 I am going to call this meeting of the City of Montpelier Development Review Board to order. It is April 5th, 2021. My name is Kate McCarthy and I serve as Chair of the DRB. And I'm here with, with many others. I'll start by introducing the other members. Rob. Oh. Oh, good one. Kevin O'Connell is our Vice Chair. Kevin. Michael Lazorcheck. Hello. Good evening, Michael. And we are supported by Zoning Administrator, Meredith Crandall, who is here with us staffing the meeting. Hello. And in introducing our members, I'll next say hello to Abby White, DRB member, hi, Abby. And then we are recorded this evening by Orca Media for folks playing along at home. Thank you for being here. All right. The next step, next item in our agenda is our remote meeting procedures for which I turn it to Meredith. You're muted, Meredith. Give me one second. The Design Review Committee meeting went to the, just about the last minute and I've got to open up my little document for anybody that's following it. Oh. Yeah. And while you're doing that, I will preview a little bit what we are doing this evening and I'll reiterate it later too for anyone who's watching, we will not be reviewing any applications this evening, but we will be doing an exercise as a board to provide insight into the way for ourselves and for anyone who's watching to provide insight into the way the applications are reviewed and the types of things that are evaluated. People who've watched our meetings can see some of that, but this will be to take a step further in so that we can understand how and just workshop a little together about how to look at applications. So, all right, Meredith is going to give us our overview. Okay. So, all right, for anybody who is viewing this meeting via the Orca Media, you can participate in this board meeting via the Zoom platform. So, to do that, you can use this link here and plug that into the browser and that'll bring you directly into the Zoom meeting waiting room and then I'll admit you. You can also call this phone number and plug in this meeting ID and then you'll be able to participate by phone if you want. Now, as Kate said, there are no actual applications for tonight. So there's no public testimony, there's nothing, no specific projects to comment on, but if you want to call in and be part of the sort of mock review process, feel free to give a call. If you're trying to access the meeting and you're having problems, please email me here. If anybody, I mean, it's all board members right now, but if anybody is on per usual, if you're having problems, please use the chat function to chat with me about it. And then we have no applications, this Zoom meeting is still being recorded and streamed live. So, I'm going to skip over some stuff. I think well, if we have any members of the public come in, then we'll go through the other items for them about muting your microphone. And then for anybody at home, if anybody is trying to get in and is emailing me and having problems and for some reason they can't get in because it is a public meeting, if the public can't attend, then we'll have to continue it to a time and place certain. I'll now hand this back over to Kate. I mean, I guess technically I still say all roll call, all votes will be taken by roll call because we have a couple of things for that. Thank you, Meredith. All right. Appreciate that overview. So, the next item on our agenda is the approval of the agenda, which we will do by roll call. And I will take a motion to approve the agenda. I'll move. Motion by Kevin. Okay. Second by Rob. Any discussion? Okay. I'll call the roll. Kevin. Hi. Rob. Yes. Michael. Yes. Abby. Yes. And I also vote yes. And we've approved our agenda. Thank you. All right. The next item on the agenda is comments from the chair. I have two comments. One. Roger Kranz has served on the DRB for 16 years on and off and has been a great presence. He has decided to not renew his term with the DRB, but I want to publicly. And. Sincerely say thank you to Roger for being a part of this board. I really enjoy serving with Roger. He's been a huge help to me as I've learned things and a good study presence. So thank you Roger for being part of this board. Give you a round of applause if we were in a room made some noise, but as it is, thank you. I just want to second that Roger has been a great asset through the years and he'll be sorely missed. Thanks, Kevin. So that brings me to part two, which is there is an opening on the development review board for a regular spot. We're going to talk a little bit more about that. And then we're going to talk a little bit more about how people make decisions. Someone who comes to each meeting as much as they can. And this is an excellent chance to get involved in the community. It's an excellent chance to get a close up view of how people make decisions about investing in Montpelier. About how people work together to make projects that are compatible and advance our community's vision. And about how we, as, as residents can help each other by getting involved in the community. So if any of those things are interesting to you and you'd like to support them, please do consider getting involved. And for information, you can either email Meredith, or you can look on the city website. There is a form that you fill out in order to get involved. Tell your friends. All right. Those are the announcements from the chair. So next what we have is the meeting minutes of March 15th. So we have Rob, Michael. Abby and myself. Eligible to vote. So is there a motion to approve the minutes as printed from March 15th, 2021. So moved. Motion by Rob second by Abby. Great. Thank you. I'll call the roll of those eligible to vote to approve the minutes. Rob. Yes. Michael. Yes. Abby. Yes. And I vote yes. So we've approved the minutes. Thank you. All right. So with that, we are going to shift to our business of the evening, which is a training session. And as I mentioned at the outset, and I'll say again, for the benefit of anyone tuning in, this is something that we decided to do after talking with a couple of DRB members. And we've also done a couple of different things that we've done in the past. So we've done a couple of different things that we've done and walked through an application without a decision on the line. But to understand how determinations are made about what type of review is undertaken. How we evaluate the compatibility of different uses in different parts of the city, depending on the zoning district. And how we, how we think about steep slopes, how we think about natural resources. These are all things that come up again and again. So we've done a couple of different things that we've done in the past. And we've done a couple of different things that we've done in the past. So determinations would, would serve us well as a group. So I'm going to let Meredith give us a good orientation to what we're doing. I think she had fun putting this together. So I don't want to steal any thunder. But my goal, if it works for the rest of you is for this to be approximately a one hour exercise. If we're really into it, we can keep going. And I think what we're doing, I think the best way to do this is that compatible Meredith, with what you envision. Yeah. I mean, this is, it's also, it's, you know, for the different parts. Board members may want to just fly through them or pick different areas that they really want to focus on. I think that makes a lot of sense. Okay. And recognizing that this, um, that because this is a training exercise, we may have prepared in a different way for this meeting than when there's an actual hearing. So I think that's the best way to do this. And for