 Ready? Good evening. Welcome to the Town of Williston Development Review Board. Today's Tuesday, April 10th, 2018. I'm going to open the meeting at 7.03. As is customary, we'll open the meeting with a public forum. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to address the board? Hearing none, we are going to open the first application, DP 18-16. Paul, could you say your last name? Heintz. Heintz, thank you. Request for discretionary permit to extend a driveway at 3250 Oak Hill Road. Paul, if you would please come to the front table. And you've already stated your name but restate it and your address for the record please. My name is Paul Heintz. I currently live at 107-9 Pondbrook Road in Heinsberg but hopefully soon I'll be living in Williston at 3250 Oak Hill Road. Thank you. Staff goes next. Okay, so this is a request for a discretionary permit to extend a shared driveway at 3250 Oak Hill Road and 3266 Oak Hill Road in the Agricultural Rural Residential Zoning District. The applicant owns both of those properties. They are separate parcels that were subdivided apart from one another back in the early 1990s and the applicant has purchased both of them. At 3250 Oak Hill Road, Lot 1, which is the northern lot on the site, there's an existing single-family home that's for lack of a more technical term falling apart and the applicant is proposing to demolish and replace that home with a new single-family home deeper back on the lot. The applicant would like to access that home via a extension of the shared driveway that currently serves Lot 2 on the site and to do that the overall effect will be to create a driveway that sets that new home site about 1600 feet back from Oak Hill Road. So Williston in the Ag Rural Zoning District has some provisions about long driveways and most of where this lives in the bylaw is about subdivisions and it's intended to encourage people who are subdividing rural lands to cluster that development and to not build sort of you know big big long driveways and what it says is if you're going to build a driveway more than 1,320 feet long you need to come to the DRB to do that and if you're subdividing it it can reduce the allowed density on your subject property from the normal one per approximately two acres to one per 10 acres. So this case is a little bit different from that but the staff felt that the applicability was close enough with what the applicant wanted to do to bring it to the board not do it administratively that the net effect of extending the driveway that serves the house on lot two to serve a new home site on lot one will be to have a driveway in excess of 1,320 linear feet. So that's what the proposal is in front of you there is no subdivision on the table at this time there is simply a demolition and replacement of an existing home so within your staff report you have the relevant bylaw sections that I just summarized and a little bit of discussion about the plots and plans that go with this so when this subdivision was created originally you can see that the driveway serving the house on lot two actually comes across lot one when lot two was created there was an access easement for lot one created but not in the same spot as where the applicant would like to put their driveway today so the staff is suggesting that final plans include a newly delineated easement area allowing access to lot one exiting out of lot two in the place where the proposed driveway would be constructed so there's a description of those easements we did receive comment from the police or rather review by police and fire and public works we did not get comments from police fire or public works other than a memo from public works stating that they had no comment the conservation commission also looked at this proposal the conservation commission did not recommend that a habitat disturbance assessment related to chapter 27 be applied for or submitted in this case the conservation commission looked at the resources there and recommended that the applicant should consider managing the open meadow to support bobble ink and other grassland bird nesting habitat and that the applicant should demarcate the class 2 site with either large boulders plantings or a fence to prevent incidental mowing into that buffer and then recommended that the driveway location and length be designed to minimize impacts to wetlands wildlife and potential agricultural use on the property follow best practices related to the watershed protection chapter of the bylaw and vermont's low risk site handbook for erosion and sediment control and then finally there is a discussion in the conservation commission comments of the future trail and so there's a trail easement that is a floating easement that goes back to the original subdivision in the early 1990s and eventually the actual location of that trail will need to be determined the conservation commission say we'd like to you know consult with the owner when it comes time to do that so that said you have recommended findings of fact conclusions of law and conditions of approval leading to an approval for this project and an authorization for the applicant to file final plans i would say that the most material conditions related to that are the showing of a new revised access easement on those final plans and also that the driveway serving the existing dwelling at lot one the one to be demolished be eliminated when the dwelling is demolished that's something that usually makes public works happy too just in service of limiting curb cuts onto the town's roads so i'll stop there one question go ahead question of curiosity what's currently what are you currently growing on there just hey yeah i think it's been out of production for a little bit i so we just bought the property in february i should say okay yeah and i you're not you're not the current owner that's cool i am we are the current owners but we just want to work back in this day that's correct yeah okay because i was just saying is one of things i see is by moving the lot back there the chance of the farmer cutting into the wetland area actually goes down and the other thing is your neighbor is is all right with the fact that you'll be driving by their by their house now with the new lot will we actually own both of those properties the one where the driveway goes across we own that