, I mean, It's, it's nearly almost superficial to a certain extent. Just to make it slightly more user friendly. You know, because you can't obviously take it down to the point where it's flat because then you'd have this 12 foot wall next to the house of some sort of that you're dealing with. All right. So the next question that popped up in the initial review is DPW, DPW's concerns with the erosion prevention and sediment control plan, the EPSC plan. The question is what specifically is proposed for erosion and sedimentation control and where? And says no proposed contours are shown around the garage or the patio. We've discussed that and figured that out. The plan, we want to know more about potential stormwater impacts based on on the design. So maybe you could talk a little bit about that, Will. Well, I mean, I think, you know, for the most part, you know, as I've mentioned is that, you know, essentially, we're not necessarily changing any of the existing slopes. We're just kind of shifting the building over and keeping this hillside kind of as is for the most part. I mean, there'll be some very minor elements of change, you know, and very micro detail. But I think the biggest thing that, you know, having spoken with Kurt was really the concern of the stormwater from the roof tied into the gutter system, and then the patio. And his concern was whether or not if we link those drainage systems into the existing footer drain of the house, that he wanted to make sure that that was going to the stormwater system and not the sewer system. So we were able to clarify that with the permit, the DPW permit from 2004. So, I mean, that's his terms of the sort of, you know, the longstanding stormwater issues. And then, of course, during the construction, we'll be following all of the sort of the state of Vermont erosion and sediment control for excavation, you know, in terms of silt fence around the construction site. There will be a little bit of a challenge in terms of the driveway, you know, in terms of vehicular access up and down. I mean, obviously, they're not going to be using it while it's under construction, but in terms of, you know, construction vehicles that, you know, will have to deal with a very small just driveway with area that, you know, might be like a removable erosion control, silt fence, compost socks, straw bales type of element. But the majority of, you know, anything that's ground area will be staked in and dug proper silt fence. And I think the first, let me say the first site plan that Don provided had the details in terms of how that is done. Okay. Well, what is the the finished surface material proposed to be? For the driveway? Yes. There ideally, they would like to pave it. That would be the plan. All right. And I guess where I was going with that is, wouldn't that create more of a stormwater issue? I mean, in terms of, yeah, I mean, technically, I mean, I think, you know, from a practical standpoint, you know, whether it's like a crushed stone, stay mat driveway or paved driveway, potentially still counting as an impervious surface. You know, I mean, short of, I can't really think of anything that you would want as a driveway that would technically be permeable, especially on a slope of that nature, you know, so, you know, whether it's, you know, a final sort of crushed stone finish or pavement is still going to be impermeable technically. You know, is what are the height, what's the highest height of the proposed retaining wall to the, to the, yeah, I guess what I was getting at, where you looked at, sorry, finish your thought, Kevin, we'll get into that. Yeah, I'm just putting it out there so we can consider it. Is there, is there a potential for creating a a hazard for a kid or something that's playing in the area, you know, falling 12 feet onto a paved surface? No, I mean, I think the highest that that's going to be is, you know, it's going to, it's going to, so, you know, the north wall of the garage will be the highest sort of start point of that, you know, the actual retaining, because the retaining wall is going to be, you know, part of it is the garage, you know, retaining up the north slope of the hill, and then it sort of comes out past the garage, steps down. So it'll start, start stepping down from probably seven feet, pretty dramatically, and then it'll sort of curve around. So okay, so seven feet is okay. That seven, seven feet will sort of be like the sort of max height of that retaining wall for the parking area. Yep, okay. So I have a question, a follow-up question, you're saying that the grade is not being changed significantly, but I'm, I feel that once you put a building where there wasn't one before, isn't the water going to move differently across the site? That was where I was going. Well, there is a garage already there, so it's essentially not going to be acting that much differently than it currently is, and there's no gutters on the current garage. You know, and we're going to have obviously, you know, any sort of, you know, up slope water that's coming down to the back of the garage will be, you know, sort of hit the foundation and go down into the perimeter drains and then go to the stormwater system, you know. So really, there's, you know, and even anything that comes down from the existing slope and then it will land on the patio and then go into, as Don specks there, there'll be sort of a, you know, what does he call it