the benefit of, of anyone who's watching. Yeah. I think part of the, the putting pieces up, I'm not sure. I'm not sure how much at home people get to see the individual things when I'm not talking. But we will do our best. Okay. Take it away, Meredith. Um, so, you know, I provided sort of a stuff overview of how I was thinking about this going, you know, you know, you know, I really tried to start this off with some just basic questions, the basic questions that as staff, um, Audra Brown and I look to, when we're first looking at an application, these are the big picture questions that really come up all the time that you have to look through to figure out how you're going to deal with an application. Um, so it's really looking at, you know, your classification of the parcel, both with regard to zoning district and other big picture issues. Um, the design review is a historic, um, those are first tier things that you really need to look at. Um, then of course you need to go to the uses that somebody's asking to, to put onto a parcel. Are they uses that even appear on the table of uses? Cause sometimes they don't, sometimes it's some completely undefined use and you have to take a look at that. Luckily, we don't have to do that with this mock one I pulled up. Um, but then you look at, you know, the different types of applications that you're going to be able to really dig deep into. Um, You know, and then you start digging into the natural resources and slopes. What's present on the parcel. How's that going to impact the application? Um, I'm not going to go through everything, but you saw that at the beginning of my little overview. Um, I included some information here. Like the, you know, the legal framework, the applicability. Um, there is a definition of development in the zoning regulations. If there is a project that comes before us and it doesn't fit into that development, it never hits the zoning regulations at all. Um, and we was just an example and this is something that we recently changed the zoning regulations on. I had somebody come to me. And I was like, I was like, oh, that's deep slopes. This is going to, you know, this is, and it's going to be on, uh, uh, commercial property. So that site plan. And then I went back to that development definition. Our old definition of development. Didn't include just cutting trees, even if it was on super, super steep slopes. Cause just cutting the trees. So we had to change the definition of development to make sure we're capturing places where somebody might even want to clear cut a steep slope. They could go in by hand and do it with a chainsaw, cut the whole thing down. And we would have never been able to do anything about it. Um, which clearly was not the intended purpose of purpose. When you dig down into what the steep slopes provision says. So that's sort of the definition of development. So that's sort of the, just when you're looking at, at projects, ever, That's sort of the first bucket. Everything has to get in there before it can go into any of these other specific buckets. Um, So. Do we want to just start digging into the actual application here? Yeah, let's, let's start as though we're at the beginning of a hearing and you're giving us an overview of what's going on. Yeah, let's, let's start as though we're at the beginning of a hearing and you're giving us an overview of what has been brought before us and what the applicant is requesting. Okay. So, which of course is. So first I have a question. Real quick. Is this, this is an actual project from, from a few years back. Am I correct? Yes. So this is an actual project. Um, that went for the board right after the 2018 adoption. Right. That, that was my understanding. So I just wanted to clarify that. Yep. So we've had, you know, if there've been changes to the regulations since then tweaks and adjustments. So the analysis isn't a hundred percent the same as it was when it first went before the board. Um, But we wanted to sort of bring it back. Um, we've had, we have a lot of new members that never saw this application and it was a good sort of complex application that came before the board a few years ago. Right. Um, so. In general. Um, what we have here, um, is a applicant who is proposing to build a. Um, the, um, three thousand seven hundred square foot. Um, as they describe it timber framing shop. Um, and there's going to be an attached office swing in there. That's a little over five close to six hundred square feet. Right. And they're going to include a horseshoe driveway. So that has two access points. So that's something that the DRB has to approve. Um, and in addition to that enclosed area, we also have a, um, a shop for having materials that need to be worked on in the shop or the have already sort of kits of things that have already been built, but they're waiting to be shipped off to the location. Um, and the application also includes a 24 by 40 foot equipment shed. Um, so. You know, this is, it includes a conditional use. So it was categorized when it came before the board the first time. Um, I'm sorry, not late, late. Oh, what are they saying here? Um, late industry I think is how it was the old, old, um, the old use. So this is actually under our current regs. An ag enterprise or something. No, no, it's late manufacturing. Um, what I wanted to throw out there is whether or not it fits under the, the, the rural, is it, sorry, I threw it in here. I'm not that's prepared because, Hey, I didn't do a whole. Oh, Oh, thing. Um, yeah, there was a. Interesting. One that we've never worked with before. Rural enterprise. Rural enterprise. Yeah. That was a no question. I know that the board hasn't ever looked at the rural enterprise before. And I didn't know if it was something to talk about. Yeah. So let me, let me read that. Um, because. You know, when, when an application comes in, it's typically the zoning administrator who makes a determination about what the use is. But, um, There, there may be different uses considered or you may have an applicant who says, no, no, I think this is more of a, you know, to talk about what the use is. So rural enterprise means a business that supports economically viable farm and forest lands in the city and region by adding value to local farmer, forest products. Direct marketing of local farmer, forest products, engaging in agritourism or agro education or offering goods or services needed for farming and forestry. So it does talk, it talks about value added products. So that could be wood processing. definition it could very well have been that or light manufacturing. Is there wood from Vermont? Is that where their where their harvest is from? I think that's something that we would need to dig down on yeah here's the the definition the full definition right yeah um and then you know one of the things offering goods or services needed for farming or forestry that's not what we're mean but yeah the direct marketing of forest products and then the question is is that really what this is I see that as an or I see that as an elaboration on what a rural enterprise can be yeah and that might that may be what it is you know is is by so here's your purpose statement so what we're what you're looking at right now is special use standards so there are certain uses that may be just different enough no matter what zoning district they're in where we have special standards for them and so if there are rural enterprises they would need to adhere to the standards here that we're looking at and this gets it abby's question yep and it you know retail you have the sale or use of locally produced farm or forest products is a core element of the business and that's