one as well yes so the attendant is okay with you do that's right correct yes okay that's all i need to know so so that's an existing single family home that's correct yeah yeah my laws are living there right now okay what else do you have to uh to add it to matt's summary i think matt said it all i mean i i think maybe the only thing i would add is you know we hope that by citing this house further back and against that tree line there it'll actually improve the property quite a bit it'll you know look better visually and i think it won't cause much disturbance to the land there so you know we hope that this actually helps the property out a little bit that's uh have you read all of the proposed conditions i have yeah and you have any uh concern with any of them i don't i will just add that when we purchase the properties um our real estate attorney thought that the the right of ways were sufficient to let us across one property to the other but since we own both of them it's really not a problem and i i think maybe making that more clear um is probably a good idea for the future so we're perfectly happy with that okay questions from the board is there is there another house back here off of that the drive there is um there's so there's the one that's going to be demolished that's right on opal road and then there's um the house on the 3266 property you can kind of see i don't have the map right in front of me but um it's kind of a mess of things right halfway down that driveway if you can see that um that's where your in-laws are that's where the in-laws are yes exactly but past that there's nothing no that that that driveway does extend all the way back to that back meadow um but there's you know other than a chicken coop um and some trash uh that's basically it so it seems like that back meadow it would be pretty cool i mean i think um yeah there there's some issues as far as wetlands back there potentially um but uh yeah it would be a nice place as well horse barn would go back there nicely with some horn I remember digging into the the length limitations on driveways once and and one issue that came up was was fire access you know if it was so long that and the proverbial tree fell across the driveway could they get their hoses back where enough but if the fire department had an opportunity to comment and didn't i mean i feel like that was their opportunity to say now well there won't be any hoses because this is uh non-hydrated so they're going to basically put a water tank down at the if they ever had a fire they put the water tank down at the beginning of his new driveway and that the trucks would be turning around dumping the water there with a line from there up to the house so I guess the the the the suppositions that a tree falls somewhere along the length of the driveway and their hose isn't long enough isn't long enough to reach I I guess the point is that fire department had a chance of review and didn't say anything correct I mean and that's that's part of when our bylaw has these what sometimes feel like really low thresholds for things going to the drb is when you go to the drb it does trigger review by those commenting departments as well so you said that you you've read through the conditions a lot of them say should would you have any problems with any of those if they were to be switched to say shall I don't think so no I mean the the yeah no I don't think so I mean the one we've been requiring a number of applicants wetlands on their sites that'd be fine with me I mean I think it's a good idea so are are we recommending that uh the density be changed to one dwelling for 10 acres so at this time no and so if you were to do that I'm just double checking that I'm being correct about that we're saying we can meet the development standards the total for the two lots 60 acres two lots of 60 acres so so the answer is no there's there's not a limitation being placed on the density of the site as part of this proposal as it's drafted and that's something for the for the board to consider we talked about that a little bit at the staff level and really felt that the density limitation was more about subdivision design than you know moving moving one house on one lot if somebody came in with a future subdivision and proposed to utilize a length of that this of what today is the proposed driveway greater than 1,320 feet so I'm going to access you know this house that house and it's it's going to have an effect that the bylaw seems not to be pulling for I might look at recommending that reduced density at that point so but I but I don't know that somebody changing a driveway to demolish and replace one house is is the appropriate time to trigger that threshold okay any other questions any questions from the audience any further no okay we're going to close dp 18-16 at 717 thank you thank you can I make an agenda recommendation real quick yep you have one hp or certificate of appropriateness on there yep I think can be disposed of fairly quickly and would leave you more time to work on your dp okay Nathaniel are you here okay uh so next on the agenda we're going to go slightly out of order we're going to go to ap 18-0176 hp 18-06 certificate of appropriateness uh could you state your name and address for the record please uh Nathaniel Ogilvy and I live at 434 Mayo Road in Huntington Vermont okay staff is next all right so this is an application that came before us as an administrative permit and it's also a application for certificate of appropriateness the application is related to the house at 38 Slate Barn Drive the Slate Barn House or the historic house at the corner of Slate Barn Drive and Williston Road and what the applicant's proposing to do is to suspend the rear portion of that house such that a new foundation can be put under some portion of it and this will I I assume look like an awful lot of work is going on when it's happening but the net impact will be that a few courses of the existing siding may not be replaced in the end in other words there's wood siding that goes very close to the to the ground right now that that would not be prudent to replace so given the that there would be a minor change in the exterior appearance of the house staff did recommend that it be reviewed by the historic and architectural advisory committee they recommended approval of