technically? A yard drain. Yes, the yard drain. So anything to the sort of east of the garage will come down and sort of hit that patio. I mean, currently it just comes down and saturates into the yard or does whatever, you know. So I mean, you guys, you have the sort of proposed and the existing site plans that I provided, correct? So I mean, seriously, we're just taking a smaller garage away and then shifting a slightly larger garage over to the east a little bit more. So yeah, as constructions projects go, it's a pretty minor thing and it's pretty much like no net, no real net change, but I guess I'm just, I'm pushing a little bit to try and understand because when it comes to water flowing down a hill, six feet matters. So I just want, I know you, I know what you can see, I just try and make myself make it visual for others. Yeah, there will be some, there will be some change, you know, from what's currently there to, you know, the sort of proposed, but ultimately, I think, you know, based on my experience, you know, building on some steep sites in Montpelier as well as, you know, Don's perspective who happened, he just lives down the street. So, you know, he and I have been on site a couple of times. He doesn't see it necessarily as a major issue. As I said, you know, obviously, you know, following best practice for, you know, during construction and then making sure that we deal with, you know, any kind of more long standing stormwater issues. Okay, so I think I just heard you say that you're adding stormwater treatment in several places on the site where none currently exists. So we are seeing a net increase in the amount of, what are they called, infrastructure to treat stormwater. Is that, is that accurate? So it's going to be better than now, you know, the plan will be as it'll be, you know, better suited to handle any sort of, you know, surgeon answer or whatnot, compared to the current situation. Okay, great. Okay. Good. So I keep saying we're going to talk about steep slopes and then I talk about erosion and stormwater. It really all knits together as we do the criteria. So we're flowing like water. So what we're going to do next, was that? I think like water is the first lesson for a good builder. That's right. That's what my dad used to say about our dirt road when he was in charge of plowing it. All right. So we are going to next do our next task, which is to consider the bottom of page five in our staff report, consider the extent to which the proposed development conforms to the design standards established in section 3007H, requiring that development on steep slopes shall be safe and not have an undue adverse effect on slope stability. The development shall therefore be designed to, so we're going to go through these criteria. The first one is to limit the amount of disturbance clearing of existing natural vegetation and impervious surface in order to minimize potential for erosion, stormwater runoff, flooding and water quality impairment. So we've just talked a lot about that. Do board members have any more questions or clarifications on that one? Okay. The next is that we're not, we, this is, we may not create slopes steeper than 30% and the diagram show that none are being created because that spot where the parking space is going is where the building used to be, right? So no new digging out to make that. Three, preserve distinctive natural features, the general topography of the site and existing natural vegetation. I guess we haven't talked too much about vegetation. Could you just tell us very briefly, Will? Is there vegetation? Is it being removed? Are things being replanted? Yeah. I mean, there's a few trees that will be taken down sort of to the north of the existing garage that just, there's no way to be able to sort of keep them in terms of proper excavation for the size of the footings that are going to be on that north wall. So yeah, it's, I mean, sort of like, you know, some very minor shrubs, two to three trees, nothing's being removed. You know, obviously grass, but you know, that will all be replanted in due time. All right. Questions from board members about that one? All right. So then the next standard is that it must, the project must maintain or reduce the preexisting rate and retain the pattern of stormwater runoff leaving the property. And I think we've just had a good discussion about how that is being managed. Okay. Produce a final grade that is compatible with the surrounding natural terrain. We've discussed how that is the case. Create a harmonious transition between graded slopes and the natural terrain. Do other, do people have questions about that? Um, yeah, Rob. Yeah, I think it's really just checking a box in the steep sows rags, but showing the proposed contours in the area of the retaining wall. I'm just not really seeing them unless I'm missing something on the new site plan here. Let's take a look. Right. So what you're looking at is the, are you looking at in on hat on the left half of the parking space, we see some contour lines and on the right half, we don't. Is that what you're referring to, Rob? Right. Nice to know if there was any grading that's going to happen on the other side of that wall on the west side of the wall. Maybe will. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, there will be, you know, the hillside returning into that steps. Um, you know, I mean, the looking at the site plan, you know, provided by Grenier, it makes it look significantly more dramatic than it actually is in reality. Um, the last time I was up there with Lucas Gendron looking at the foundation, it was much more modest looking. But yes, we will be, you know, just to sort of pop you back in here. That you're saying this area right here, you know, coming into that stepped wall, correct? Well, can you share your screen so that you can show us with your, I didn't hit the share button. There we go. I had it selected, but this area right here is what you're concerned with, Rob, right? Yeah, I mean, I just, I, yeah, I mean, I think that and then also this, well, the same thing on the other side of the garage. Yeah, I mean, it's essentially just the sort of, you know, just keen into the hillside sort of, you know, the existing slopes were not necessarily going to be changing them. It's just kind of talk to the building in and the slopes in their natural form will, for the most part, plus or minus, you know, some detail, but, you know, we're not necessarily creating any new slopes, you know, it's just we're just the hillside, the building is going tucked into the hillside. Well, a related question that I would have is on the east side of the stepped retaining wall, which we're looking at. Thank you for pulling that up. I can't quite describe what I'm looking at, but it looks like if I'm reading my contours right, can that be erased on the final plan because it looks like it's hilly on the left side of your car and flat on the right? That's definitely something I can bring up with Don. Thank you. Yeah, because that's going to be flat. Yeah, thought so. There will be weird slope parking area. Right, this isn't an off-road vehicle dealership where we have to show what the car can do in the long run, more keep our car on flat ground wherever possible. All right, yeah, thanks for writing that up. That would be helpful. Yeah, so basically right there, but yeah, essentially, I mean, the hillside is just going to sort of die into that stepped wall right there. Same on this side as well. Great. Yeah, I think like on the other, since you are really creating a contour, I think it'd be helpful maybe show some more elevations on that wall because that is essentially your proposed contour. I'm just, all I'm doing is, you know, it seems like a good project. I'm just looking at the regs for the engineer plan report and it's, you know, number one is existing in proposed grades just to make sure that for consistency that that box is effectively checked. Yeah. Yep. Nope. Thank you, Rob. That's a good eye and important detail. I mean, if someone else comes back to work on this in another 17 years, the discussion has been captured. That's important. Great. All right. So let's move on to the next standard then. Avoid creating continuous unbroken slopes or linear slopes. We've shown how that's done to a minimal degree. Contour graded slopes by varying the slope increment to produce a final grade that undulates both vertically and horizontally. And I think we've shown that that is the case. Does anyone have questions about that? Nope. Okay. Very cut and fill banks and terraces to produce a final grade that has visual interest and allows for naturalistic landscaping. No cut and fill banks or terraces are being created. Consider the use of retaining walls and terracing rather than cut and fill banks. And indeed that has been considered at the back of the garage as well as to the west of the parking spot. Vary the pad elevations on sites with multiple structures, not applicable. Provide roads and drives that follow existing contours. We're not creating new roads. Use compact building forms or multi-story buildings to minimize building footprint. This is a compact form for a garage that mimics the existing one. Split or multi-level building forms, not applicable. So that brings us through our steep slopes standards. Are there any last questions? We've had a good discussion. I appreciate that. Are there any other questions about those standards? No. Okay. Great. All right. Thanks, everybody. So that was that was one big thing. Let's move then to the special use standards. And our evaluation of the special use standards begins on the bottom of page eight and top of page nine. So we haven't encountered special use standards too too much as a group. So I just want to remind you and those who are listening that the special use standards are supplemental requirements that come into play when a particular use is proposed in any zoning district. The standards are about the use, not about the location of where it's taking place. So in this case, the special use that we're talking about is a fence proposed to be over six feet high. And that fence that we're talking about is the retaining wall over by the parking area. And Will, I think you said to us that it's nine feet wide, but you expect it to be about seven feet tall maximum at its highest. Oh, I think you're on mute, Will. There we go. You know, I think it's it's hard to say exactly like the precise site and a lot of it has to do with sort of how the sort of final game behind that on that north wall will be. But essentially, you know, let me, whoops, wrong one. Have you seen the right screen? We're seeing, we're seeing your page. Yeah. There we go. Can you see that now? Yes. Yes. Yeah. So I mean, this corner here would be the highest point and then it would step down in this direction and