I'm not a hundred percent sure this is something that wasn't dug down into in the application before so we don't have that information so that's a question that I would be asking if this came before me now or maybe I would put in the staff report that the staff you know that the board needs to ask where's the wood coming from um I don't I don't think it's necessarily uh local as defined by within just the state borders I mean it could easily be New York or New Hampshire it's actually defined local farm or forest product shall be interpreted to be within the state of Vermont huh I think that's very restrictive it's different than some it's different than some state definitions of local such as in farm to plate and others yep yeah I mean it's a different it's a different animal yeah maybe that's something but maybe that's also something for me to bring up with you know I would I would ask that you make a note of that Meredith yeah I will because my my guess is is that they're you know that that I have some familiarity with that with that uh business and uh my my and this is this is just a guess on my part but my guess is that uh they're not they're not limited to just within Vermont porters to get the kind of product that they need they they probably have to shop it around yep and then the question is is this is that really does that limit this definition so much that it's really a pointless category of use um or did did the planning commission really want this to be very restrictive to sort of in small way small woodlots small farms that are local um or Vermont specific and I don't know the answer to that I wasn't yeah but it's a good discussion point yeah absolutely okay so now that we've looked at that Meredith do you think you would classify this as late manufacturing or rural enterprise um I think you know like I said rural enterprise is a question we don't have enough information for that I think it is still late manufacturing I think that definition still makes sense here um okay um so if look instead we can decide it or or not but if this came up in a in a DRB hearing if you've been working with the applicant you would have resolved this by now right it's very unlikely that the DRB would have said hey have you considered rural enterprises exactly that's we I want to at the very least I would have spelled out for the board here are all the facts that go to these different uses um and you know if there are great areas the board would need to make a call on it or at the very least call it out for you know for uses that you haven't looked at before like for the rural enterprise I've done this before I think where there was a question of does this use apply um and if there's if there's a question of it I leave it up to the board to make pal some decisions yeah and folks may remember that we did that when there was a something about utilities and it had to do with you know whether whether something is hooked up to a wastewater system versus doing something that involves water that is not part of an overall system so we made that determination okay well does anyone have any questions about the way we do uses or I think that was just kind of a good exploration all right well uh why don't you is Meredith do you want to say any more about the application it's just kind of it's sorry this is I'm not used to processing it this way yeah different um so I don't think I have any other general stuff to talk about the application I think it if if everybody else is up for it it sort of makes sense to just go through the process that I normally go through okay that works for you um which is very similar to when we go through a staff report let's do it um okay so um I'm not going to be able to pull everything up because there's a couple of different documents but um we have our you know dimensional standards that's always the next thing we go to um and we've got to figure out you know does that every structure meet all of those setbacks um hold on I'm trying to I don't think I can pull up I don't think the settings are okay if I do that are you guys seeing the um meeting packet here yeah yes yeah all right I can't try to find which page has the dimensions um so you know I always look at this clearly it meets the partial size which can be your minimum clearly it meets the frontage um the coverage here in this district 20 percent um you know this is something where I would actually look at the numbers I'm not going to go through that here um but because they already had a permit to have the shared carport the houses this long driveway right they're adding another driveway they're adding the shop here I usually just because I can't eyeball it for a parcel this size where they're saying the max coverage is 20 percent I usually crunch the numbers um and same for the setbacks um trying to see where they had trying to figure out which one actually had the this is one of the fun things not everybody does all your good how large was the parcel um the parcel itself is 9.1 acres okay and so this one we've done I try to encourage us they put in their sides their setback lines right so here's your 20 foot setback line and the side setback that orange dotted line is the setbacks um and they included their river setback from the top of bank um these are just things that we we try to encourage them to actually put on their site plans it makes a big difference if you can do that with a colored line you know the septic pump station that doesn't have to be outside of the back they've got what else they have in here um so coverage includes all impervious surface right so you would be calculating the driveways and the parking areas and maybe even storage areas the coverage time to go yeah yeah all of those things I mean when people start bringing in the surfaces that are questionable on whether or not they're going to be impervious or not we start digging down into details um so with this for the for the storage piles you know if this was coming before me I'd be asking for details on what's underneath there um how long the storage piles are going to be there is there going to be an effort made to make sure it continues to retain grass coverage so that they move them around periodically um or does it look like probably that's just going to end up being compacted earth in which case that's going to count as an impervious surface um and you know we've got it it gets tends to get a little dicey if we end up with numbers that are really close when we estimate it because we have some tools in the office we can use with GIS mapping and and measuring where we can mark out areas if it starts to get close I tend to go to people say okay I need a super defined site plan that is going to show me all the measurements of the driveways even here where is arc I'd be asking for that um and then you know if they start getting really close then I start saying okay we got to make some of this this impervious surface pervious you need to start thinking about what you're putting underneath what kind of driveway you're putting in and try and prove to me that you can get water to flow through it okay good well that gives some insight into how that happens um how about we keep rolling um let's let's move past accessory structures in uses um unless there's something relevant there nope and really there's not because they've kept all their development outside of the riparian buffer the water setback we don't really need to talk about that either that is something to always keep in mind though um as well let's before we talk about that let's get oriented to what we're looking at because um we've got a riparian setback and we also have a river corridor and I believe