a certificate of appropriateness for it uh with a few with a few conditions basically holding the applicant to what they posed and thus it's before you as the issuing authority for a certificate of appropriateness I've prepared one for you to consider yep thank you so how is this portion of the structure currently suspended currently there are sonotubes that have posts that basically hold up the entire structure and so yeah um but as far as the suspension the building would you know you basically tie into those posts and then dig down underneath to put in frost walls and then yeah a slab for the garage and what's and what's your relationship in this process are you the builder no I am the potential buyer potential buyer okay this whole process I'm basically looking to see if this is doable and that's a contingency in advance of the sale got it okay okay do you have anything else to add uh to what Matt said any questions from the board one just one question uh who have you contacted for to do this job just out of curiosity uh his name is I'm gonna blank on his name uh he's a contractor that works with my parents though uh I've also talked to uh as a dance concrete uh who does foundations as well as so he's done he's done building lists before right yeah that's one the only piece that's lifted is kind of this back the single story piece right and well it extends a little bit into DC pretty much to where the staircase is uh the because that actually doesn't have a foundation that's that's where it gets yeah just um concrete yes port port concrete and then uh under where the garage currently is there's a dirt floor so a slab in between the port concrete there's a great slope very much there from front to back so that you're gonna have a lot more concrete exposed at one end than on the other I don't based on looking at it I would say no but I don't know it looks like here too I think it's a pretty pretty flat side pretty flat side yep anything else John? You're thinking about putting a drain in that uh facility when you when you put the floor and everything in just out of curiosity I don't know I I hadn't thought about it what you want to think about that before they start to lift because they're gonna have to put the piping so it goes through the wall any other questions any questions from the audience okay uh thank you for coming we're gonna close this at 722 record pace for two don't say anything yet until we can see if you gotta understand I qualified that thank you okay 36 Blair Park DP 18-06 please come forward the mot hotel group LLC for a four-story 96 room hotel uh with underground parking business park this little building welcome thank you you could uh state your name and address for the record please g4 design studios semi semi-college street I'm Abby Derry from Trudell Consulting Engineers 478 Blair Park Road Williston my name is Dave my name is Dave Zang I'm uh from a VT hotel group LLC and I live in 29 Vale Drive South Berlin room welcome Matt okay so this is an application for a discretionary permit it's to develop a new 96 room hotel parking landscaping outdoor furnishings and other appurtenances on the parcel of land at the corner of Blair Park Road and Williston Road this is the parcel that currently includes the building where the post office is located as well as retail in the front of the building facing out on Williston Road so this is a proposal to add that building to that site without making modifications to the other building on the site this project was originally reviewed by the DRB as a pre-application on November 14th of 2017 and initially as a discretionary permit on February 13th of 2018 at that time the DRB made some further recommendations in response to the design they were shown at that meeting and the applicant has since reworked the building design and made some changes in response to those comments which they are prepared to show you tonight the staff has also brought those changes back to the historic and architectural advisory committee for their input and I'll go over that in just a second but just to really really boil it down the primary concern expressed out of the DRB back in February had to do with the mass of the building in particular its mass as it faces Williston Road and so you may recall the original design had the four-story facade a little closer to Williston Road with a small covered entry just sort of in between that facade and Williston Road so I'll let the applicant go through all the details of it what what they're showing there is the design you saw in February but what the applicants have proposed now is a two-story element on the front of the building coming up to the setback line instead of the full four-story mass that element includes some of the common areas of the hotel with some glazing a pitched roof element that wasn't there before and then a covered entry beyond that extending out to the edge of the setback at the edge closest to the multi-use path there's been some changes in the arrangement of some of the exterior treatments as well in keeping with that and the applicant has updated three-dimensional renderings of the site showing the site with landscaping at a you know at a certain level of maturity and with the leaves on and things like that for the board to consider so most of the recommended findings and conclusions and conditions are identical to what the board saw before we still have compliance on the basic standards of the bylaws we did before related to things like parking lighting building height reminding you that this is a four-story building maxing out at 52 feet above average finish grade and that's because it's taking advantage of a height incentive related to providing a minimum of 30 percent of the parking demand in a structure in this case underneath the building so the updated review we did have a hack meeting the hack members in attendance at that meeting felt that there were no additional recommendations required i did have a member who did not attend that meeting who sent me some of his own comments after the meeting which i've attached because they're essentially like public comment from from anybody we give them to you but they were not ones that the full hack considered they are related to the design review chapter and the board might want to think about some of those one particular thing