then also step down in this direction. So what do you think it'd be the maximum or I mean, there must be a range within which you expect this to fall. Could you let us know what that expected? I would say between seven and nine in height. Hard to say. I mean, it's engineered to be a nine foot wall in the back of the garage, you know, and whether it steps two feet right at this corner down to seven and then steps down and wraps around or if it comes out two feet at nine feet and then steps down to 10 feet, you know, those details are somewhat verify and field, you know, it's engineered to be nine feet tall all the way across if it needs to be. But I doubt based on my observations of the existing site conditions that that will be the case. So it's going to be a very tight wall going from starting at nine and stepping all the way down to zero over the course of 16 feet, you know, nine foot linear and then another. All right, thank you. So the the thing we need to find as a board is walls, walls shall not exceed the exceed a height of six feet unless approved by the board under the regulations for buffering. Sorry, I need to pull up the standards here. Am I missing the standards with the in them? On page nine of the staff report. Yeah. So wall, like I said, walls in the side of your yard shall not exceed a height of six feet unless and the first of the three options for unless is approved by the board or required under the regulations for buffer screening or security purposes. So there is a very general board allowed to approve a higher side or rear wall without any other qualifiers. So we don't have to find that certain standards are matter certain conditions are met in order to approve. It's just pure board discretion. Pretty much. That's what it appears to be. And I think it goes back to the purposes of this whole provision, right? But yeah, the sub part one of the exception of the unless is approved by the board, especially, you know, when you're when you're considering a steep slope situation, my thought is because they're connected and you have engineering behind it that that may be a way to help the board figure out the answer to that question. Okay. Yes. This is probably the only section in the zoning where we don't have standards to follow. Which is fine. I mean, just different. There's very other very specific allowances, I think. But also because I think a fence would be different than a retaining wall. And that might be one reason there's so much discretion in that first space. Right. I mean, it's good that it's that it's worded like this. It gives us the ability to to be flexible and to for projects to, you know, be flexible as well. So yeah. So this is a different situation than say, if it's in a front yard, like we've talked about before, or a fence that has a screening purpose, like we've talked about before, we're talking about a retaining wall that's part of a part of a larger project. So do board members have any questions or concerns about approving this exception to the height limit? Well, I just just my concern was that, you know, if you have a nine foot wall in a paved area down below and kids in the neighborhood, it's just that you're going to want to be the cognizant of that and plan for, you know, having some sort of barrier. So, you know, a little tight isn't going to go, you know, tumbling head over heels. Yep. I speak from personal experience. Tumbling tikes. We've seen it happen. We've seen it happen. Speaking as someone who has a how tall is that while outside my house, so it's probably at least 15 or 20 feet tall. Okay. Okay. That's 16, Kate. It's what? At least 16 feet. So is the, is the water intended to flow like over the face of the wall or is it going to be also captured by the footing drain? That's going to be captured by the footing drain. There'll be probably a eight inch minimum from the top of wall to grade. So any downslope will just go down and then just flow out. All right. Well, I think we can see how this wall at its, at its increased height serves the project. Is there anything else we want to discuss about this? No? Okay. We won't spend any more time there than necessary. Great. Okay. So what I'd like to do now is just kind of go back and go through as we, as we always do and confirm that folks have what they need to know regarding the other standards, most of which, according to the staff report up here to be met. So we'll go back to page three of the staff report, starting with our general standards, our use standards, single family is allowed and the use isn't changing. So that standard is met. 3002, 3003 are dimensional standards and accessory structures, setbacks, things like that. The question in here is, could you tell us where the final, I think you sent us this, well, because you sent us the site plan, we have the final garage. It's 22 by 26. That's, that's the foundation footprint. There's roof overhangs that, you know, make it to some odd actual dimensions. Okay. In terms of the actual square footage. Yeah, for Pervious calculation. Yeah. You know, as it is, you're at 32% in Pervious, it can go up to 50%. So I think, I think I would just ask that, you don't have to do the math this second, but on the final site plan, please include the coverage with the overhang. Yeah. I mean, I had it shown at 750 square feet. Okay. Okay, with the overhang. Yeah. Okay. So what Meredith raised in which I know we're getting to bottom of