those are different sets of standards within our zoning right well so the river corridor we're looking at the zoning so the river corridor is within the unified development regulations as part of the river hazard area subset um so the board doesn't ever deal with that that is a completely separate permit that goes through our um certified flood plain manager so that would be Audra Brown who's also the zoning assistant so we work these in in tandem um so that if a project for some reason needs to get modified because of those river hazard area regulations we make sure that that has happened if at all possible before the application actually gets to the development review board okay but I'm gonna I'm gonna just say that again because it's pretty important um we look at riparian areas areas directly adjacent to the river they're in the zoning there is a separate permit that's all about river corridors it's not and it and a river corridor is the area that a river needs to move it needs to meander in order to fulfill its processes over the course of hundreds of years um and so it's much broader than we think of sometimes when we think of areas that flood necessarily for example so it's more about erosion hazard and meander so um so I just want to clarify that that's what we're looking at because sometimes as a board we'll look at that and we'll say well the river corridor is important we want to preserve that but we don't have anything in our book that gives us authority to do that so this question comes up sometimes of what is within our discretion and where do we exercise discretion and I want to get into that a little bit about exercising discretion within the river corridor versus the riparian area and how we talk and think about that okay no and that's that's a really really good point um especially because if you if you start really digging into the river hazard area regulations you have the river corridor layer there is also a separate um flood hazard area layer that's in closer to the river itself which has to do with um well it's not always in closer it depends it depends on where you are and what the banks are like all these sorts of things the other thing I mean there's river corridor which is about letting the river meander there's the floods hazard areas which is about making sure things are anchored down so that when it does flood things aren't going to get washed down the river or get destroyed um there's there's a whole whole slew of of requirements that I am personally not trained in um but it is a separate little layer on top of everything else thank you pause there to see Rob did you look like yeah it seems like that there's a distinction there and that the river corridor is really more of flooding and erosion versus like natural resource and like aquatic protection so really like looking into something at the river it's the board is really only looking at more of the um environmental or concerns related to living things and not necessarily the soil and um flooding and that in that type of stuff um not obviously not black and white but uh that seems to be the general of them there that's I think a good distinction um you know some of the some of the requirements about making sure that there's a natural woody buffer along the edges of the river is in part to protect from erosion but it's also to make sure that the river stays a living entity um in those places where it can be good distinction so so the riparian area which we see outlined by the it's the 50 foot river setback right and you're pointing it to it with a little hand there yep so that's your your beginning of your water setback and the first half of that as measured from the river is riparian buffer so you have limits on what can happen within the water setback the full water setback and even more limitations within the first half of that the riparian buffer okay um this has come up in a couple of recent applications um one out by the roundabout that was very close to the channelized mostly channelized river and then also um further down on Elm Street with the subdivision um so I just want to pause on this and see if anyone wants to talk anymore about the riparian area regs the way you just put it Meredith made a lot of sense that you've got the water setback and the first half of it's the buffer which is very limit uh there are limits to what can happen within the full water setback but even more limits to what can happen within the buffer which makes sense because it's closer to the river um any questions about that well I guess I think I think it we did the net application on the um on Elm Street with related to the stream um no I think there was some discussion about process for where the conservation commission has you know comments um on things often maybe involving the river um maybe we could just kind of go over that process yeah yeah that'd be good um regulations we can see them on your screen yes perfect so hold on one second because I'm just trying to figure out where I see conservation commission um so here is where the conservation commission can step in when we're talking about riparian areas and water setback areas um it's specifically when an applicant is applying for a waiver to remove woody vegetation from part of the riparian riparian buffer to allow for the development of water access and the development of water dependent uses um and yeah so applicants have to submit waiver requests any of those waiver requests to the conservation commission for written comments before the board reviews that request so that's that's this area when we're looking at Elm Street it was a subdivision question yeah um and subdivisions there it's a little different um there it is hold on one second I'm in the right place because I don't want to scroll around on my so for that for subdivision applications for subdivision have to be for for proposed subdivision that include natural resources area or their required buffers identified on the natural resources inventory map have to be reviewed to the conservation commission for review so that you know and that step doesn't really say anything else about what what kind of recommendations they have to make or whether they have to make risk recommendations um it just says that um the conservation commission may make recommendations to on the application to the board and the applicants are strongly encouraged to meet with the conservation commission prior to submitting an application for a subdivision doesn't say that they have to meet with them ahead of time there's there's it's it's kind of hard to make requirements in there um and I think part of that I'm not even sure I'm not sure why that is so fuzzy okay that's the right word for it yeah I mean is there any it's for any way that I mean like obviously you can clean it up in the regs but is there any way the board can clean that up by you know you know clarifying our process of how we how we interpret that we could do it by precedent setting you know make make a decision in in saying we see this as you know setting a precedent and it's not that's not casting it in concrete but it's it's one way that we can exercise some discretion there I mean it's also if you say we really we want you you're telling me that you really want these two actually applicants to go before the conservation commission if you're going to say you're not going to accept an application for subdivision that hasn't had that process then right you know I mean you you have the ability to tell me what a complete application is I don't want to see an application for subdivision with a natural resource on it unless the conservation commission has met with them that's