that mr. Forrest did notice was that there was not an airlock and i assume he means an airlock on the entry that faces williston road so the board should think about that think about whether you would consider that a principal entrance requiring that airlock treatment the other ones are related to the variety of color materials whether anything's a dead wall and the context and form of the building which i think is the main issue the board's been wrestling with from the beginning so you still have in front of you recommended findings of fact conclusions of law and conditions of approval they would be based on the applicant's revised submission tonight with any other changes the board wants to make or feedback the board wants to give the applicants about the revised design and i'll stop there and let you guys start getting into the details okay so where are the comments from mr Forrest last page very final page of your packet right here back side back side of this i was going to say i remember reading oh i didn't find him okay has the applicant seen uh brian forrest letter they are just getting it now we're just getting it now okay all right so i let's take let's take a moment go ahead and read it if you would please okay so why don't you walk us through the design from the previous meeting okay and changes that you are proposing in response to the uh to the feedback that you received well the first one on the right of course when we had on february 13th as you can see it's a vertical four-story mass there wasn't much of a covered canopy face of a class you guys made comments it wasn't very pedestrian friendly towards route 2a so what we did for the modification for the building on the right um like i said we reduced the width of the mass the building the building was originally 65 65 feet wide and we reduced it to 56 um we we created a two-story bump and set to building back another 10 and a half feet and it goes up another third and fourth story to kind of reduce the mass facing route 2a we created more of a covered covered porch patio area around route 2a we just first first drawing on the right don't like see it but the the covered that covered porch entry was maybe five or six feet wide and it wasn't much to it we're on the second version we had a nice wood decorative six six by six wood post we extended the canopy around towards the south part of the building um we added more wood i think the board was like to see more wood facing wood paneling facing route 2a more architectural detail we did that we added more glass we also added a gable a gable end on facing route 2a um i think hack maybe mentioned that we did that we added more glass in the first floor because one of the concerns the board was that you know once you go down in the main lobby go down a long hallway to get out of the building so the original original plan had the lounge and the fitness area someone to center the building what we did was we took the lounge and the fitness area moved towards the end of towards route 2a it added more glass so now people can hang on the lounge um get more interactive route 2a hit the bike path you know they can sit there in the lounge either go outside on the summer day and the patio sit out and have you know breakfast or whatever and enjoy the interactions of the of the path so so that's route 2 yes i mean route 2 i'm sorry route 2 okay 2 yes i just and i'm just saying that for the record talking about route 2 okay yes um so i think you know i think we reduced the math like i said reduced the math by the width we stepped the building back we added more glass we try to make it more pedestrian friendly by moving the lounge in the fitness area towards route 2 so that interaction there works well so the first floor we kind of broke up that whole first floor it's not a long hallway we have we have um and we created a great room with big open great room fitness area lounge and lobby all along that side facing going towards route 2 so it's a nice nice entry and um building friendly to go from the center the quote center piece towards route 2 um like i said originally on that side we just had we just had rooms facing route 2 and we took those rooms out and put the lounge in the fitness area down there you know made a more glass more more more pedestrian friendly facing route 2 business center there too yeah we also but yeah exactly we also have a business center there as well um um what else do we have here yep the q q5 one that it looks like there's rooms that open on to the lounge and i just wonder if that's it's not really in our purview to comment on the layout but it just seems like the lounge might be loud or it might be it just seems like a weird place to have rooms enter off of yeah well we could do it we could have a privacy wall like the second quarter there between the rooms and the lounge if we have to separate that and have a buffer and we can also insulate those walls yes yep yeah we'll definitely look into that that's fine while we're right there didn't you saw there was a comment about airlocks i think that's a requirement yeah i marked it on the drawings for best to do that would be on that would be on both the main entrance at the at the port for share and at the lounge yep yeah we'll do that the building's building's been pushed back even more from the original i'd say we pushed it back another four or five feet for the cover porch and then we went up 10 feet we pushed it back another 10 and a half feet so i was going to ask you if you could actually show me on probably your new proposed plan if you could kind of show me where the vertical line of the face of the building was in relation to the the main mass of the building now the main the original one was right here that's about 10 we're about like 10 and a half 11 feet back but also this i think i think this area here we're like you said you see here like you know like over here we're about three or four feet out so there's an additional couple more obviously we're about 12 or 13 feet back maybe we're before mass wise so it's the entire structure then moved to the north so i would i would call it the length of the building yes yes this is pushed back the main yeah i'm just going to make a quick correction the the main part of the building is in the same place as it was before the only thing that has changed is that