 Hello everyone and welcome to the South Burlington Development Review Board meeting of June 15th, 2021. My name is Don Filibert. I'm chairman, chairperson of the Development Review Board. And with me tonight are other board members, Dan Albrecht, Stephanie Wyman, Alyssa Eyring, Mark Baer, and Jim Langen. Also with us from the city of South Burlington, Marlekeen Development Review Planner and Delilah Hall, our zoning administrator. So jumping ahead to the agenda, are there any additions, deletions, or changes to the order of items in the agenda tonight? That being none, let's turn to announcements and reminders. And I will turn it over to Marle, who you have some announcements about appointments to the board Marle. You do. Yes. So the city council at their last meeting reappointed both Mark and Stephanie. So congratulations and thank you for your continued commitment to serving the city. There were actually seven candidates. So it was great to see such interest. The candidate, the new candidate that they selected to join the board is actually an old board member, Frank Coakman, and he will be joining us at our July 6th meeting. That's good news. It'll be good to have Frank back and our thoughts are all with him and his family, their family. Okay. Again, thank you for those of you in attendance and watching online. Just so you know, this meeting is being recorded, and we would really appreciate it if you're not speaking or participating if you would mute your phone. And also, unless you're participating or speaking, if you would turn off your camera, because it's really hard to kind of sort out who's talking and who's participating and what so that would be greatly appreciated. Anyone who wishes to participate in the hearing should sign the virtual sign-in sheet in the chat box. This is necessary in order to be considered a participant in the meeting. Should you ever want to appeal a decision in the future? Please indicate that you have a comment by saying your name in the chat box and that you would like to ask a question or be considered a participant. Also, in spite of the fact that it's called the chat box, we really would like people to refrain from having back and forth conversations with people in the audience. It's very distracting for us. It's kind of like being in a live meeting and having people in the audience talking. So if you want to have a conversation with someone else, please take it offline. Also, anyone on the phone that would like to sign in to be considered a participant can send an email to Marlekeen at mkeen at sburl.com. Provide your contact information. You can also submit any comments you have in writing. I'm going to mute your phone. I've already talked about that and mute your audio. And so next, any other announcements, Marla? Yes, so we need to talk briefly about the July 6th meeting, which will be the next meeting of the board. For the next meeting, we have scheduled a formal site visit. This happens very infrequently. This will be the first site visit that has happened in my tenure with the board just in four years. We will be meeting at the barn on Old Farm Road at 5.30pm. We do need a quorum of board members. Again, this is very infrequent, so please make an effort to attend. And then we will be, I'll send out a memo describing what a field visit is, but it's a information gathering visit where board members act as video cameras. They can see things that are pointed out to them. There should be no discussion of anything that's pointed out. And we will appoint a hearing officer, a member of staff that will either be Paul or possibly Justin to kind of keep that process aligned with what's allowable under state law. So we'll meet at 5.30 and then the next thing I need to talk about for the July 6th meeting is because the governor has lifted the state of emergency, we are required to have a physical location for all meetings moving forward. We can still have meetings online and we will continue to have a hybrid option once we move into the new space at 180 Market Street. However, our current setup at 575 Dorset Street is not well suited for hybrid meetings. So I need the board to decide as a body whether they want to have the July 6th and July 20th meetings in person or online and then Delilah or I will be the physical location person. But if you all want to continue online for two more meetings and then we'll switch to 180 Market Street in August, that's fine. Or if you want to just switch to in person for the next two, that's also fine. What are folks thinking? Go ahead, Mark. I'm fine keeping the next two meetings virtual and then just starting clean over at Market Street. What do other folks think? I'm kind of in agreement with Mark. I'm leaning towards the virtual for the next two and then starting at market. Okay. Yeah, agreed and hopefully the city does to be a virtual option as well going forward as well too. I would say in favor of going back to in person for the July 6th cleaning is because of the field visit and we will have deliberations it may be a little less rushed if we just go as a body from the field visit to deliberations in person. But you all live very nearby so it's not really a big deal to change your mind. No, I'm still good with the virtual for July 6th and 20th. Okay, so we will go to in person meetings in August. Okay, great. Thanks guys. Thank you. Any other announcements. Marla. That is all. Okay. And are there any comments and questions from the public that aren't related to the agenda or items on the agenda? Hearing none. We'll move ahead to the first item. We'll read that the first item is agenda item number four miscellaneous application MS 2101 of the city of South Burlington Department of Public Works to construct a dog park on the northwest corner of Wheeler Nature Park. The project involves impacts to class three wetland and wetland buffers at 1100 Dorset Park. Okay, so who first of all other any recusals or disclosures. I just want to disclose that occasionally my company does do work for the city, but I don't think that that will affect my ability to be impartial on this project. Okay, thank you, Stephanie. Any others. Okay, who is here for the applicant. Justin. Yes. Okay. Who is the applicant. I am Justin Rabbit is the director of public works and the staff Lee is owned to the dog park committee. There are at least two, it's tough to tell from all the boxes here, but there are at least two and a half committee members present. I'll, they're certainly free to comment, but I'll be leading the technical discussion on behalf of the city as the applicant. So, thank you. I will need to swear you in. Do you promise to tell the truth whole truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of perjury. I do. All right, thank you, Justin. Justin, could you give us a brief overview of the project. Of course we've all read the staff report. But it's always helpful to start out with just a brief overview. And this is a miscellaneous application. I'm not quite sure what that means, Marla, in terms of the action we need to take. What, how many stages will there be for this application. Sure. Miscellaneous is similar to a site plan and in that it is just one hearing. You can either continue or close the hearing tonight, but it should be voted to be closed. Okay. Okay, good. So, Justin, introduce us to your proposal, please. Thank you. And Marla, thank you for putting up the site plan. I won't do the long tortured history of South Burlington and dog parks, other to state it is long and torturous. Which gets us to tonight almost three years ago to the date. The city council established a dog park committee and the main function of that enabling charge was to identify a location for a new dog park in the city of South Burlington. Certainly we would have been speaking to you much sooner if we had not essentially lost the last year in progress like the rest of society in general. What we are presenting tonight is a two and a half plus or minus acre dog park. Located at the south. East corner of Dorsa and Swift Street. It will is proposed to be access off of the existing parking lot shown in faded gray right off Swift Street. That parking lot is roughly 200 by 80 though it's not its shape is not uniform. And it can hold approximately 40 to 45 cars. In discussions with the dog park committee, we felt it was very important as you can see in the site plan to segregate areas and thus we're proposing a half acre park. For I guess anecdotally small dogs but the more common nomenclature would be perhaps timid animals and a two acre park for large dogs or dogs that don't mind kind of getting getting into it with other dogs. In the where the two parks meet with it with a small the dog park meet. There's a shaded area right off of the parking lot that will be the gated entry in which at which point after entering into the dog park. You can either head into the small area or the large area. That is the only entrance for the public. Above this is the Wheeler house that also houses our community gardens, but not a big parking space and it's a it's a probably a couple hundred feet through what is now the the outdoor venue space by the by Wheeler also accessing the park. And then off the rec path doesn't make a lot of sense for people arriving in vehicles. So we ended up with the primary entrance on the north side of the property. And just to the south side of the property. There is a note and a leader for a maintenance gate. And that is where staff will additionally be able to enter into the park to perform. This project is included in the city's current capital plan as approved by the city council and subsequently its voters so it's it's a community project and on behalf of the city. We are forwarding this application. Thank you Justin. I have one question is the parking lot the same parking lot that exists now if you're going walking in the nature park. There are no proposed modifications to the existing parking lot at this time. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, let's move ahead with the comments from staff. The first one is. I'm going to read these because these are short staff considers that provided information does not directly address whether in the applicants professional judgment the encroachment adversely affects the flood storage capacity. The wetland and that this criterion should be better addressed. So, you have what are your thoughts about that Justin. Yeah, sure. Certainly we submitted both are well and ecologist findings as well as the findings from. Division and the Army Corps of Engineers. Our view of this specific finding is the wetland has minimal water storage ability to begin with any runoff that arrives essentially flows freely into the channel. That leads water kind of around the southeast corner of the lot under the footpath bridge. So, if for those of you if Marla, if you can return to the site plan, if we don't mind hopping around, it might be easy to identify. Thanks, Delilah. Oh, hi, Delilah. Thank you. I know a lot of people use the wheeler park also for the natural walking area. And if you park in the southeast corner of the existing lot, the way you enter into the natural area is over a wooden footbridge and that is essentially where the drainage flow runs around this park. What we're what we're doing with the dog park. Thank you very much. What we're doing with the dog park is not going to impact at all. We're not proposing to regrade. It's just it's an existing natural area that will have to be mowed and kept down. But other than that, we're not proposing to change elevations or do you want anything that would impact the drainage around the southeast corner of this lot. Do you board members think about Justin's comments in relation to the staff comment? It sounds more like he's familiar with the site so I trust his judgment on that. I guess I have a larger question related to parking there in general and I can say that until you get through all the comments. Okay. All right. Any other comments? I would concur with Justin's assessment, especially since there's going to be no regrading and, you know, water can flow through the fence. So I don't think it's going to be changing the water course going on there right now. Good. Okay. Moving on. Yeah, I guess I do have a concern with this. It feels like there's not really an effort here to avoid the wetland. And there's quite a bit of space that's not wetland here. And we are talking about, you know, an area that's going to be sort of adding, you know, concentrated pet waste to a wetland with what seems to be maybe minimal effort to avoid it. So I do have, you know, some concern with this. I don't know, Justin, if you could speak to whether, you know, it's this wetland area would be able to be not totally avoided, but looks like there is some quite a bit of high ground here. Yeah. Would you like me to respond to that, Madam Chair? Sure, please do. Yeah, so I think in general, I understand Mr. Langen's comment. We, we as a dog park committee and as staff are approaching this site, particularly given back to long tortured history of us getting kicked out of various spaces, including city on property. We probably only have another bite or two at this dog park. So we are trying to get as much room for dog recreation as possible. This isn't a box or it's not a housing development. It says it says low impact as you can get for this type of a wetland impact. Certainly avoidance. I know where avoidance falls on the mitigation hierarchy. I think we just