what I'm going to tell applicants it's the same thing with you know what you want me to include with other large-scale applications if there's something that you find is missing in the application ahead of time that you keep repeatedly have to ask applicants for at hearing you can give that guidance to me and say we just don't even we don't want you to calendar calendar it until they get you that information yeah so I think that's something we should we should think about so what I'm hearing is that there's there's kind of a a may and a should as far as comments are concerned when it comes to subdivision yes and then there are a couple places where as a conservation commission is relied on by the drb to make recommendations for example in that waiver provision that you showed us so it's a very specific reason that waiver where it goes to the conservation commission it's only for a very specific reason not not there might be other reasons to ask for some sort of development in the water setback area and the conservation commission doesn't have to be right and then then we sometimes have circumstances where the conservation commission will see something and will chime in so in those circumstances what is our you know so if I'm an applicant and I'm reading through the requirements and I expect that my materials will be reviewed by the drb and then another plain doubles advocate here and then another city entity chimes in that I didn't expect to hear from what is the conservation commission's oh general sort of role when it comes to weighing in on other resources not where it's not listed in the zoning because it can be very valuable right now the conservation commission is is advisory to the board and it's not it's not a it's not a absolute standard and I mean I'm a little uncomfortable with this because it's it's it's it's kind of fuzzy but on the other hand until we have some experience we don't know how fuzzy or lack of fuzz it actually is that that that's an official language tiny tiny prickly yeah I mean it's like right now the design review committee is an advisory committee they are advisory on very specific scope of things which is the design review standards the conservation commission under these regulations has an advisory commit capacity for very specific items um if they start to weigh in on things outside of that scope I think that you know it's it's still an advisory position because they are they're sort of the city's experts in a way or at least some of them um but I don't actually know how much weight it would it would be required to be given if it's outside of the scope of the things that the zoning regulation specifically say I'm going to just be honest there I don't I don't really know so that's something we should think about what would be valuable to the DRB because if we expect that we might seek conservation commission feedback on certain things that should be up front in the regs like there should be kind of a overall statement that says the the DRB at its discretion may request console uh conservation commission input um all applicants are encouraged to consult with the conservation commission on their project um this is all us brainstorming right here so for members of the DRB who may also be on the conservation commission or anyone watching we're not presuming a new role without further discussion here yeah because that that role could could potentially expand and that could be a lot to ask of a of a volunteer that's exactly that's exactly right I mean our projects aren't changing but our regulations are and we have to be careful about how we how we draft these I'm I'm a real proponent of if things are absolutely clear right now I don't necessarily feel a need for 100 clarity because we need to build up some some experience yeah and I think the other that where I was kind of going with my previous comment is um we would never want an applicant to be surprised by the conservation commission a period of meeting with input that they hadn't been aware was forthcoming so that would have to be the other piece of the communication so um Michael you've been quiet and you can remain so if you wish but um I know we've talked before that we've acknowledged the conservation commission's capacity and coordination um habits um but do you have anything you want to add based on your experience worry about the conservation commission as trying to expand their territory if that's what you're worried about and I think beyond that if you're actually you're gonna have to provide guidance because we don't have the focus or the capacity to be uh as responsive as you may or may not want the DRB being the May there because you know the reality is we meet on different days on different weeks so we would be delaying potentially delaying permits or applications which I don't think is appropriate right so we'd have to think about that you know that would be I guess the merits concerned to figure out how you would engage the commission and then you know I think the couple comments that came in from you know Paige and Alec you know I think it's just going to be sort of random and it would come in as as previously it's just a comment right not expecting any sort of response from the DRB other than like hey think about this a little further yeah but I think it's just like you all are saying I mean if you're going to either if it's a one or a need from the conservation commission to the DRB it's going to have to be very clear beyond the way the the current zoning regs are written because we're just not going to be able to wrap our head around it anytime soon to be efficient sure sure and that that makes it efficient like you said and more fair to everybody involved so so let's keep chewing on that I know that there have been times when the conservation commission or members of it have weighed in and helped me think differently about a project or helped me learn more about a natural resource so making sure that um everybody's sort of aware of when and how that will happen seems important and I think just one more thing if I could just throw it in there I would also be very wary of uh you know conservation commission has a different agenda than the DRB the DRB doesn't really have an agenda right the agenda is enforce the regulations are considered permits based on the regs whereas the conservation commission is I mean it's in the it's in the name right conservation so the agenda is going to be different which means you're going to have to provide guidance to rein it in sure so that's what happens with the design review committee for example they have a checklist that we've received that frames their recommendations to us based on certain criteria so okay well this is good we have about 25 minutes left so unless there's any final thoughts I think we should we should move to the next thing but this is this is constructive and I see Meredith taking notes yeah it's good discussion yeah thanks Michael instead of just going through piece at a time since we're only at basically three thousand five and three thousand six what are there things that the board members want to jump to I don't want to necessarily go through you know steep slopes which don't apply here you know erosion control stormwater if nobody really has any questions about that I'm not sure we need to to go into that what do people want to talk about yeah that's fine with me if you're curious about why we have conditional uses and what those standards are and how they're different from site plan standards or just any of those sorts of questions um yeah I mean there's this this is an interesting one because it does have the big um u-shape driveway but the