we put the covered porch on the outside so the the four floors has stepped back from the right-of-way line however the building footprint itself is in the same location as it was in our last proposal this is like this is the main part of the building the main mass is back about 12 13 feet from the side right yes okay so are there fewer rooms now yeah we uh i think we went from 96 to 92 that's what you lost yeah we stepped it out we had the upper floors that's where the some room were and then we stepped the building back you lost so two rooms um yeah two rooms per floor yes did you are they rooms smaller now because you also made our own well originally we made the building bigger and from the prototype and and then we talked to the owner we decided to go back to original prototype just make the even construction better follow the prototype so that's what we brought we shrunk it back to original which we was 65 we brought back to 56 we shrunk it by nine feet and did that shorten the the height of the roof or did you change the pitch to keep it at the same height i think we we made i think you made a little bit steeper add a more roof element to it i think you know i think the original you can see it might be a little bit flatter so we shrunk it made it made the it didn't make this a little bit steeper not going to look any different in the elevations maybe on the side i have a side problem you can do this on the side right from the end yeah so the the covered portion at the along right that is um route two sorry yeah it came on me i think what time are we in now yeah where is this let me look at those 3d views we set those might that you hand it out yeah it might help out so so i'm understanding that's about you said four or five feet from the from the building to the calm calm line and then there's there's a roof overhang of how much yeah right so from the from the drip of the porch back to the to face the building i think we're about a four and a half overhang there maybe five five feet five feet out roughly around there is there an assigned function to that well it's not not very much well we couldn't yeah well we couldn't do anything here because approximately but you know we kind of wrap around we have a door here and we kind of go overhang over further this side because this is where most of the patio areas on this side of the building you can see from the rendering so i mean we couldn't we couldn't we could overhang too much because approximately the property life facing them too so that's why we kind of continue to wrap it around so we use that element on the on the west side and then we can then they come come out that way and add more more seating area up there their constraint that keeps you from sliding the building back two more feet and getting a more comfortable depth to that overhang there is not no constraint so just just to be i just shift everything so so abby just to be clear so there's so the whole building could move two feet right and in fact i mean what happened when we revamped this footprint was that the whole thing got a little bit shorter so you know there's some wiggle room to shift okay okay i just want to make sure i understood if you get down into the garage so right you've got that yep we okay so that that entrance off in route two definitely has more of a prominent feel and a definition of a of a secondary entrance i just i think where you were going john is that it doesn't have a whole lot of functionality not not to that the porch if you wanted to have people actually sit out there it out underneath the porch yeah and i understand they may or may not we don't really even know that till after he gets built and how comfortable of a place it is that it's too shallow we'll be almost certain that they won't right right just smoke your cigarettes right that's a covered place to stand liman just tell you that i think this rendering is significantly more appealing is there a reason you you you changed from the the vertical i'm not sure what the the orange material was before but orange well it's not it's a it's a wood composite wood panel system i mean have a sample here if you want to let me pass around but um yeah we kind of went with more darker grayer colors but we kind of i think we simplified it hat kind of like that but i think i may conserve over here we didn't have he wasn't going to grab the water around over here there's a more more curb appeal and that's what we did here along this element through here added more added more than wood paneling um i think we had some like some type of stucco feel up here um when we went to the panel system had a little more wood through here where the main entry is we added more wood in the back so you know coming down to kind of get a feel more curb appeal from that side as well we want to feel we kind of just gave up on this end because it's the back is not technically i mean you still see it from the street pretty well so i mean i want to make sure we dress up that area but colors work better i think there's just too much color going on a little bit too bright and kind of tone it down a little bit here what was the dark gray material the top the top layer what is that um it's going to yeah it's going to be a composite panel system so kind of like the wood but it's just going to be great great color just a tip from the Department of Defense if you want to make a building less imposing don't put the darkest section at the top because it pulls the eye up rather than you tend to put you tend to want to pull the eye down so people don't say wow look at that thing they seem less psychological okay thank you thank you did you say you had some samples that you brought with you yes absolutely sir i'm going to see the the pinwheel that shows up on the site plan on these renderings is that still is there still some artwork there is that still part of the plan it is i mean that's just an image a symbol to depict of future sculpture sculpture but that is that's part of the still part of the plan so the metal panel is on the all the gray there's just two different colors of this cheer that's the light gray is a middle panel yes yes yes and i think the hack mentioned they didn't want to do a matte finish like uh so we're not going to do a matte finish which that looks like that but not so bright for the they wanted it not to