feel and I think we probably personally know or anecdotally just how much the community, particularly during COVID was relying on recreation and we all read all the issues about the demand for space for dog. So this plan is responsive to what the public is telling us. I'm not sitting here saying it is impossible or I'm going to fall on a sword if the impacts need to be made smaller for this reason. I'm just presenting to you more of the need side of the equation. Sure. I was struck by the comment that this is for large dog, I think for large and small dogs. This is actually larger. The area is larger than the bike path down by the lake. I mean, not by dog park down by the lake. Jim, did you start to say something? Yeah, but you can go ahead. I mean, I guess my question would be, I guess Marla, if the, or Justin, if you know if the Natural Resources Committee was asked to take a look at this. Yes. I did not specifically reach out on the planning and zoning side just now. The dog park committee worked with natural resources at all. The dog, the dog park committee is comprised of a number of folks from various city committees, including a member of the Natural Resources Committee. However, we did not formally bring this site plan to the NRC for their review. Go ahead. So, is there a plan to. Completely. Or is it going to be left somewhat naturalized in those areas? I think historically dog parks and the dog. You have really good job of, you know, kind of maintaining the lawn growth, if you will. We don't have to. And this isn't just us in South Burlington. You know, my, my familiarity with the regional dog parks is. We're happy when we get grass to grow at all. So I don't see us having a heavy maintenance hand here, Stephanie, in terms of mowing. But certainly we can expect the impact of the pups running around to, you know, have that impact, if you will. I have a question for Marla. Marla, if the, if the draft. Natural resources standards that are being considered by the planning commission. Now we're in place with this still be able to be built. I believe that recreation is one of the allowable uses. I thought that was just for like a discrete walking path, not generic outdoor recreation. So I think that's the case. Yeah, my memory on what the exact regulations are is a little fuzzy. Yeah, I guess, I mean, I certainly agree with Justin's point. And as a, as an advocate for one existing dog park, because it is located near a lot of the people who have apartments. And the dog ownership only continues to grow. So I, I understand the need to just, it does seem odd that we've, we've essentially got, if you just look at the broad rectangle, the hockey rink size, or it looks like a hockey rink from, you know, the rectangle that we've got half of it on top of a wetland buffer. I don't, I'm sure there's a reason why, but I'd like to hear if the, maybe this is a question for the dog park committee members. Why there wasn't even from the get go like, well, there's wetlands here, we should maybe have it be extend a little bit more to the south and a little bit more to the east. You know, instead of half of a park being wetland. So going, if I may madam chair, we don't, we only have about 15 feet to the south until we are sitting on top of the existing use that is the pizza oven and there so there's not really southerly expansion possibilities. We quickly get into the nature walking trails and kind of our feel of that is the last we keep barking dogs away from that use of this property, the better. And then the over the overarching answer is from my original reply to the similar question of, you know, we're having to fight in class city wide to find any space for these uses so we're coming in with this proposal as is. If the report from our wetlands are certified professional soil scientists indicated a higher degree of functions and values, we would probably have a plan that was more sensitive to that. But as you can see in the packet that's that's not at least that person's opinion. Yeah, I get it. Okay. Thanks. Other questions about this issue. So we move on. Number two, as noted in the storm water section above staff recommends the board require the applicant to demonstrate how the impacts of the proposed project are mitigated by the measures referenced in the criterion. Such mitigation may require modification of the proposed park boundaries. That's kind of more of what we were talking about. Okay. So, it's almost the same answer as the first question and that runoff from this part of the property drains by way of culvert under Swiss street and into the seas existing stormwater system, or then heads north to a large detention pond near the interstate overpass. So again, this what we're doing isn't really changing the flow of stormwater from a pre and post situation. And this is an area that's currently treated via a state regulated stormwater treatment practice to the north of the site. Or members any comments or questions or thoughts about this. Jim. I don't have additional questions on the wetland. I also have a parking question, but it sounded like maybe Dan had one as well. I'll just say anecdotally that I'm driving a kid in there around five o'clock on several days a week and that parking lot is full and people are parking on the grass. Now, and it's not a dog park, and it's not a dog park. Functionality of the traffic lines on foot street and to this location right now is, you know, it's almost gets to Spirit Street at time. So it may be hard for dog owners to even park at this site unless there's some changes, at least at some times of day. Justin, was that consideration when you were doing the planning? Yeah, we looked at the, I mean, in general, the these heavy, these heavy use recreation areas during their peak period, they're over parked with or without an additional amenity and you know, whether it's one more dog park or one more softball field. We want to, to the extent possible, take advantage of an existing inventory. If we find we need to expand parking, we have a little ability to do that directly to the west. We certainly think if we start looking to the east, we'll be running into similar wetland issues. The parking, that parking lot this stated in gray is actually attached to the original Dorset Park Act 250 permit. So we're trying to take advantage of existing existing parking knowing that people might be arriving along the bike path or they might be coming in from some other area. So I'm just going to dispute the fact that during these periods for any function at that Memorial Park parking is an issue. Any other comments before we move on or questions? I think, I think that's it for staff comments. So, the question is to vote to close or continue. What is the board's pleasure? Don, you see if anyone in the public wants to speak on this. Thank you, Mark. I meant to do that. Always good to have a former chair to enter. Thanks. Are there any members of the public who would like to make comments about this project? See the chat box. Looks like Barb is turned on a microphone. Mark, would you like to provide comments? Yeah. Hi, I'm Barbara service. I'm a resident in South Burlington and I was the chair of the committee that looked to find this site. I think Justin has done an admirable job of talking about the trials that we faced. There is another space in South Burlington. So, I'm going to go ahead and create something that will hopefully pull dogs away from running wild in Red Rocks where we have great concerns about the natural area there. And this hopefully will begin to address that concern. And we looked pretty carefully at the issue of the natural area next to this and that's one of the reasons the lines are drawn the way they are. And I know I'm repeating a little bit of what Justin said, but I want to speak as a member of the public. I think that we are cognizant of those concerns. We also had the issues around things that had already been done at Wheeler House and we're trying to be good neighbors, both with Veterans Park and with Wheeler House and with the natural area. And at the same time provide a space that's large enough. The existing dog park at Farrell is simply not adequate, especially for a large dog. We've got a number of configurations. There are things that will happen with this dog park. It will have rounded edges instead of sharp corners so that dogs can't trap each other. It will have natural amenities and not so that Justin has talked about things like using a fallen tree as an agility thing for a dog instead of putting in another piece of cement. So the area will stay as natural as we can possibly make it. And it will also be a nice thing for expanding the recreation options there at Veterans Park. And the location is a pretty accessible one and we recognize the parking challenges, but those exist anywhere that we look. And certainly they exist. People know when they can and can't go, but we also are looking at daytime usage. Huge number of dog increase in the number of dogs during COVID. And we've got people who are working remotely and take a break in the middle of the day to take their dog to the dog park. We've also got people who are retired who will be going during the day when other folks are at work. So I think that the committee did a really careful job of trying to find a place and I think the plan is respectful of the natural areas as well as the needs of the community. Thank you for your comments and thank you for your hard work on this. Other comments from the public Linda Kieson. Linda, are you there and would you like to speak? No, I guess she's not there. Is there anyone else who would like to provide public comments on this application? Erin Nunn. What is your pleasure board? Shall we close or shall we continue? Madam Chair, I'm in favor of closing the hearing and I thank the committee members for all their work. I'm going to, since we're at a public meeting and on the record, I'm going to abuse my privilege. As a member of the board and ask if Justin can provide an update on the construction of the upgrades improvements to Feral Park, Feral Dog Park. Any news or scheduling on that? Justin, are you still with us? Yeah, there you go. I am. Are we doing off topic public works 101 here? Be happy to answer any and all questions. At your pleasure. Well, I just wonder if you had an update on Feral improvements and what's the hypothetical schedule, assuming approval of this project. So, you can answer both questions remain ongoing. No matter how, how much we lower the fence someone seems to find and own a smaller dog. That can somehow get under a fence as we were faced with this week. That is not a joke. So those efforts remain ongoing. Okay. This fence will be. Obviously we have not contacted any contractors and procured bids, because that would be jumping ahead of any process. So just be subject to the availability of contractor services. And just a quick note on the fence. The fence that we're proposing is almost identical to the fence that surrounds the stormwater pond in front of Butler Farms, the southerly part of Butler Farms. So it's a natural wooden fence. It has a black mesh in between the cross members but from 30 plus feet away all you can see is a natural wood. We're trying to try to be sensitive to not wanting to see just another chain. But if we can get that installed then and I really haven't heard about fencing contractors. Oh, I know we're pretty much everyone else in the industry seems to be backed up these days. But we'll do our best. We'll do our best to get it constructed as soon as we can. Thank you. Any other comments or questions from the board. Park go ahead. I'm sorry I'm not used to these deliberations if can you explain for those of us who don't know I've been to the DRB a few times but your language is foreign to me. What if you close this then what happens. So if we close the hearing we're done taking testimony. And then the board will deliberate and issue a decision is that correct Marla. Yes, I would just note that the board to look unlike city council the board deliberate in private. That's okay but can you can you give us some sort of a timeframe about how long that takes. So the maximum amount of time the board has under state law to issue a decision is 45 days. We always try to do better than that. Okay, thank you. Thank you. So, would someone like to make a motion. Was that Dan that made a motion. Well he kind of came close. I don't know the number in front of me but I can staff can feel I make a make a motion to close the hearing for I don't have the s the number miscellaneous number in front of me, but I would make the motion miscellaneous number. Thank you. All in favor of closing this hearing, say aye. Hi. Hi. Hi. Oh, that's all right one commission all insarshions are closed. Thank you so much. Oh, please. Okay. And say hi. Um, any post. No, okay. Good, thank you. Let us move on. Justin. Thank you, committee members. Thank you, Justin. Um, all right, the next item is a continual continued final Platt application, Steve. residential subdivision. The amendment consists of modifying the tree preservation area for the purpose of changing the stormwater treatment system and updating the tree inventory to reflect existing conditions on long drive. Is there anyone? Do we have any recusals or disclaimers? Disclosures. Hi, this is Stephanie. I need to recuse from this one. Okay. Thank you, Stephanie. Who is here for the applicant? Steve Marshall from Civil Engineering Associates. Okay. Thank you, Dave. And you were sworn in at the last time we heard this, correct? That is correct. And just for the public, this is a final plat application and that is the final plat is the last step in a series of application reviews before the board deliberates in issues of decision. So we've already had a hearing for final plat. This is a continued hearing. And I would turn us our attention, if I can find it here on my other screen, to the staff report and the issues identified in it. Let me see. There are two staff comments. The one relates to requiring the minimum size of new plantings to be 2.5 inches. I have a question about that. Is that the diameter or the circumference? Marla. The hour land development regulations define it as the diameter measured six inches above the base of the tree. Okay. Okay. Applicant, what are your thoughts about that requirement? That is a requirement and that's acceptable to the applicant. Okay. Good. Any comments from the board? Okay. Moving on. The next comment is, appears a number of the proposed new trees are outside of the previously approved tree preservation area. The board should require the applicant to update and expand the tree preservation area to include these new trees which should be tagged and added to overall inventory of trees to be retained. Applicant, what are your thoughts about your ability to do that? We concur that that's an appropriate request or requirement of this application. Okay. Any questions or comments from the board? Well, it strikes me that we are at a point where we could entertain a motion to close this final plat. I'm afraid to ask for a public comment. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any comments from the public or questions? Yes. Hi. This is Beth Zygman, 338 Golf Course Road. I'm in a budding property to this development. Can you hear me okay? You sure can. Great. I have a question, a couple of questions actually. I reviewed this application and it seems that there's a list of trees here that don't correspond to the 17 trees that are to be planted to compensate for the 17 trees that are going to be removed in order to construct the drainage swell. I'm just wondering what the diameters of those trees are going to be because the tree preservation plan on the bottom of page eight does specify that the diameters of the trees that are used to replace trees that have been destroyed or removed should be equivalent to the diameters of the trees that are removed. In other words, if you remove a tree with a diameter of 12 inches, you have to plant one that has a diameter of 12 inches or two trees that have diameters of six inches, for example. I'm just wondering, maybe Marla can look for this, where the two and a half inch diameter number came from and whether the trees that are going to be planted are going to follow the tree preservation plan and if not, what's the reason for that? Marla, it seems like a good question that the board should probably be aware of. Do you feel that you can answer that, respond to that? Sure. This is more just probably best addressed by a recap of the last meeting on this subject. So at the last meeting, it was discussed by the board and agreed to by the board that removing of the removal of the 17 trees supposed to be impacted by the stormwater system seemed reasonable if the applicant provided mitigation. And the tree preservation plan outlines a specific mitigation that can take place without any further review by the board, and that's what that refers to of the one-to-one review. The board under all projects has the authority to modify a previous approval if the circumstances of that approval have changed. At the previous hearing, the board determined that, yes, in fact, the circumstances of that previous approval have changed because now the applicant is required to install this stormwater system and therefore it is appropriate to modify that specific requirement in the case of the 17 trees to be removed. I'm not making this up. I'm not saying this is in the LDRs. This is sort of the conclusion that the board came to at the previous meeting. And so at the previous meeting, the board said, well, we don't need you we don't need you to replace an inch by inch basis. What we need you to do is to provide replacement trees in areas that would be supportive of the goals of the tree preservation plan. And so prior to this page that Delilah has up right now in the package for the stormwater is a letter from CEA explaining their process of determining what trees would be appropriate to support the purpose and where it should be. So this is the applicant's proposal in response to the board's direction at the previous meeting. If I could respond to that, if I remember correctly, Marla, the board at the last meeting was not familiar with the tree preservation plan. So, you know, I'm just bringing that to their attention at this moment, because there are criteria laid out in the tree preservation plan as to, you know, that speak to the diameter of the trees that are supposed to be planted and compensation for trees that are removed. Okay, well, thank you for your comments. The tree preservation plan is part of the record for this project. So if the board has further questions about it, they can discuss it tonight or they can review it as part of their deliberations. Thank you, Marla. Do you have any other comments to contribute tonight? Is it bad? Me? Oh, no, I don't. Thank you. I just hope the board will consider the fact that that is actually in the tree preservation plan. If they're removing a tree that's, you know, 15, 16 inches in diameter and replacing it with a little sapling, you know, that takes years to mature into the same caliber tree. So that's what I wanted to bring to your attention. So thank you for the opportunity to do that. Thank you. I would remind people to please mute your audio. We are getting some feedback. If you're not speaking, are there any other members of the public who would like to make comments about this? Hearing none. Can I ask the applicant a question? So, Dave, I know at the last meeting I did ask you that anything you proposed should be reviewed against the tree preservation plan. Basically, you know, it needs to be defensible. Yeah, there's common sense and then there are legal agreements that need to be appealed. And I just want you to testify to us because obviously we will be reviewing it during our deliberations. Do you feel that your proposal still meets the intent and the letter of the tree preservation agreement that was put on this project that we will be looking at during deliberations? Yes, I do. I think if, as Marla pointed out, if you can find a time to review one more time the applicant's cover letter with regard to the marching orders that were provided by the board and again the intent of this particular tree preservation plan, that these, those particular obligations are being met with this particular proposed planting plan coupled with the understanding that where the trees are being taken out, there will be, according to the arborists for the project, virtually no change as you look at this particular facility from afar. So there are two goals with regard to this tree preservation plan. One is to maintain the shape of the canopy as one views it from afar in regards to the character on the landscape and the other is to provide screening to the surrounding homes of the proposed homes within this particular project. So things that we found as part of our recent sidewalk is that, A, things have grown up significantly in the past 17 years, but at the same time we did find opportunities to place additional trees to supplement the screening, especially in the northwest corner, to again reinforce the intent of screening associated with the project and the intent of the tree preservation plan. Okay, thank you. Any other questions from the board? So shall we entertain a motion to close the final plait? That would be a cue. I will make a motion that we close FD 2115 long drive final plait application. Thank you, Mark. Do I hear a second? Second. Okay, thank you, Dan. All in favor of closing the final plait application, SD 2115. Say aye. Aye. Opposed? And the hearing is closed. Thank you, Dan, Dave. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Okay, moving on to the next agenda item. Site plan application, pardon me, SP 2119 of homes in Shelburne, LLC, to amend a previously approved PUD consisting of 36,883 square foot auto sales and service complex and fire station. The amendment consists of expanding the pay vehicle display and storage area by 8,385 square feet at 1301 to 1325 Shelburne Road. Are there any recusals or disclosures? Okay, who is here for the applicant, please? Hi, I'm Joe Wythe. I'm with the Weidenberg Real Estate Advisors, and I'm representing the applicant tonight. Thank you, Joe. Anyone else here with you? Yes, there is. I'm Joe, Consulting Engineers. I'm here. Joe needs technical help. Okay, thank you. I think we need to swear you in. So, would you raise your right hand? Both of you, please, do you swear to tell the truth under penalty, the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth under penalty of perjury? Yes, yes. Okay, thank you. If you could please, that's just a very brief overview of what you're proposing. This is a site plan application, and tell us a little bit about it. Sure, yeah. Our application is pretty simple. We're proposing to expand the vehicle display and storage area for the dealerships by 8,385 square feet. There will be no changes to the existing buildings or access to the site. The expansion area will increase total lock coverage for the PUD from its existing 67.2% up to 70.7%. I know that staff had a question about whether we had included the concrete block retaining walls in the coverage calculations, and I did check with the engineers. They are included, so our proposal is to increase that lock coverage up to the 70.7%, which is 0.7% above the max coverage of 70% allowed in the district. As allowed in section 9.05e of the development regs, we can, we're allowed to exceed the coverage by up to 10% through the purchase of a transferable development right, and the applicant is intending to purchase one TDR from a seller in the southeast quadrant, and we do have an executed option to purchase agreement for that TDR, and we did submit that to the, we did submit that with our application, and our intent is to close on that purchase after we receive approval from the DRB, and we'll record all the required legal documents. Thank you. John, can I, can I get a point of clarification, and I guess that would be to staff, Marla? I've never heard this before, Trent TDRs for lock coverage. Yeah, so this is new, and I started this thinking that it would be, there would be no staff comments, and still decided to write it as a draft decision, because I just wanted to make sure everyone had an opportunity to understand what this is. I'm glad you asked. In the urban design overlay, which is largely Shelburne Road and Williston Road, the City Council has recently approved an amendment to the LDR, and that's the most recent amendment to the LDR that allows TDRs to be purchased to increase density in the urban design overlay. So it's dipping our toe in the water of allowing TDRs more broadly throughout the city. Okay. And TDRs can be sold from properties in the SQNRP at this time, though some changes may, depending on how this goes, that program may broaden in the future. Okay. So if one TDR allows you to expand up to 10%, does that mean that this property will have an up to 10% lock coverage bonus on it with the TDR, or is it a one-time use for like this expansion project? It's not quite that one allows you up to 10%. It's that you are allowed to purchase TDRs in order to get up to 10% more. So the max one TDR, I'm going to see how fast I can get to this section of the LDR, but one TDR only allows 12,000 square feet. Joe, do you remember off the top of your head? It allows up to 10,000 square feet. Okay. So if they wanted to go to 10%, they'd have to purchase the appropriate amount of TDRs that represented 10% of the property. Okay. Okay. All right. So if they do go over, if they purchase more TDRs than they need, they can bank them and use them later. And that would be the same review process as it is today, where if they have them and it's a minor expansion, it could be administrative, but it's a larger expansion in front of the DRV. Okay. Just to follow up, just to follow up to Marla, is there, is this policy certified somewhere? And I guess what I'm getting at, it's one thing to allow TDRs for the goal of addressing a critical need such as housing. It's another thing to allow for a TDR to increase lot coverage to sell more product. Sure. It's never against the applicant. So is this written down somewhere? Yep. It's in the urban design overlay district. Okay. Good question. Any other questions before we move on to the staff comments? Okay. The first comment is about the retaining walls and wanting to, wanting the board to confirm with the applicant that they're provided computations of lot coverage include the retaining walls. Does your computation include the retaining walls? Yes, it does. Okay. Good. Thank you. Any other questions about that before we move on? Second staff comment is asking the applicant staff recommends we ask the applicant to provide an estimate for the installed cost of the replacement plantings and bond for that amount as required in 15.15B. Yeah. Our landscape archetype at