board has talked about multiple access points a few times so that may not be a question here yeah you know I think yeah conditional use and the major site plan are the big things that we don't necessarily go over and fold you know in full detail every single time I might propose that we look at conditional use because there's some overlap in theory with site plan and also because there's a character the neighborhood question here that um that I think is important to explore a little because it's something we talked a lot about when this actual application came through I think that sounds good um and because we are dealing with a situation here that you have different um impacts right so you're talking about adding in a a you know light manufacturing but it's dealing with saws it's dealing with um you know with noise potentially with a lot more lights in the in the area um and those are all questions that sorry I'm trying to scroll to my conditional use in my um rags at the same time but those were questions you have residences your residential uses across the street from the project as well as across the river um but the immediate neighbors are um leaning more towards other sort of light industrial or um nonconforming but still some form of industrial or rural enterprise businesses because there's the the sort of landscaping treeworks place um closer into Montpelier and then on the other side you have the um small motors repair location and I'm just gonna say something maybe obvious to people at this point but we have permitted uses and conditional uses permitted uses can happen in the district conditional uses may happen in the district subject to additional standards to make sure it's compatible sorry I dive into the details thank you um all right so this is your conditional use standards right I'm assuming everybody can see that because I'm not getting my little green outline um and so with the conditional use standards we look at the capacity of community facilities and utilities traffic impacts character of the neighborhood which I think is actually the it might be the fun one to focus on um because that also gets into our potential condition um conditions of approval um and so you know your character the current neighborhood character is so it's the right spell neighborhood and it talks about it being a mix of open farmland in the valley um and wooded hillsides so we're down in the open farmland valley in this space there has been some residential development along elm street in gould hill road and proposed development should discourage fragmentation of this land by following conservation subdivision principles that would cluster development while protecting large tracts of open space for conservation forestry farming and recreation uses efforts to be made to locate any new residential development off quality farmland and out of the flood plain now in this project they've already done the residential development this is a new um new development this is not residential and people you know the architectural compatibility I don't think was necessarily a big question maybe I don't know um I think that the biggest question here was the character of the neighborhood with the use impacts of the use shall be consistent with the neighborhood especially with respect to noise hours of operation and other features that define an area's character and it says the existence of one conditional use in a neighborhood should not necessarily be interpreted as justification for a similar conditional use to be located in that area um whatever which is why it's conditional use rather than permanent right and what I'm going to do so I may have to change my orientation I think they included the narrative about the um so these pictures were from a neighbor these photographs were from a neighbor um showing sort of the character so this is the property to the north so this would be taking a picture basically from almost the driveway of what's there now um oops things are upside down sorry about that I don't know what orientation so this is the view so here's the driveway that got put in and there is the the property to the south so this was all just a great big field or is all under this um sorry they're all oriented weird right so here's a ridge that's sort of behind um in between where the development was going to happen and I think the river facing south yep and there again the south view of home site location and flood plain so it was it it was very very open to begin with um I'm going to try and find wow that's a lot of pictures where's their narrative and sorry hold on okay well while you're doing that I want to remind that um when we're talking about putting something in a open space where nothing has been before that it's easy to automatically think that a building in a field is not consistent with an empty field but that gets us into a little bit of catch 22 because we are reviewing the project for its compatibility with the area as a whole and the overall pattern of uses and pattern of land development um and so when we are looking at something that's a conditional use especially when there's not something when something hasn't been there before we have to kind of think in that way um we may think well the what would be consistent with the area is nothing but that's not our job um and I think can kind of challenge when it comes to this more subjective characteristics that we need to think about the other thing I'll note and I can be corrected on this but Meredith if needed or anyone else who works in this in this area um the standard that we're going for is that the applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed development shall not have an undue adverse effect on the character of the neighborhood so sometimes things might have an adverse effect there's a building where there wasn't one and you can't see something for example people might perceive that as an adverse effect but then you have to ask given the character of the neighborhood given the purpose of the zoning district given what's allowed is that adverse effect undue or is it acceptable so um that's kind of what that's what we're thinking about thank you for keeping your teacher hat on Kate do we look at um soils like quality of the soils in this area um so you know there's the the item of keeping residential development outside of what is it the quality farmland yeah farmland but so that that comes in when you're talking about the neighborhood and how the neighborhood has been defined and if there's specific developmental standards for certain neighborhoods but there is nothing further in the regs to talk about soil type um and because what we were talking about right now is not residential development it's industrial i'm not sure how or manufacturing i'm not sure that that would actually come into play in this particular application yeah because they're not they're not making that the regs don't have that same recommendation for a light industrial yeah it's it's very you know and it's a it's a character of the neighborhood basically criteria it's not going to come into play unless you're looking back at to how a neighborhood is defined um when it comes to the soil types and where you're putting the development um i'm just taking a peek so it's yeah it's light manufacturing which was then the category of industrial uses i keep throwing it yeah sorry it used to be under the the 2011 rank it was light industrial um so for you know for testimony on this conditional um use it really came down to in large part the um testimony at the hearing because you know this is what was provided for discussion about character of the neighborhood it all went to