be shiny water that finish yes a nice try you almost tricked me but that's just like great color here and the panel system is actually great the paneling system similar to the one yes famous which is true this is the plastic wood yeah laminated type i've been ripping i've been putting this on my trim on my trim i might be a little bit lighter than that but i kind of give you an idea i'll sell that that's true i don't think you've ever made that mistake also i bought this youtube love plastic wood it's great stuff that's unique now i have a little question the site that's like are there are set back for one building on the site no um we do sometimes get comment from our fire department when there are buildings close to one another if they have any concerns about ladder angles or access um we didn't get any comments like that in this case and looking at the site plan i think you're closer to i want to say you're closer to ashley furniture almost maybe maybe not maybe you've got a little more proximity um but between the existing building in the hotel you mean you do have a full width you know two-way drive aisle between those two and you're also yeah you're right and you're drivable around ashley furniture as well i mean that's it just it looks the the site looks a little tight a little congested i was right i've heard comments from people i know that say are they really going to put a hotel is it ever going to fit on there absolutely it says right on the plan i mean we've taken comments from the public about this site over the years they've all been related to the vehicle access in and out of the post office which when people do that they they really don't touch any of the rest of the site they drive into the post office they drive out and it just is the kind of place where people are in a parking space for five or fewer minutes and there's a lot of turnover and there's a lot of vehicle conflict related to that none of that's proposed to be touched as part of this proposal so how how does a stone sample the colors has darker than what they couldn't find me couldn't find the exact color but the lumber showing in here is a little bit lighter because i think hack mentioned he kind of wants to match ashley actually so so just let me finish my question so um so how how does how do those colors relate to ashley that was where i was going with this because that was a hack question yeah i think we're pretty close to what actually was well we took pictures of it we don't have pictures of ashley furniture but um which we're trying to get close as we can what the hack recommended but it's kind of matched the stone for ashley okay so so you you are aware of that when you yes i told like i dropped off that this is a little bit darker than what we're showing of represented ashley furniture but kind of gives you an idea of what your intent is to get a color that's it's more similar to yes because that's what the hack mentioned i think okay great great that was where i was going with that thank you really was how the the uh post office trucks circulate through through the site that's a moral question for you yeah i couldn't uh want me to answer that that would be great so um so the post office entrance all thanks you're just going down oh it's upside down that's okay so here is a is a one way so most of the post office um trucks they come through here and they have a small loading dock right here um where they would you know load and unload as needed and some of them would would park usually along here or they would park along this this side on the existing plan and then this is two way so they can just go back out here or if they choose can go the long way to get the light gets closer to get to quicker to get to route two but they have a loading dock here and they maneuver so they go back into that dock yeah they well it's a it's like a one of those small ones not like a long loading dock or a trailer or anything like that it's like one of those ones that yeah just to that's all we see on there is mail trucks and they probably have probably five five or six of those we parked overnight and they and they leave it on site and then they just kind of go in and out through here throughout the day this is a more of an aesthetic thing but it seems like the two crab apples are too tight to the it seems like they really crowd out the it's like hidden how to get into the into the hotel like if you could pull those apart a little bit more and be less um more have more visual towards towards the entity okay David what where are you talking right here talking about this was basically blocking this mature trees you know the illustrator plan do you want to just maybe that'll be shown on the landscaping plan very mature right here a little bit just to address i'm jeff gall from trudel consulting engineers and i think it's it's hard to get exactly the same model tree for the for the 3d renderings these are far enough apart that they're not going to be together i mean they're they're mature canopies are not going to be together so i mean that's that's just the yeah that's the 3d thing yeah okay but even if you switch rounds you've got the the ton is arborite if you switch the arborite and and the tree around just to give you a little bit more spacing i don't know very minor did you make any changes to the plan in response to the traffic study that was that that was received we haven't are there any partions of that that were different than you were anticipating the traffic impact study no um the we had stand-tact um look at the two intersections at either entrance to billard park road and they didn't um find an adverse impact to either of those two intersections they the report was that there was a capacity enough to support the trips from the hotel i recall a two two percent additional traffic something in that range yeah it was a under 10 percent i think also worth noting that the v-trans has had asked for payment for nearby projects v-trans projects there's some contribution right yep and they in the report they had suggested a mitigation traffic mitigation um amounts in addition to the town traffic impact fees are there questions looks down don yeah take your time we're not no hurry is this going to be this isn't going to be wilson hotel is it it's is there yet to be determined um we're still working on the brand