Trudell has estimated that the proposed landscaping plan here will cost $6,500. Correct me if I'm wrong, Lucy, but I believe that's the number. That's correct. So it sounds like we're set on that. Marla? Okay. Good. Number three, staff recommends the board require the applicant to demonstrate that at least eight short-term bicycle parking spaces exist or are proposed to exist prior to closing the hearing. And there's a comment about the requirements. All right. Yeah, we did check into the bike rack issue. And what we found is that there is one existing rack on the site that allows parking for two bikes. However, the bike rack does not comply or the type of bike rack does not comply with the regulations. So we are agreeable to a condition of approval that requires prior to issuance of a zoning permit the revision to the plan to show complying bike racks that provide at least eight spaces for bicycles. Great. Thank you. I'm sorry. I need that to be a specific location in order to write it as a condition. Can you describe where you think that would fit? Sure. Well, actually, I'll turn that over to Lucy Thayer, the landscape architect. She did make a recommendation on two locations. Lucy, you can grab the drawing tool if you want to draw on this plan. And this is Abby from Trudell. I'm going to actually draw this on. I sent the note over to Joe earlier today. So I think, can I annotate on here? But I have a cursor. I don't know if you can see my cursor. Yeah, if you go, if you go to drawing tools at the top and grab whichever one you want, be able to draw with those. I am sorry. I don't see drawing tools. Is that the side for me? It looks like a paintbrush down arrow next to it. Is it on the web version? Do I need to be on the desktop version for this? Should be on either. In the share screen, it attendees the ability to draw. Do you want to indicate where in the upper right, upper left or around? I do. So if you look at right now where it says bike rack on the Audi building, there's a in the, I guess the lower right corner, there's a concrete pad with a notation that says bike rack. And that's the location where one of them is going to go. It's, you know, all we need, we're going to do two loops at each location. Two loops is for bike parking spaces for a total of eight spaces. So the two loop area will be six and a half by seven and a half feet on the northern side of that area where it's right where it says bike rack. And that gosh, I wish I could find that drawing tool. But it's six and a half feet by seven and a half feet and it fits pretty neatly and it's not much bigger than the bike rack illustration symbol. Can you tell me if I want to get the right spot? You've circled the right spot with the purple. Oh, there's purple? Oh, sorry, I didn't see. Thank you. Why can't I find where this is? The second place is in front of the Acura building, the southern piece of the Acura building where it says existing sales building. And there's a little, there's a small bump out on the southwest corner of that building. The lower right part of the screen. And on the west side of that building, there's a bump out in the front, I guess would be in the front, near the front entrance of that building. And that would be another six and a half by seven and a half foot. Yep, a little bit north with that blue, that blue right about there is where that would be designated a designated space for two, two more of those inverted U loops. So, pardon me, does that address concerns board and Marla? Oh yeah, that was a thumbs up. Okay. All right, so it seems like we're ready to close this hearing. Would someone like to move? What is it about me in public comments? Are there any, thank you. Are there any public comments? Hearing none. Are there, would someone like to move that we close this hearing? We'll make it look like it will be closed. No, go ahead, Dan. Oh, I lost the SP number now. I'll make a motion that we close the hearing for the site plan. Okay. Second, anyone? Oh, second. Thanks, Mark. All in favor of closing SP 230 019, say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? No. Okay, the hearing is closed. Thank you, Joe and Abby. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, moving on to the next application. Site plan, pardon me, application SP 21021 and conditional use application CU 2102 of Tyler Barnes to construct a 6,000 square foot pump track for the purpose of outdoor recreation to the rear of an existing two building commercial complex at 1879 and 1881 Williston Road. And I just want to say it's a really good day if you learn something new. And when I first looked at this, I thought what on earth is a pump track, but I went online and YouTubeed and now I know what it is. So before we get into the details, are there any members who need to recuse themselves or disclose anything? Hearing none. Who is here for the applicant? Tyler Barnes is here. I'm a jerk. Are you, can we see you? Are you on the phone or? I'm on, my camera's on. I'm on Joe to meeting. I don't see him, but okay. So we need to do you have anyone else with you who will be testifying? I know ma'am, I do not. Okay, would you raise your right hand please? Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of perjury? I do. Thank you. Give us a little introduction to your application, please. I'd be happy to. Thank you for the opportunity. A little historical context. My family has been bitten hard by the bicycle bug that started prior to the pandemic. Unfortunately, we had a situation during the pandemic that made it a little difficult for us to fully enjoy the past time. My son got hit. It wasn't a big deal. He's fine. He bounced right back and candidly it didn't really affect him at all, but it definitely made my wife and I pause and gave us reason to start evaluating where and when we could safely practice, we were going to allow our kids to safely practice their past time. That coupled with the fact that we own an indoor recreation facility, we own a gym. This is at the property in question. We're spending a lot more time there because we can't afford to maintain as much staff on hand to keep things running for obvious reasons. Due to COVID, we started thinking and reflecting about how we could give them adequate recreation opportunities short of sitting in the lounge and staring at their iPads while they're there after school or during downtime. A good friend of mine who engineers these contracts across the U.S. volunteered to donate some of his time to help us construct one in the spare space that we had out back. In a nutshell, that's why we're here is because this is something that I would like to afford to my kids and to our staff during this difficult time to keep them busy, keep them occupied, keep them engaged with healthy passion and healthy outdoor recreational pursuit while they have to sit at the gym and watch mom and dad go work. In a nutshell, that's what we're trying to accomplish. I will say full disclosure since we have had the notice on the door of our intent to further this application and to go through this process, we've gotten a number of inquiries more than I ever thought that we would from our existing members asking if it would be open for their use. As per we've outlined in the application, that's not our intent. It would not be our intent unless that's something that the board would be amenable to. But we have a long way to go before we could really entertain that candidly. I don't have an insurance provider for that to allow for a commercial use. But if that's something the board's open to, it could really help us build our business. I'm not going to lie. So I would be happy to pursue it. I'd be happy to dive in in greater detail as to what a pump track is and what it entails. Madam Chair, if you think that would be helpful for the committee. Oh, there's a picture. Let me just ask. Thank you, Tyler. Do folks on the board want a little introduction to pump tracks or do you feel you know what they are? I'm okay with that. Without it, Mark, did you say? Okay. So I think it sounds, anyone need an explanation? So I guess we're good, Tyler. And is this picture, is this a rendering of what you would have up back? It's approximate. The layout would be slightly different, but the composition is very similar. So effectively what we'll be looking at is a series of interconnected dirt mounds that are engineered in such a fashion that would allow the rider to successfully navigate their bicycle around the dirt mounds without having to pedal by using the momentum of going up and over the mounds as in employing a pumping fashion. To circumvent the track. Each one is slightly different in shape and there's a little bit of an arc to it. It's hard to get an exact engineering layout of one without, because candidly, most pump track designers kind of go with the flow and use the natural terrain that's available to them. With the understanding, particularly in this case, that there are very specific guidelines that we would have to put in place as to what we could do and what we could not do. But generally speaking, I chose this picture because it's representative of what we would plan to do both in terms of the composition and because aesthetically, it's the look. It would be manufactured, for lack of a better term, out of a number of different types of soil and we would plan to use native plantings both in between the sections of track and on the perimeter, specifically on the ridges of the track, both as erosion control and also to further complement the aims of LDR 12.01, which is to leave the areas of within 100 feet of potash growth in as natural and in as undisturbed state as possible. Currently, those lands are designated as either parking lot or a picnic area that consists of mowed grass and maintained landscaping. It's our hope that this would help further move us towards the aims of those LDRs. Okay, so it would not be paved? No, no. It's comprised of dirt. Now, they do compact the dirt in such a fashion as to make sure that it doesn't erode over time or that it holds up under the elements, but it's not paved. Okay, good. Thank you for that overview. Before we dive into the staff comments, does the board have any questions? Yeah, I just have one more question and I guess it's an understanding of the use, I guess. And I guess maybe, you know, you provide a very detailed narrative that I didn't read completely through, I just tried to get an understanding of what your proposal is, but you mentioned that you were not looking for an approval for commercial use on it, but so is it just for your use, for your kids' use? Like it's your private use and it'll be, you know, are you fencing it? Is it how are you going to prevent people from using it when you're not there? And or is it more like, you know, all of your, you know, the people who come to the gym, can they use it? So if you can give a little narrative understanding on that. Sure, great, great question. It's our intent currently for it to be private. And so it'd be for my family's use and our staff's use during off hours. So it would not necessarily, it wouldn't increase any trip ends to the facility or really change the nature of what it is that we're doing. We're currently zoned for indoor recreation and a few other uses. So we would need a conditional use to extend to outdoor recreation. With the board's permission, we'd be happy to explore extending that and opening it up and making it more for commercial use, but that's not our intent at this time. How we would prevent other folks from using it two ways principally. One, with the way that we would propose to engineer the track, you wouldn't necessarily be able to get enough inertia to make it around the track without having a designated start zone, right? So one section of the track that's built up a little bit higher than the rest as to give you enough of a ramp to drop in, so to speak, to the rest of the track, that would be gated. So you couldn't get into that without, you could, but it would take some effort. The other measure that we propose to take and we're open to feedback on it is, and what we have seen done, it's very popular with BMX tracks across the country, is to establish two posts on either side of the track that can be cemented or just dropped into the ground that would allow chain to be strong across them during off hours. So effectively what that would do is, even if you were to somehow circumvent the gate and to get into the start track, you would go down and then you have to stop before you hit the chain and then move your bike around and then try and regain momentum again. So just effectively for folks who really wanted to pirate the course, the juice wouldn't be worth the squeeze. In addition to that, we've, as we've got on calls, we propose to put a number of no trespassing signs up and the installation of an extension of our security system that would involve, we've sourced a very low-cost, for lack of a better word, term, a ring doorbell system that would alert us when folks are on the property and would give us a quick video shot, snapshot and would allow us that two-way communication with those folks should someone be on the premises when they're not supposed to be there. Okay. These are all great questions. Thanks, Mark. And thank you for your... Can I interject a little bit here? Sure. So the board approves a use and it is blind to the success or lack of success of that use. So what Tyler is asking for here is outdoor recreation as a use and this is very