is just reconciling the different parts of the application and make sure we know we're talking about here. Okay. 750. Very good. Better to have more than not enough. Yeah. Yep. Sure. All right. So next, well, I do have one question about the setbacks and the uses. This one's for Meredith. I believe that at first I found myself wondering, are we allowed to have a parking space in the side setback? And then I saw the part of the regulation that said parking for residential purposes is allowed any place where there is a legal driveway. And so I believe that this parking space falls under within the legal driveway area. Is that your take on it, Meredith? That is my take on it. So a few, a couple of revisions back in the regulations, there used to be like surface parking or I think parking was listed in our accessory use table where we talk about dimensions. And it was allowed, I think it was allowed up to the property line at that point. I am honestly not quite sure why that got taken out of there. But I think that we look at it as part of the driveway here because it is a residential driveway. Okay. Just wanted to be extra sure about that and have that discussion on the record. Thank you. Great. Okay. So then we're moving into 3004, which is the demolition permit and the details that we received in the staff report showed that the demolition will be undertaken in accordance with the regs and things will be removed from the site within 60 days. As far as riparian areas and wetlands or vernal pools, these are not found on the site or within 800 feet. So those criteria are met. We've discussed steep slopes. Any last questions about steep slopes? Nope. Nope. All right. Well, I guess I hate to keep being a bit harsh, but yeah. So I mean, it just sort of looks like from the new site plan that any work done in the driveway, even if it's going to be mescal, you know, won't be disturbing steep slopes. I think there was an initial figure that was put forward that showed slopes greater than 30% in the driveway in that area of being being graded. But it appears that maybe there's a more recent survey that generated the contours for this new site plan because they are different. And so I just sort of like to check the box that there is no disturbance of steep slopes on the driveway, which appears to be what you're conveying here. Yeah, keep remembering that button. Grenier was out there recently doing some field surveying to just to sort of reconcile the LiDAR data with what was actually, you know, which is a little bit, you know, it's yeah, I'm not sure in terms of if they did, because Don did do some driveway sort of proposed grading. I mean, I think whether one of the site plans that you have, not the most recent one, he had some more accurate detail. But um, yeah, Matt, as far as the steep slopes and looking at the original slope map, it does show some steep slopes on the driveway. Do you think it would be possible to have that integrated into the plan documents, the site plan, any, any new information about driveway slopes? Yeah, I mean, I think we can we can get that. As I said, it's going to be very, very minor change if there's much change at all that can happen ultimately, yeah, due to the need, what's existing conditions and connecting point A to point B. All right, thanks. Thanks. Is that good, Rob? Yeah, sounds good. Thanks. All right, so that's steep slopes, erosion control section 3008 we've discussed. Are there any other questions? Similarly, stormwater management. Okay, great. So we haven't we've talked a little bit about access and circulation, making sure that it's safe to come and go and move within the site. We understand better now how vehicles going to get in and out. Are there and it's an existing access onto a town road? Any questions about this? No. We do note that, as you know, will work within the city right away will require the construction and access permits. So that's on your list. Parking and loading areas. You said that the parking space is eight feet by 18 feet. Let's see here. Yeah, I mean, it's definitely, it's been a while since sitting in your shoes, but I do recall that I designed it to the zoning regulated parking requirements. Excellent. Excellent. Nine by 18 or eight by 18? Eight and a half by 18. Thanks, Marius. Eight and a half. Yes, eight and a half by 18 is the standard parking space size. I think I always just default to nine feet for ease. Yeah. And that's a used to be nine feet wide used to be the standard, but they bumped it down to eight and a half when they rewrote the regs in 2018. All right. Great. And Meredith, do we need that labeled on the site plan? I think that would be helpful because it's not actually in there and it's sometimes tricky to check with the scale. Okay. So that's just another little tweak. Great. So then moving on to the special use standards, we've discussed the height of the wall. Are there other questions from the board about this project before we deliberate? Okay. So based on what we talked about, I noted four little tweaks to the site plan. I want to make sure I got this right. One is what we just talked about by adding the dimensions of the parking space. Another is to add any data obtained in the field reconciling with the lidar with the site conditions. Making note of the existing and proposed contours as we've talked about. And then tidying up the parking spot and the stepped wall to show that the parking spot