on it with a few a few um franchises franchisers it will probably be a brand correct you haven't anticipated construction uh date if this is approved fall late fall yeah fall before winter as soon as we can get our permits is the answer um is there a separate signage application that's coming in for this or so you reviewed at the last meeting a separate application for master sign plan and i believe you voted on that do you recall did they did they do a motion for approval on the master sign plan that is that is unchanged under this proposal um i do want to say that we did change the sign plan a little bit master sign plan in with the submittal is different than the original submittal and that's okay i and i can go over those right now if this is a good time is there an application with that i didn't i didn't see that i didn't see any of that that's why i was so we had yeah there was a um on the agenda last time there was an application in front of you to review a master sign plan and we we didn't talk about that with you at that meeting i don't know if you had a separate discussion about it in your deliberative session um i did continue to sign a joke okay that's something we need to review tonight i would recommend it if you would like to talk them through it we are so we i mean we did submit a master sign plan and in your package that is c204 and pull it up here for you um there was a staff report that matt had prepared dated February 13th 2018 and there are a couple of changes from that that i just wanted to go over tonight with the table so so if i could just interject for a moment sure this is to staff so uh traditionally what we see where the master sign plan is that identified uniquely in the staff's recommendations and i don't believe that's in this packet is that that is correct we did it in the last packet we didn't prepare a new one for you so that's an oversight on our part okay what i can do is i would recommend you have the applicant go over the changes we didn't have any recommended modifications to the last plan and if it's possible i can probably take a look at the numbers that have changed in relation to the report we prepared last time and give that to you tonight um if you want to consider it tonight that's fine if you if you would rather we bring it back to you at a future meeting we can do that too if if the changes are minor my recommendation would be to try to do it as a package with the site plan approval i i agree with if the changes are minor to incorporate into this package yes i will see if i can make something out of um what we prepared for you but in February as abby goes through the change okay okay thank you okay um so just so everybody is following along do you have the original maybe you don't have the original packet okay we don't that's right um so we had prepared a assigned master sign plan list and on in that table the only change that we made was that we had proposed the new the wilson hotel sign just the square footage of the words and at the time to be 24 square feet we're now proposing those three to be 42 square feet so what that does is each 42 yep three times 40 yep each of each three 42 square feet so our originally our original sign area proposed was 323.7 square feet now we're proposing 389.7 square feet we have an allowable maximum potential sign area of 460.8 square feet so we are still under the amount allowed the reason we increased the size was to make it more in scale with the building and more visible from the road the the words at 24 square feet were pretty small in the original proposal so on your elevation you can see it kind of fits inside of that gable that gable end is this the 42 or the 24 that's the 42 that's the 42 so these are signs t you and v those are signs t you and v on the master sign plan right i do have a copy of the report we prepared for you before and what we would do with that is in the recommended conditions of approval we would change signs t you and v from 24 to 42 square feet in the table in condition 3 we would change the total in that same condition from 323.7 to 389.7 and then in the motion for approval we would identify hearings of february 13 2018 and april 10 2018 those are the changes that would be necessary to take care of that there are two more directional signs that we added sign r we increased the number of sign r from 6.3 to 12.3 square feet and we added a sign w which is a one-way sign in the area of three square feet so in the directional section and one more b thank you so b is now six square feet i'd have to i'd have to adjust that mac that complete total 389 or did did your 389 in that includes that that includes that one-way signs i want to see the mass confusion when the people driving in both directions trying to i don't go to the main entrance especially in the winter that's sign sign a which is i think that they ugly black park center sign reducing by two square feet yes there's going to be a new sign that it's not going to be the same sign if it becomes the best western do they have to come back or as long as it fits in that the 42 square feet we don't regulate content that's that's very intentional and keeps us on the right side of the constitution as well as when when signs change and a property has a master sign plan we we do require an administrative sign permit for that and that's to ensure that things like sign lighting and placement and all those other things remain in compliance with the town's rules and the master sign plan so you get like pink with yellow polka dots or something they could do that there there's a provision in the bylaw that lets an applicant tell you if they're going to enforce any standards for you know sort of font color scheme etc it it's more likely to come up when there's a multi-tenant property and you deal with a lot of you know you have a whole range of corporate tenants that all have their prototypical sign and it can be a little bit jarring if you know some of them are one type of sign and some of them are you know some are a panel and some are individual letters and some are this and some are that and you know you can control it down to the point where i've been to a shopping center before where all of the signs had to be in the same font and literally there were no corporate fonts allowed williston holds that out as an option to people if