akin to like when we talk about gas stations that want to be renovated and the gas stations that as well, you know, it's a staying a gas gear, you know, we're like, but it's increasing trips by like 200 trips and they say it's still a gas station. There's nothing you can do about it. The inverse holds true here too. You know, the use is the use and if the board approves it, Tyler can use it as outdoor recreation broadly. So I would encourage, you know, I guess I'm going to take an opinion and I know I'm not supposed to have an opinion. I would encourage the board to not include any conditions that require it to remain private because, you know, as the state, we would like to see businesses be successful. And it's difficult for me to imagine a scenario in which a successful open to, you know, members of the gym, people who are willing to sign a waiver version of this is really creating an adverse impact. I do notice that it's in the traffic overlay district. It's in zone C, which has the highest number of trip ends available to it. So there may be some scenario where, you know, the board has a condition that says, you want to open it to the public. We would, you would have to come back for a zoning permit and pay your trip ends. But other than that, I would encourage the board to leave this pretty open for Tyler to grow his business as he sees appropriate. Those are helpful comments. Thank you, Marlon. Thank you, Marlon. I would agree with that, Marlon. I guess the one question that Tyler's pointed, would he have to come back for a conditional use? Or if we don't put any conditions on it, is he sort of free to operate it as long as he comes in to pay his trip ends? So this is a conditional use hearing now. So if you use, he has approval for the use. What I would suggest as a condition is that if it were to become public as part of his zoning permits, he would have to demonstrate, you know, what the increase in trips is and illustrate that, you know, he A, is under the budget for the state and B, you know, pay the traffic impact fee for those additional trips. Yeah, okay. Yeah, I'd be supportive of that because I think it's going to be applicant to flexibility to grow his business without our sort of interference as long as he stays within the regs. I think it's good. I have a question. Tyler, are there others of these in the area? There are. There are. There's one at Catamount Family Center. Actually, there's two at Catamount Family Center in Williston. There's Essex, the town, well, forgive me. I don't know whether Maple Street Park in Essex is city or town or junction. I've lived here my whole life. I still can't figure it out. But Maple Street Park has one, wherever that is. Cochran's Enrichment has one. It's open to the public. They're increasingly popular and it's pointed out in the brief. They're increasingly being used in environmental and sensitive areas as a means for both to help with erosion control and also to give folks the opportunity to explore otherwise ecologically sensitive areas with minimal impact. Building a trail network through a nature preserve is not always optimal, but having a pump track in a small designated area can give families an opportunity to do something other than just walk on designated paths that kids can get excited about. Interesting. There isn't one in South Rowlandton. Thank you. All right. Are we ready to move through the staff comments? The first one relates to staff room and we're going to modify the plan to neither be in the right of way nor within the drip zone of existing trees. What are your thoughts about that? Is this, I'm sorry, is that addressed to me? Yes, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. So, if previous trees are not present on the site, they must be replaced in the same location with the same species or the applicant must request to amend the site plan to relocate the trees or replace with a different species. Yeah, Madam Chair, if we could move to completely agree and we were more than happy to comply, we've included two proposals for the layout. The one that we're currently looking at on page 21 does not comply because it is in the right, this start ramp would be in the right of way. The next one does comply. We would propose to move this start ramp what would over to the left on the screen, which would be approximately, I believe that's southwest. So, as to move it out of the right of way and out of the drip zone and then the perimeter of the track would be constructed in such a fashion that it would go around the drip zone of those trees. Excuse me, we'd be happy to modify. Again, it's not perfect because the trees are, it's a moving target, right? This is a little bit of a liquid dynamic, a fluid dynamic, so the trees grow each year, but generally, but we would modify the track to make sure that it extends outside of the drip zone. Okay, any comments or questions? Make sure I understood correctly. So, this one that's shown on the screen, I've drawn, unfortunately the pens that I use came out black, but I've drawn the right of way. You have the start box out of the right of way and then you would be proposing to take what you've drawn as the dash line around the pump track and just spread it out a little bit farther than it's shown, so that it's outside of the drip zone of those trees. Is that what you said? That's correct. I mean, right now, it's only really close. It would appear to the tree furthest to the left and also at the start track, the start ramp itself. That's what those would be the problem areas, but we would address it with all the problem areas. Okay, I think that the second, no, one of the other staff comments of the storm water section, and it's not highlighted in red, which is why I'm bringing it up now, the water section had expressed a preference for the other configuration because it provides a greater buffer between the pump track and the stream and redevelops the existing gravel parking lot rather than disturbing existing green space. I guess, how does the board want to wait those two considerations? I mean, I thought that I kind of was leaning towards the first option as well. I'm just saying that it is further away from potash growth. Okay, others? Thank you, Stephanie. I'll concur with the civil engineer. Okay. All right. Okay. Does that give us what we need to move on? Well, I think you need to provide, yeah, so if you, no, that's okay, because if you guys are inclined to prefer option one, the condition would be to move the start box out of the right of way. Okay. And, you know, I also said in the staff comments, I would really encourage the board to find that it's an area rather than a specific loop. It should be generally configured as shown in option one with the start box moved out of the access, but as Tyler said, this is something that's a little bit fluid and will be designed on the fly. Okay. Can I ask a question to Marla and to the board? One of the considerations that I understood in the LDRs was that in addition to that, we have two issues with how the lot is currently configured that has been grandfathered in. One is the fact that we have a parking lot within 100 square feet or within 100 feet of potash growth. And the other is the fact that we have, we have mode maintained yard within 100 feet of potash growth. If being totally transparent, it would be our preference to have option two. Well, selfishly, I don't want to have to mow anymore. I know it's not great for the environment. It's more expensive for a building in Candley. It's time that I don't have. And by doing option two, we would disturb the green space that would happen, but it would then be left in a natural state after that point in time. My question to the board is, is that more desirable than just used, would that be advantageous and more consistent with the aims of what we're trying to get at with the LDRs? Or should we just go in the gravel lot? I'm open to either or. I'm asking the question because this is not my wheelhouse. Thank you. What are your thoughts for? Any specific thoughts? Marla, do you want to weigh in? I would only weigh, not on a professional level, but as staff, I would weigh in to say that I guess this is one of those situations where the board can digest it, digest the question. I think it's a great question from Tyler and I think there's, you know, pros and cons to both. So the board has the authority to make the final call during the deliberations. If you want to let it sink in and think about it and make your decision in the decision. So we could actually close tonight and then take care of this during deliberations and it doesn't sound like, Tyler can live with either, either solution. Yes. Okay. All right. Good. Let's number two comment, I can just move the surface of the right of way. Is that something you're prepared to do, Tyler? Candidly, Madam Chair, we're not. And Marla, I hope I wasn't quick in my response that I sent you this afternoon. That wasn't my intent, but as I understand it, the right of way is this area that we're looking at that says, to the right of the screen, that says common right of way, volume 88 pages 105 and 360. And there's a little arrow pointing to it. Part of that is some confusion on my behalf. Yeah, because we've, we've, that, that area has, has very recently been paved in 2016 when we moved in our neighbor, Doug Netty and Fernando Cresta and, and I chipped in to repave that section of road. And it's in pretty good shape. I took photos of it and submitted them to Marla this morning. Do you want to pull those up if you don't mind? Because, yeah, I mean, this is something I, I have no feelings. Don't worry about that. Know what? So I have no feelings. Don't worry about feelings. But this is a comment from the fire chief and maybe he misunderstood the location. So if you would walk us through the photos, I think that'd be helpful. I'm working on it coming up. Give me a second because it's coming up slowly on my laptop. Yeah. I think Marla, and members of the board, I do, I think candidly that the fire chief misunderstood what, where we were talking about. So we, we paved together with my neighbor, Doug Netty and Fernando Cresta, we paved the entire length of the, the right of way all the way down to the end of his property. Um, after that, it turns to dirt. It turns to gravel. That is in rough shape. And, uh, off to the right of that is the lands behind our property, which are owned by South Bruins and Realty Corp. The old Randy Munson land trust. I, it's, it's, this is, I, I have no evidence of this, right? But I think they interpreted where the pump track was going as that space because this is the road right here. And if you can see, but this is our red building over here, please forgive the poor landscaping off to the side, but you can see the white truck that's parked in our back lot. That's right where we would propose the track to actively start or very close to it. You can see that it's paved all the way up there and right to that spot. And it's the roads in, I mean, it's, it's, it's a Vermont road, right? So it's not perfect, but it's in pretty good shape. And it was, it was repaved just, just a few short years ago. And, um, you know, by being candid, if it's, if it's a, if it's a question of having to repave that road, I can't afford it as much as I would love to do that. I just, there's no way that I can swing that, especially with construction cost being what they are. I can't, I can't swim. And I would, I would, I would hope that I would need to, because I, again, it looks like it's in pretty good shape, but that's, I will defer to the, to the board. Yeah. I mean, it looks fine to me. Um, Marla, board members, do you think there was a misunderstanding? So you don't own the unpaved portion? No, I do not. Okay. Sounds like a misunderstanding. Yeah, I would agree with that. Yeah. Marla, does that sound right? Okay. Let's move on. Number three, the provided plans indicate an existing approval dumpster to the rear of the building nearest to proposed use. Staff recommends the board require the applicant to demonstrate that the dumpster will remain accessible for pickup. Um, yada yada. Is that acceptable to you, Tyler? It is. Um, the, what, in the comments that I, it made tomorrow this morning, we don't use a dumpster. That was, that was a condition of the old use. So we only use small trash bins, similar to what you have at a residential, in residential neighborhood. So that area is, is just, we just use it as storage. So I don't know that that still applies. Um, but if, if, if that's something that's needed, we'd be happy to, to take a look. Um, that was also another reason why I thought that what, what I'd prefer, um, option two on page 22, um, is because it wouldn't change the turnaround at all. So currently they have no problem getting in and out. There's plenty of space and, um, as a matter of fact, we have to politely remind our neighbors sometimes that receive, um, shipments that they cannot use our parking lot, or at least we would ask them to kindly give us permission before they bring in a, uh, 42 foot tractor trailer truck and they use it to turn around. So there's, there's plenty of space for that. But if, if, if there's something that we need to do to demonstrate to the board that, that there's ample space, we're happy to do it. Can I have a question? Sure. So where are, where does the truck come to pick up your toasters today? We wheel it off to the side because we keep the, we keep the, the totes inside. Off to the