architectural compatibility yard lot coverage and landscaping um you know they they didn't really give us a whole bunch on noise or lighting you know they they told us what the lights were going to be but this was a big part of the hearing it was you know are it are the is the neighbor's noise going to cause you know is their noise going to be worse is it going to cause an impact is the lighting going to be an issue um ultimately in the decision um you know there were some some standards reviewed um it's you know i call this out in my little overview and it's something to look at under our current lighting regulations there's actually some limits that help come into play here about saying that if it's not just the exterior lights but part of the outdoor lighting regulation actually also looks at interior lights if they are going to be below the top of windows because those are going to shine out especially if they're lights that are and if they're the individual lamps the individual bulbs are going to be brighter and emit more than 2000 lumens those have to be fully shielded even inside a building if they're going to be lower than the top of windows um so that's it's it's one of those details that i think sometimes people skim over in the lighting regulations and when it comes to looking at the conditional use standards as well is it's not just the outside it's also the inside um you know are there any are there any um large unusual mechanical aspects to the project that are going to add a different kind of noise um that need to be drilled down on when talking about the the potential adverse impacts and whether or not they're going to rise to the level of being undue adverse impacts there i'm going to pause right there and say good evening joe good to see you thanks good to see you too sorry i'm white that is all right we are working through this sample application we're doing it in workshop format and we're just kind of talking through things of interest we've talked about riparian areas and river corridors we've talked about conservation commission review uh distinguishing between different types of uses and now we're talking about conditional use review and specifically character of the neighborhood so it's on page seven of the sort of draft staff summary that that marath provided in our packets so um that's what we're doing and we're yeah we're gonna go just another 10 or 15 minutes um just in the interest of having a shorter meeting and i mean i think i could go on and on talking about this but that's why i do what i do but um we'll we'll we'll have some discipline um so as we're talking about character of the neighborhood um what i'm remembering from this application is that there was concern that this would take away from the rural nature of the area and then others said well it will enhance the rural nature of the area because uh a sawmill something that uses a forest product is necessary to create the overall the whole of the rural um and so there was that kind of back and forth a little bit at the at the hearing and kevin were you at that hearing do i remember correct that do you remember sorry my mind was all squared what could you tell me this um sort of i don't know if you were at this hearing the for the real one not the sample that we're doing now but there was a bit yes i was yeah about whether whether this was sufficiently rural um or whether you know whether it should be allowable and that reminds me of a question about conditional use in general meredith which is is a conditional use always allowed so long as it can be adequately conditioned or can something that is a conditional use be rejected if there are no conditions that it can that can i mean in my view it's a subjective exercise to a degree and so that could that could have varying varying outcomes depending on on you know what the project is and what the location is so i don't think there's any cast and stone on that yeah i don't think there's a hard rule yeah you know i think that what it comes down to is that it's not a barred um use right in that area right but the board could layer on so many conditions to make it actually match the condition the character of the area that it's just not possible because to to be able to have it not have an undue adverse impact might mean it's not feasible feasible it's a good i mean here's what i remember i remember that this came across as being a really well-thought-out project and it looked like it was just going to be a good fit and uh so i mean it it wasn't automatically granted a conditional use we had to go through that process to arrive but uh but all the all the stores were aligned with that project yeah yeah and i mean there's a i'm sure that we could think of some sort of light manufacturing that would emit you know odors or the as a gas fault a gas fault plan i mean you know that would be heavy manufacturing i don't know that's light manufacturing well whatever i'm just saying just because you have one light manufacturing uh a project an application that that meets the subjective criteria doesn't mean that the next one is going to do is going to meet it as well i mean it's going to be evaluated on its individual merits yeah i think kate i um there's always a struggle between between this subjective criteria and the strict interpretation of the racks so for this one for example um if if the proposal had been for 24 hour operation seven days a week that may have had an undue adverse effect in a way that six ten hours a day six days a week might not have or eight hours a day six days a week or ten hours a day five days a week yeah i think i think that's a fair that's a fair characterization and that's why come it becomes very important for the board to flesh those specifics out if they aren't in the application materials um because those findings of fact in a decision that need to also be reflected in the decision can then come back and become um basically conditions on the approval right if suddenly the applicant is operating 12 hours a day way into the night or somebody's coming in and operating in the middle of the night or like 4 a.m because they have a project that they have to do and i say no you came to us for this conditional use approval and said you were going to operate from x to y that's when the impacts you're having on your neighbors are okay they've been considered to be to not to be unduly adverse once you get outside of those rounds i can't say that that's the case if you want to operate then you got to go back to the drb right and then it basically becomes a condition of the approval without being an explicit condition that the board has put on the approval those conditions that we throw in at the end are things that were not elucidated in the application as this is the scope of what we're doing right because the things that are in the application are the findings that's what we know to be true about the application that's presented before us and for those things that need to be done a certain way that might be a little different than what's proposed we do the conditions right so for this one for example this type of project one of us might ask well what what do you anticipate in terms of um large vehicles coming and going each day like so maybe you'll have your staff coming and going and that's at set times generally at the beginning and end of the day what about truck traffic and then we would have a conversation about oh gosh that's very early or very late or that's within business hours or that's more at the end of the week than the beginning of the week and we can understand compatibility um because i've sort of branched off into conditions on permits i