is going to be flat and making the wall part of the contour. Does that sound right to board members? It does. Yes. And to the applicant. Well, on the last part, that's also inside the proposed garage, the same contour issue. Yeah. Thank you. Yes. Okay. Great. All right. Thank you. Good discussion. With that, I will, we have been during, as we've been working on Zoom, we have, during our time working on Zoom, we've been deliberating in a closed deliberative session. And we've been doing that for all applications, regardless of how simple or complex they are. So when we move into deliberative session, it is not a comment on the quality or acceptability of the project. It is simply our process until the end of DRB by Zoom. Nor the complexity of the project. I would also add to that. That's right. It's typically with the old protocol. If it was more complicated, then it can simply be ascertained that the public hearing, we would vote on it in open session. That's right. We hope to return to that at some point soon. But so with that, I will accept a motion to close the hearing on this application. I always get this wrong, don't I? To close the public portion of the hearing on this application and move to deliberate and deliberative session when the public meeting is adjourned. That's spot on, Kate. And I'll make that motion. Thank you, Kevin. Is there a second? Second. Second from Rob. Is there any discussion? Okay, I'll call the roll. Kevin? Yes. Joe? Yes. Rob? Yes. Roger? Yes. Michael? Yes. And I also vote yes. Very good. Thank you. Thank you very much, Will. Good to see you. And we'll have information in written form when the decision is written up as soon as we can. All right. See you later. All right, folks. In the other business category, our next meeting is March 15th. And Meredith, is there any other business? No, I don't. Oh, yes, actually sort of there is. So this past Wednesday, the City Council approved changes to the zoning ranks. So I will be sending those around. It's, as I said at the beginning of staff report, nothing that impacted tonight's hearing. The changes in large part had to do with tidying up residential zoning uses. We had to make some changes to anything to do with accessory dwelling units due to some changes at the statute, the state level. And while we were doing that, we just cleaned up some definitions to make the different categories of residential uses clearer so that and also to avoid places where we had gaps where we had some special uses defined in Chapter 310 that weren't listed in the use table. And it wasn't clear maybe how you looked at them for density or it wasn't even clear what zoning districts they were allowed in. So there's been a lot of tweaks to fix that. And there were a few other adjustments. I will be circulating a new copy of those ranks, but I'll also send you the final summary that is a red line to show exactly what things were changed. I don't think it's really going to change our jobs that much other than it'll make it easier on the administrative end before it even gets to you to figure out where things fall. Meredith, can you just quickly summarize what the state changes were that impacted the effort to change ours? So the state changes had to do with accessory dwelling units and not allowing barring certain restrictions. So we had to change, I think it was the minimum size for or a max size for an accessory dwelling unit. I can't remember it all because Mike leads those. And then there was also a situation where towns are no longer allowed to sorry let me restart. We can no longer consider character of the neighborhood when looking at I think it's one and two dwelling unit uses, which basically means we had to change the uses. Anything that was a conditional use, any district that had one and two dwelling units as conditional uses, that's wiped out now because the only difference with conditional use in general for those was character of the neighborhood. That was the new thing that was being thrown in that wasn't considered otherwise. So one and two dwelling units will be permitted uses, meaning administrative site plan, administrative approval in all zoning districts now. If anyone's interested in diving in it's act number 179 from last year. Thanks Kate. Mike usually handles those types of things and it just flows down to me and I don't need to keep it all in my head. But there's a good, there's a decent summary on the city's website. And yes, that link, that'll make it into the record of this public meeting. Very good. All right. Thank you. Is there any other other business or announcements? Okay. Next we will move into deliberative session. We've had the motion to do that. We have the link in our email inboxes from Meredith. So is there a motion to close the public meeting and move to the deliberative session? Is that right? Just close the public meeting. That's right. Okay, fine. I need the motion. I was waiting for somebody else to go. Motion by Kevin. I'll second. Second by Roger. All right. We'll take, is there any discussion? All right then. Kevin. Yes. Joe. Yes. Rob. Yeah. Roger. Yes. Michael. Yes. And myself, Kate, I vote yes. Very good. Let's rejoin. Let's go straight to the deliberative session. I'll see you there. Thank you all for attending and for all to who participated or watched. And we'll see you next time. Thank you. Meredith, you've sent us a link. Yeah, it should be in your email. Okay. Thank you.