side, like. No, inside. We keep the totes inside and then we just wheel them out to the side of the building. So not where the location is shown on the plans. Correct. So if we go back to, we, we have, we have two totes who are recycling, uh, and a waste tote and we wheel them out of the building around to the side of the building. So they don't, there's no pickup. I think I have a picture of that. Okay. Yeah. Are those two toes there? Yeah, that's just for reference, but we typically bring them over if, um, to the side. No, unfortunately that's, I mean, yes, but like, if we look from the top view, I can, I can show you exactly where we bring them. Okay, give me a second. We have left them there before and they've come and picked them up with no problems. Let me get to that top view. So yeah, thank you very much. Um, if you look at the, of our building, the bottom right hand corner, we typically leave them right there. So if you look at the, the portion of the building that's denoted 41, 30 square feet of onto warehouse space, we leave them to, yeah, right there. Are we good with that board and Marla? Yeah, that only needs any concern I have. Okay. Good. Board, any other concerns related to that? All right. One more comment on number four. Staff recommends the board require the applicant to demonstrate that at least three short-term bicycle parking spaces either exist or are proposed to exist prior to closing the hearing. So we currently have three spaces in front of the building, but what we would propose to do, Madam Chair, is in the area that we're looking at. And I have a photo of that just so everyone can see it's not all that pretty or sexy, but going back to the overhead view on page 21 or 22, we would propose there's a concrete slab that's outside of one of our egresses. And we would propose, yeah, so right now if you, yeah, that photo or the, that photo will work. So if you look to the right of these, the trash cans there, there's a garage bay door. You'll see in front of that there's a concrete slab. That slab is just a giant slab. And we'd be more than happy to put in as many bike racks as the city would like to have us to put there. That's not a problem. And they would need to conform to the regulations in terms of style. What type? Yes, ma'am. That's the current rack that we have. And that does not conform. That is okay. Okay. All right. Any other questions for Mr. Barnes before we close the hearing or vote to close? Are you taking public as well? Thank you. What is it about that? That is so hard to me. Thank you. Are there any members of the public who would like to comment on this proposed application? Yeah. This is John Wilking. Hey, John. Hi. When you look at the pictures of the, hang on a second, let me just get something turned off here. When you look at that picture, the building in the back is mine. Yes. 30 Kimball Avenue and is a quiet class A minus office building overlooking, well, one, one corner of it is overlooking the site. And so my concern is only one of, of noise and, and traffic. So can Tyler, can you speak to me about what is expected? I understand it's being fairly private. I expected it to be fairly quiet, but if it was a playground, it would be a problem. No, I completely understand. And I'm sorry. I'm just trying to find, Mr. Wilkins. Yes. Do we currently, if I may ask, and again, do we currently, I guess, my question is, do we currently, the amount of noise that we currently make, does that, does that affect the operations that you're building or does that in any way intrude upon your business? No, sir. Everything's fine. Okay. Then I can, I think I can very confidently say that this would, there would be effectively be no change. What we do with the gym, we played music loud enough to take the tartar off your teeth and all candor. And we open up those giant bay doors when we do it. And if that hasn't caused any disruption in the operations of your business, I can 100% guarantee you that this will not add any to that. There will be no speakers outside. There will be really no noise. There'll be no shouting. This, these are just the kids recreating the same way that they do when they attend our kids classes. And we hope we do programming in that back lot. So I feel very confident in being able to say that it should not have, it will not have any impact on the business. But I thank you for the question and for the inquiry. With regard to traffic and trip ends, being totally honest, if I do not, even if we were to open this up to public use, I don't see this as being something, and I would love to be proven wrong. I would love it. I don't see this as something that we could do to drive a lot more traffic to our business. I see this as something as an incremental value driver that we could use for our existing customers. And I see this as being an incremental service that we could offer to our existing customers. I don't think we're going to drive a lot more business, new business to our location. I could be wrong. I could be dead wrong. But I just, I don't see it. And if it is, that is something that I would, that's a good problem to have. And I would gladly take up mediation efforts with you somehow in some way shape or form. Very good. Thank you. Thanks, John. Any other members of the public who would like to comment? Okay. Hearing none. Shall we move toward closing this hearing? What is your pleasure? Can the chair make a motion? I keep asking that. All right. I move that the plan application SB 21021 be closed. And can you talk about application use? Dan, you second that? Yes, ma'am. All in favor? John, quick question. Sure, Mark. You got a little broken up there. Did you put both applications for closure? I'm sorry. Did you put both applications? He has the site plan application and a conditional use application. Oh, I didn't realize those were separate. Do we need to vote separately on those, Marla? You can close them both together. Yeah. Okay. All right. So I'm sorry. I will amend my motion to include closure of conditional use, CU 2102. We have a second. Second? Thank you, Alyssa. All in favor of closing these two applications? Say aye. Aye. Aye. Chair votes aye. Opposed? Okay. They are closed. Thank you, Tyler. And good luck. Thank you. Thank you very much. If I may ask, and please forgive my ignorance, what does this, what does that mean? What happens now? So the board has up to 45 days to issue a decision. They typically act much faster than that. The decision is issued. There is a 30-day period after which you can get your zoning permit. We can talk offline about potentially waiving your appeal period, but you'd have to get the signature of all people who have participated in the meeting. Okay. Very good. Thank you. Okay. The next application is Site Plan Application SP 21-020 of Burlington International Airport to install landscaping at the northeast corner of the intersection on Williston Road and Airport Drive in accordance with the approved overall landscaping plan at 1200 Airport Drive. Any recusals or disclosures? Hold on. This is Stephanie. I'm going to recuse from this. Okay. Thank you, Stephanie. Any others? Okay. Who is here for the applicant? We have a team of people. This is Larry Lackey, Director of Engineering and Environmental Compliance at the airport. Hi, Larry. Hi. I'm Carolyn Irvin with Wagner-Hottson Landscape Architecture. Hi, Carolyn. I'm Keith Wagner from Wagner-Hottson Landscape Architecture. Okay. Anyone else? And I'm Jackie DeGest with EIV Technical Services. Okay. And Stu Monkrieff with Jacobs Engineering Group. Okay. That's it. Okay. I'm going to swear you all in. If you all would raise your right hand, please. Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth under penalty of perjury? Yes. Thank you. Okay. Why don't you give us a brief, very brief overview of your project? Okay. This is Larry. We'll give you a brief overview of a team approach like we have in the past. And I'll be very quick because I believe most people understand the or know the history here back in 2018-19. And as continues today, the airport has multiple applications before the board. It became obvious that there had always been a challenge with respect to meeting the landscaping requirements for cost and supply for those different developments. So in late 2019 to 2020, the airport took on a very large project of developing an overall landscaping plan from Williston Road, Down Airport Drive, Airport, Arcway, and Kirby. So with that, we got the Airbnb approval in June and 2020. And then because of that, then there was an application from the hotel that required the use of some of that landscaping plan to devote some of those costs because that threshold couldn't be met. So we have identified and we also have the current terminal integration project, again, where that threshold couldn't be met. So we came up with the first phase of a long-term plan here to address those costs and also improving the entrance off from Williston Road and the airport drive as our first phase where it'll entail the costs from the additional costs or overrunning costs from the terminal integration project and the hotel and beyond that in this phase one. So from that, I'll turn it over to Caroline and Keith to do a description and we're ready for, we responded fully, we received comments late last Wednesday and we responded fully in writing to those comments to staff by Friday. So that we have responded and we're ready to respond further tonight and we've had further discussion with Marlon on the current project along with the other projects. So Caroline or Keith? Yeah, thanks for the opportunity to present tonight. Could we maybe pull up, let's see, which one is that? Page 10, which shows the visual of what the plan looks like. Yep. So the design team worked to create an iconic landmark at the corner of Williston Road and airport drive that we hope would truly create a gateway onto the airport campus. The main features of this design are three, the Vermont Grand Up block walls that you can see in this photo, the native birch groves behind and the BTV letters that you see. These features build on the concepts that we established in the master plan. The letters are meant to be a modern sculpture with a nod toward the aeronautical world and they're intended to as an interpretation of an airplane fuselage and are to be fabricated out of aluminum with metal rivets. I don't know if you can see the rivets but they do show up on a closer photo. The letters are positioned behind the Vermont Grand Up block walls and they're surrounded by the native birch groves and then we have planting beds that sweep around the walls and under the letters and the native birch and they create sort of a natural carpet of fern and low ornamental grasses and then there's a red twig dog with the sort of emerge behind the letters and in and around the trees that will add a winter interest. So the overall intent is to create a unified composition of those three main elements and that the sculpture letters inform size and orientation will become a recognizable monument to the airport and its culture. I'll also add that, you know, we are doing some grading there that will vastly improve the looks of the entrance off Wolfson Road. So that's pretty much it. Thank you for that overview Caroline. So I have a question to start with. There are currently some like granite small walls. Those are different than what you're proposing here. Yeah, those are, I don't think they're granite but they are, those are going to be removed. Okay. All right. Okay, I see. Yep. Okay. And it seems like the main concern in the staff report is letters and whether it's actually sculpture or a song. I think we need to have some conversation about that. Yes. Don, if I could introduce that subject please. This is a sign. There is no question that this is a sign. It is an advertisement for what is the business on the site. If it were, it could be a sculpture and not be a sign but as advertisement for what their products are sold on the site or what business has happened on the site is a sign. You know if they were to switch it doesn't letters don't make a sign if it's like hello or like smile or something. It could be considered a sculpture but because it's related to the business it is a sign and must be treated as such. So the questions here are in the original approval and a 21 the applicant had said that they were going to present a sculpture. They could switch it to a sculpture. They could switch it to you know hello or smile. It would be kind of silly or they could do like an airplane here or you know something airport related. I don't know. So that's an option. They could do a sign and make it meet your sign ordinance which has a maximum size. You know certain requirements they would do that. They could go so. Or the final option would be to go through the process to request the planning commission modify the sign agreements to allow what they have from house. That's a much longer process. I wouldn't recommend to make like a short-term solution to getting them an offset project for their proposed internal interventional hotel but that is sort of an option that they can pursue later if they want. As the applicant we're prepared to propose just for tonight and we move the letters and come back with a sculpture or revise signage that meets the requirements. We believe even without the letters this is a vast improvement and we'll meet the intent of our overall landscaping plan. We also as you're aware we're waiting for the