want to just flag this i can't remember if i flagged this during the last meeting if not this is if i did this is a reminder that certificates of compliance are not automatic anymore so if there's a big project and the board really wants to make sure that it is done right before it stops starts operating the board needs to specifically say that a certificate of compliance has to be um issued before the use commences and how does that work do you go out and look at the site with your clipboard and your maps and you make sure that the roads as loud as it should be and the parking spaces are the right size and okay yeah um that there's a whole form and I go with the decision um and do check boxes um I've since I've been here I've only had to do one of those um because it stopped becoming automatic and with the new adoption of regs in 2018 it was a retroactive application so that if the board didn't specifically require it in a previous decision it no longer just automatically applied so for old permits that were in progress you know the construction was happening when I came on in 2018 we didn't do them anymore okay we are getting toward the end of the one hour that I promised um I've really appreciated this conversation um are there any kind of outstanding issues that you have either or questions that you have either about what we've this this mock application we've been discussing or types of questions you want to flag for any future training exercises well I think this has been very helpful just in just in the sense that we're not under the gun this is a this is a uh a a sample uh not real it gives us the ability to drill down in all sorts of different ways um and I think it's been time well spent thanks Kevin yeah I agree it's been it's been really helpful I like I need to hear things again and again so thank you even even with the amount of time I've been on on the board it's good to to to do this from time to time yeah I mean no project is the same but uh you know it's helpful to these are not easy issues they seem easy at the service but there's a lot of a lot of stuff behind them so thank you yeah are there any topic areas that um you have sort of lingering questions on that you'd like to study at another time whether steep slopes or noise or parking or circulation or drive-throughs or anything else well I'm thinking all honesty the more I dig in I I think that uh that the and I think maybe this is this is known that there's there's work to be done on the planning commission to you know to really to really dig in and um you know I'm I feel okay saying this you know I think that that there was a lot of work that went into it um and I think if during that process some of the Montpelier planning commissions uh recommendations and we didn't get incorporated into or the Montpelier planning staff didn't get incorporated into the final you know regulations um not the fault of city council or not the fault of like maybe anyone in the city but I think just to how the that process went um and um I don't know so I think that like every application and every time we dig in we find more and more details that uh maybe just don't really apply or fit to fit Montpelier very well um and I think it's going to take a while to to really flush those out um but I just I don't want to apply my frustration with that because I think that it's you know until those are fixed it's the it's the role of the board to really sort of like look at projects like this is this what's what fits Montpelier for an applicant we're the backstop I mean that that you know until there's more clarity that that's a role that we really are you know have to play yeah you know if we come up with a list of like five or ten of those things and I'm sure we each have a version of that list in our heads I think it could be possible to sit down to have a joint meeting with the planning commission and that might be more fruitful when we can do it in person yes we we haven't done it in a very very long time not since I've been on and it could be again without a hearing in front without an application in front of us without a hearing of the standard hearing just to to kind of workshop it I think that could be helpful yeah I think that's a good idea um the other thing to remember is that and this is it's sort of a big picture thing is that the the regs the applications that come before the board are coming before the board because there are parts in the regulations that are supposed to be gray or subjective and if every application were easy and straightforward and there were clear lines they would all be administrative that's a good point so you are getting the difficult applications we're approving lots of ones that aren't difficult um or at least they aren't difficult till the neighbor gets cranky um so you know there's there's a lot the I mean that's that's part of that's part of the issue and reason we have a development review board mm-hmm yep um but when our places parts in the regulations that really just don't make sense um I try to take notes when that comes up but it also doesn't hurt to shoot me an email to specify provisions it's really easy for me to then take those compile them and forward them to Mike because he's the the the arm of the planning commission that comes into this office um and he's also had lots of experience with revising regulations drafting regulations um drafting legislation and and figuring out does is this something that we can tweak in the regulations or is this a bigger problem um you know is this something easier is it a bit you know a really hard haul to fix um you know we haven't as a as a group worked with the planned unit development regulations in here since they got adopted yeah um those are going to be interesting when we start trying to apply them yeah we may want to do a work I mean I'm not going to give us all homework or anything but when when we're ready for another workshop like this that might be a good topic it's PUD yeah the PUD would be a good one yeah and I think and and how the PUD and the subdivision can interact yeah because they don't necessarily have to but sometimes both of those will apply come before the board at the same time yeah yeah all right shall we uh bring it toward a close here were you able to finish your thought Meredith sorry oh I'm good okay so um thank you for that training I um I found a very useful Meredith you um prepared us and walked us through that very very helpfully so thank you very much for doing that yeah I want to thank you thank Meredith and and Kate I want to thank you as well you really did a great job here that was a joint effort Kate right on right on all right so the next item of business on our agenda is other business our next meeting is May 3rd 2021 because we do not have applications ready to go for our next meeting so we expect the days will be lighter and the weather will be a little better and I hope you all make the most of your Monday evenings um take a little bit of that time that you would have spent on the next meeting and tell your friends that there's an open spot on the DRB um so that we can get more people involved uh really if they aren't interested in the DRB we have two spots open on the design review committee and there is four available seats on the historic preservation commission um we need people for all of those very good okay okay I'm making a motion to adjourn I will take is that a motion by Kevin second second second by Abby um I'll call the roll um Rob here Abby yeah Kevin yes Michael yes and Joe yes and I vote yes as well um we've unanimously passed a motion to adjourn and our meeting is over thank you all very much have a great night