they want to control it if the drb felt that was necessary they could ask an applicant to provide that but our track record in williston has generally been that controlling the location and size and also having a prohibition on internal illumination has been enough to bring some consistency to the sign packages we see okay so we've gone over proposed sign changes we've gone over proposed building modifications to address the uh the topics raised at the previous meeting is there anything else uh to bring forth nobody has anything else i don't have anything else any other questions from the uh from the board the only thing i was wondering are you still going to have benches up front too for people just to stop and rest at or whatever yes yeah seeing that there's nobody in the audience um they're good as well um okay uh we're going to close dp 18-06 at 805 thank you for coming thanks okay we're going to go into deliberate deliberative in spite of the fact that he's a bicyclist in spite of okay welcome back to the wilson uh development review board of tuesday april 10th we're now back from deliberations and do i have a motion for dp 18-16 yes as authorized by wdb 6.6.3 i john hemmelgarn moved at the wilson development review board having reviewed the application submitted in all accompanying materials including the recommendations of the town's staff and the advisory boards required to comment on this application by the wilson development bylaw and having heard and duly considered the testimony presented at the public hearing of april 10th 2018 and the findings of fact and conclusions of the law proposed by staff for the review of the dp 18-16 and approved this discretionary permit subject to conditions above this approval authorizes the applicant to file final plans obtain approval of these plans from staff and then seek an administrative permit for the proposed development which must proceed in strict conformance with the plans on which this approval is based thank you is there a second i'll second it david seconds it uh any further discussion all those in favor aye opposed hearing none motion carries do i have a motion for dp 18-06 vermont hotel group llc as authorized by wdb 6.6.3 i court notoriety moved at the wilson development review board having reviewed the application submitted and all accompanying materials including the recommendations of the town's staff and the advisory boards required to comment on this application by the wilson development bylaw and having heard and duly considered the testimony presented at the public hearing of february 13th 2018 and 2018 and april 10th 2018 and the findings of fact and conclusion of law proposed by staff for the review of the dp 18-06 and approve the discretionary permit subject to conditions above this approval authorizes the applicant to final file final plans obtain approval of these plans from staff and then seek an administrative permit for the proposed development which must proceed in strict conformance with the plans of which this approval is based we would like to remove condition 2a condition number 21 and condition number 24 and add condition number 25 to provide airlocks at both exterior entrances thank you is there a second second uh paul seconds it any further discussion yes um corny what were the dates of the public hearings that you mentioned it was february 13th that's why i stumbled it was february 13th 2018 and april 10th but i believe there was also a november date correct that's uh the november date was the pre application i think we haven't typically put the pre update in the motion but february 13th okay okay you're good with that job okay um any further discussion all those in favor aye opposed hearing none motion carries uh do i have a motion for dp 18-06 master sign plan as authorized by wdb 6.6.3 i david saladino moved at the wilson development review board having reviewed the application materials submitted in all accompanying materials including recommendation by the will having heard and duly considered the testimony presented at the public hearings of february 13th 2018 and april 10th 2018 except the findings of fact conclusions of law and conditions of approval proposed by staff for the review of dp 18-06 msp and approve this discretionary permit for master sign plan this approval authorizes the applicant to submit final plans obtain approval of these plans from staff and then seek an administrative permit for future development which must proceed in strict performance with the plans on which this approval is based just note that the condition of approval number three which references the following table has been revised such that signs tu and v are now 42 square feet sign b is six square feet sign s is 12.3 square feet a new sign w has been added for one way directional sign which is three square feet bringing the total up to 389.7 square feet thank you is there a second paul seconds it any further discussion all those in favor hi hi any opposed hearing none motion carries uh next up is uh hp 18-06 certificate of appropriate niche appropriateness is there a motion yes as authorized by wdb 6.63 i david turner moved the wilson development review board having reviewed the applicant applications submitted in all company materials including the recommendations of the town staff and the advisory boards required to comment on this application by the wilson of development by law and having heard and duly considered the testimony presented at the public hearing of april 10 2018 accept the findings of fact and conclusions of law proposed by staff and approve hp 1806 it says five for proposed foundation replacement this approval authorizes the applicant to seek administrative permit for the proposed development which must proceed in strict conformance with the plans on which this approval is based thank you uh is there a second second john seconds it any further discussion all those in favor hi opposed hearing none motion carries is there a motion to approve the minutes from the drb meeting dated march 27 2018 paul makes a motion to approve the minutes is there a second all second david seconds it any further discussion all those in favor i i any opposed motion carries minutes are approved uh is there a motion to adjourn make a motion drb meeting is adjourned at 855 thank you everyone thank you mr chair sub nine p