decision as Marla alluded to the on the terminal integration project and our understanding is that there may be a condition with respect to the zoning permit on this and the zoning permit on that. So obviously any delay is going to be very costly for us so we are prepared to make to remove the letters and then again this will be a vast improvement to this area and come back separately. I have a question are the letters is the sign as it's portrayed here inconsistent with the city's requirement for signs? They are yeah they're too big. Okay we did do the calculation and we could modify them but I believe bring them down about six inches and we believe they would meet that requirement. Okay okay so board are we set to say that we've had sufficient discussion about this issue before we take public comment? Can I ask a question? Sure go ahead Dan. Is there a reason the sign doesn't say Burlington International Airport? Only because we wanted to be a sculptural element similar to the one you'd see at LAX more of a sort of a bold graphic sculpture and then the fuselage that was the only reason we we didn't want it to be this very traditional and parochial you know sign on a wall. That and if you from a navigational standpoint BTB it's actually KBTB are the facility identifier for aviation like parallel is KTLT that's where the DB comes from so and that's why we're looking to make it more of a sculpture than a sign but we understand that and are willing to pull those letters for tonight. Yeah I get that and I get the connection and for people in the industry I'm thinking of the general public. Right. If you live here you know what BTB means if you're a tourist or you're driving around you're looking for the airport especially given Vermont's draconian signage laws. Somebody coming on Williston Road do they know? Do they know the airport? I realize things are a lot easier these days now with phones you know but is there signage east bound west bound or coming from Kennedy from Kennedy Drive yeah signs that say airport straight ahead but if you're coming on Williston Road either direction is there any signage at all that indicates the airport is coming up? I believe there are small signage on the side that do identify the airport coming up yes. There are the agency of transportation off of premises business directional signs. Yes. There's an OB there's a black OBDS somewhere that says airport? There is along Kennedy and I believe there's on westbound Williston. Any other questions? Yeah okay. I just wanted to comment sort of in line with what Dan was saying I find the giant BTB letters sort of misleading just in I know it's the Burlington airport but this is in the middle of south Burlington. It just seems strange to me to advertise Burlington Vermont in south Burlington without really specifying that it's the airport. I think it's a little bit odd. We can remove the letters and come back with a modified signage or sculpture if it would satisfy the board. BTB is the indicator of the Burlington international airport from a navigational standpoint. Right but it's also the indicator of the city of Burlington and this doesn't specify the airport so if you're not a local I think that it's pretty misleading. I get where you're going with it that's just my opinion. Any other comments from the board? We'll take public comment but it sounds like we're not going to close this hearing tonight that we need to continue it. Am I reading that correctly Marla? So I think that this is where you know we had very maybe able to testify on whether they have sufficient landscaping budget with just straight up removing the sun and dealing with that at a later time to address their needs for the terminal and hotel. And we do and Caroline can take you through that. The hotel was $39,600 and the tip was $33,477.71. So Marla you were breaking up there's a lot of feedback in the background you were breaking up I'm not sure what you're advising us to do. Okay I'll try again. Is this any better? Okay so Larry had suggested that they remove the sign from this proposal altogether and come back to it another time with a sculpture. So they could potentially close tonight if the remaining elements of this project A you know meet what the board considers to be an entry feature and B provide sufficient budget to address the deficit for the terminal project and the hotel project. Okay applicant what are your thoughts? Caroline is going to explain that. So there's sort of two options we could go with the first would be to just go with a phase one that would be the walls just the walls and that the cost for the walls is $35,400. The tip the tip budget that would be going towards this project depending on what the board determines the conditions are would be $33,477.71. So there's a difference of basically $1,900 that the airport would be willing to fund that amount at this time in order to build the walls. Option B would be to call phase one both the granite walls and the plantings which comes to a total cost of $57,900 and then if we were to apply the tip money the $33,477 and the hotel money which I had actually when I wrote this to you Marla I had the wrong number it's actually the hotel's $39,500 that leaves let's see an excess of $15,077 that could go towards phase two which would be the sculpture if that makes sense. Yeah we also two things the hotel has asked for a continuance or an extension on their zoning permit application the May of 2022 so that that shouldn't impact this at all. That's it. So where do we go from here? We would like the hearing obviously like approval without the letters because our understanding is this is also tied to the tip project which is a significant undertaking if it gets pushed back is going to go into the winter and that's more into the winter than we wanted to. So we are willing to take the letters out that's a significant improvement that we can build upon on that corner and move this project forward and it's consistent with the you know overall landscaping plan that was previously approved. Okay thank you Larry. So board members is that is what Larry suggests acceptable and Marla does it meet your needs? It does it yes it's a question for the board that I don't have any concerns about what they're proposing as long as the board feels like the proposal without the sculpture is still an entrance feature. Yeah I'll speak up I'm okay with that proposal and and I guess speaking of this is a this is a true and literal gateway. Unfortunately it didn't say so we were on it because then I would have walked it. But it does make me wonder about yeah it's great it's great you're doing that work at the corner that's sort of a you don't even know you know it's it's kind of dumpy looking there as you well know right and as an improvement and but I would encourage you to you know talk to talk to others in the city or other people doing design work around there and you know come up with you know some some other ways to make it more of a gateway feature and and maybe it's yeah maybe obviously something better something better than a wooden sign but but some sort of announcer that's presence is a great idea. We're we're committed just like we were with all the effort and time that went into coming up with the the you know the long-term landscaping plan so we're we'll work this until we get approval for all this but in the interim we really need approval actually thank you. Thank you okay I would like to entertain a motion to close site plan 23020 or 21. If you take a couple of comments. Thank you I'm sorry is there any public comment about this proposal? Thank you Delilah. Anyone want to offer some comments? I'll make a motion they'll be closed site plan application SP 21020. Thank you Mark. Second. Thank you all in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? No. So we have closed the hearing thank you all for coming tonight and good luck. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Okay our last application tonight is sketch plan SD 2116 of beta air incorporated to amend an approved plan for an airport complex the amendment pardon me consistent demolishing two existing buildings totaling 9,029 square feet boundary lines between five existing lots for the purpose of constructing a 41 foot high approximately 265,000 gross square feet office and manufacturing building and related site improvements at 3070 Williston Road. So this is a sketch plan for those of you who aren't familiar with this this is kind of a high this is a first step high level overview of the project which gives the applicant an opportunity to get some feedback from the board and from staff and get some idea of where our thinking might be going relative to this project. So let's are there any recusals or disclosures to announce? I'm just a staff manager recuse from this project. Okay. Thanks Stephanie. Good evening everybody. I'm Katie Clark. Hey Joel. Katie Joel Page was gotten partners architects. We have art Clugo here as well and Chris Gendron with Stan Peck and Gregor Macefield with studio three architecture. Good evening and Larry Wacky from the owner. Hi Larry. Can you say Greg's last name again? Gregor Macefield. This is a sketch plan so there's no need to swear people in so applicant I would ask you to give us a very brief overview of the project. Okay. Who would like to do that? I'm going to well all right you want to hear hi this is art Clugo with the applicant the beta. Marla are you able to bring up the short slide deck that we had sent today? Short the level of the presentation. We can pull that up for you. Yeah Marla it's what they're looking for in supplemental storage. If I could suggest also when a lot of mics are open is when we get feedback so if you are not directly answering or speaking please mute yourself because it does create feedback. Good suggestion. Okay so let me go into supplemental and open the item that you need. There you go. We can go to the next slide please. So just just for reference and maybe maybe the next slide that would be great. So for those of you who are unaware of what we're doing here we are building zero operational admissions aircraft and a charging network that will eventually span across the country. Right now we're doing it right here in Burlington Vermont. We have grown rapidly in the last year we have about 270 employees and if we're successful we'll potentially double that number with our manufacturing facility that will need to obviously construct more aircraft. Right now we're right we're headquartered at the Burlington International Airport in what folks refer to as the North Hanger right next to the main terminal and our first mission will be organ delivery. We were founded in 2017 with support from United Therapeutics. Martin Rothblatt their CEO and founder was looking for a more sustainable way to deliver organs and we were hoping to fill that gap and also fly cargo missions and eventually fly people as well. The next slide shows our charging network and the projects that we're currently targeted that are currently targeted and permanent some of them that are completed. Our aircraft flies about 250 nautical miles between charging and you can see down here in the left hand corner the most simplified method for charging which looks like a car charger. It can actually charge vehicles as well electric cars and up at the top shows our charging pad that's located right here at the airport which has crew quarters and a control center. Folks like Martin will use it to house pilots and you know keep a staff on call for those critical missions when they are delivering human organs. Let's see that's all I have so Marla you can take it away please. Here let me grab or art yeah let me grab Marla yeah Marla Marla or Madam chair hi this is Art Clugo with beta and picking up where Katie just took us the whole goal tonight is to give you a little bit about beta talk a little bit about the manufacturing plant and go through staff's comments and we'd like to turn it over to Madam chair to go through staff's comments and we have some additional graphics for each one of those comments as we get there. Okay let's start with the comments. The first one staff notes the applicant has not made a specific proposal for the area within the project area to the rear of the proposed building this area is a historic quarry and is lower than the surrounding grade. Staff recommends the board ask the applicant to describe the proposed use of that area. Okay and so I can take that one if you never want to hear me okay. You're a little muffled but go ahead go to try. That area um mute me or it's the owl isn't it sorry we're just working through some technical difficulties but so just to describe that area it's called behind the building or east of the site that area is actually considered a runway protection zone we actually avoided it on purpose because that area restricts development for such uses as buildings and parking lots basically to protect the public from an aircraft that may undershoot or overshoot the airway or the runway so that area is limited by the FAA for any public development which is which is the one reason why we didn't go in that area. There is still some opportunity potentially to do stormwater treatment in that area and we're still evaluating that. One other thing we should you should know about the site on that side is that the if you can see the runway and that graphic that the Lila has up there's a there's approach cones that limit the height of the building and that that as an aircraft comes in there needs to be a clear area below that aircraft as it comes in and we can't impact we can't be within that when we when we look at that cone the height of our building is restricted by that elevation of that cone as we approach and we've done a preliminary analysis to establish a max building height and location based on that cone and we've submitted an application to the FAA to further confirm our preliminary assessment. Okay, can I ask a question? Sure go ahead Marla. So Chris what is the height that you believe you can construct in that zone? It's hard to determine an exact height because the building the finished floor can change right now or the the manufacturing crew needs around 59 to 60 feet to do the operations that they need. And you think that that's your proposal? This is our to pick up on what Chris just said there the average the building height was calculated at 41 feet high based on the land development requirement to use the average grade around the building now because the site slopes 20 feet from the front to the back the height of the building on the runway side will be closer to 60 feet the height of the building on the wilson roadside or the office side will be closer to the 41 feet probably a little bit less as we described in the application. Does that help you Marla? Yeah that was a moral that I was wondering what did you call it a colombo question I knew the answer already I just thought the board might be interested. Okay thank you thank you. So have we addressed number one board? Historic quarry start the proposed use of that area okay let's move on to two recommends board discuss the project design and gateway vision with the applicant the board may wish to have this discussion in conjunction with the site plan parking placement standards below applicant what are your thoughts about that applicant number yes so for item number two if we could go back to the opening presentation we have a couple of slides that we would just like to talk through to work through this particular item we want to look at slide number 10 and slide number 11 which are noted as staff note number two there we go so in in terms of what the gateway or the the entry might look like we have two images here one in the lower right hand corner which is the existing condition as you were driving east on Williston Road you would pass the existing landscape supply shop and then you would move towards Pete's RV and you can see that it's a fairly urban and somewhat commercial stretch of the road there what we're proposing is a much more campus like feel as you see in the perspective which integrates a series of landscape features in front of the site as you that you would pass through as you enter the site including landscape walls plantings you can see that there's connections to the rec paths there both along Williston Road and into our site that will again develop this campus feel that we're looking for as you look at the proposed sketch there you can see in the background very low on the horizon the building it's a bit of a the white wall and and right where Marla's Dot is at there the building sets back fairly significantly from Williston Road and so what you're going to see upfront as you pass through is this fantastically landscaped new amenity along the the travel path there if we go to the next slide here's a sampling of the type of elements that will be incorporated into this new entry we'll have the the native birch groves will have rock and landscape walls they may also be core 10 to match some of the existing architecture that's here at the north hangar and that the development review board has seen for previous applications that we've made for the north hangar and then a nice little vignette there of what a walking path might be as we start to come through the campus and develop this campus plan these images that you see here are consistent with the master plan that was developed for the airport and we look to use those leverage those and expand those as we develop the the campus and the gateway here for our new manufacturing and office plan thank you any questions from the board about this it's a beautiful stone wall um number staff comment number three staff recommends the board ask the applicant to address the comment during the sketch plan meeting and the comment was in relation to bike path access which you just addressed very commercial I think you addressed that does any does a board member have any other questions about that staff comment or move on okay comment number four given the skill the project staff considers there is a reasonable nexus for the board to require the applicant to install sidewalk along the north side of wilson road between the two proposed entrances I think you just addressed that it sounds like that's a yes absolutely yes definitely okay board any questions comments okay uh number three i am sorry five staff supports these recommendations um about the traffic study recommends the board require a traffic study to accompany the next application for the project for further recommends the board's activity to authorize a technical review of the study so that both the study and the technical review can be presented at the first hearing for the next application so I actually have a question about this Marla what is the difference between a traffic study and a technical review of the traffic study sure um and I'm just going to give one sentence of introduction um in our initial pre-application meeting with the applicant they said that their um initial like super 10,000 foot estimate is that they would anticipate um an additional 200 p.m. pk hour trip ends so though that number is could vary by an order of magnitude non-order magnitude but by by you know 100 percent even direction um that's why we're recommending a traffic study a traffic study is prepared by the applicant a traffic third independent third party technical review of the traffic study is when an independent third party reviews the traffic study and tells us whether it's good or has flaws or um you know could be improved in certain ways great okay that's helpful thanks so um applicant what are your thoughts about the traffic study you prepared to do that applicant art you're muted no i'm not no art is muted art applicant i'm sorry can you hear me madam chair we can now we can now yep okay great sorry about that um i just wanted to say before chris jumps in and talks through the details on the staff comments here that is the applicant is in complete agreement with um staff's recommendation to pursue um in um uh was it calling in yes technical review thank you stumbled on my words there uh we do believe that given the the size of the project given the complexity of the project the integration that'll happen with the regional transportation plan that it's always good to have a second set of eyes on this you know certainly stan tech and vhb are doing a great job on our behalf but in terms of making sure that we're all looking at the same thing we're completely behind the the idea of uh of a technical review for the traffic piece and with that turn it over to chris and let him uh talk through the details but but if i may you're committed to do the traffic uh we are and as chris will share in just a minute we're fairly far along we received the second draft of the traffic study uh today and we need to review that and anticipate being able to submit the traffic study sometime over the next week or so once we get a chance to review it and have our team respond to any comments that we may have great great was somebody else going to say something on your team okay board any comments no just uh no i just thought i'll make a motion that we invoke technical review of the traffic study when it comes in okay anyone want to second that i'll second this is jim do we need to vote on this marla yes all in favor of invoking a technical review of the traffic study okay sounds like we're good with that okay number six staff recommends the board direct the applicant to submit field delineations in wetland reports as well as probably documentation from the state wetlands program supporting the delineation as part of the next application is that acceptable to you applicant i'm sorry you're muted i can't hear you who's speaking for the applicant please who's speaking for the applicant this is chris gendron um speaking for the applicant we delineated the wetlands recently and we're scheduled to meet with the uh to meet with the call the wetland ecologist later this month okay okay good thank you any questions from the board okay number seven staff recommends the board discuss with the applicant whether they believe they will be able to adjust their proposal to meet the requirements for the above discussed exception to parking being prohibited in front if they cannot staff considers the other potential exceptions only allow a limited amount of the desired parking to the front and therefore would require a significant redesign of the project applicant what are your thoughts about this can i introduce this one don sure please do i'm sorry guys so probably remembers there are three things that have no authority to waive and one of them is parking in the front however there are prescribed exceptions to parking in the front and one of those exceptions that is available in this zoning district is if the applicant creates a um what was the term a um significant green space to create a campus style quad um where the park it sort of goes street parking building quad building parking street so it's like a it's like a parking park so the idea is the idea is that the quad is in the center then there's buildings then there's parking and then there's the street um so this exception may be available to this applicant but the restrictions on that exception are extremely tight um and sort of in the staff comments the four staff comment number six all of those restrictions are enumerated and so if they wish to pursue the parking as they have shown they have a pretty high bar to do so um and so that's sort of where i where i would leave it and let them say how they how or whether they think that this is going to work for them great thank you for that introduction marla um madam chair yes okay i look we were going to say something so it's just you're okay go ahead so um if if it is okay with the chair we would actually like to talk through items seven and eight concurrently and we're going to just do an overview of the site plan and how we build up to where we're at so we've got some slides that we'll talk through and we're going to have our architect joel page take us through that and then when we get to the actual parking piece i'll um step back in so joel great thank you all good evening everybody um would it be able possible to go back to i think it was slide that's the one right there um so i think this gives us a good overview of the site in general as well as the campus which encompasses the future campus for beta which encompasses everything inside the red line starting from the far back of the shot there's a aircraft sort of parking area that's wrapped by an l that will potentially be the future cultural center for beta and then working our way closer down the sheet where you see the big tan area which is the quarry that we're going to be working in imagine in that space going from a desert basically this underutilized piece of land to a modern net zero manufacturing facility that ties into the landscape and hugs the corners of the landscape it becomes one with the landscape all those beautiful rvs will end up going somewhere else there'll be a beautiful green new pathway and parking leading up to the entrance to the production facility i think it's important that we describe kind of the work that's going to go on there so this is a manufacturing facility as well as beta's future headquarters so it'll be a large building housing a lot of unique work that's being done including the manufacturer of electric vertical takeoff and landing aircraft which in itself is a totally unique entity the building that's behind the first rectangle you see is continental hangar i'll point out a few key features which will come into play in the next few slides slides there's mirror bells which is the rectangular building closer to williston road at the far end of that red line and then on the close end of the shot there is a rock outcropping which plays into our landscape design so we could go to the the next slide here you'll see pretty lightly are some purple lines in the middle of the shot those are takeoff and landing departure three-dimensional planes that we have to work around to fit this building into the site so that in the areas northeast of the purple lines are basically where we cannot develop the big dark building in the middle of the shot is the continental hangar and that can be a landmark for how we orient ourselves on the site go ahead and go to the next shot so you've seen a couple of site plan layouts and they're really the culmination of an evolution of our design process and starting with the design on the left as we've learned more and more about the manufacturing process we also learned that we really need to maximize our footprint area and to do that it takes the building and we have to be 60 feet away from the continental hangar which was that dark rectangular building you saw previously in the middle of the shot so to get the building size we need that pushes us further to the south which ends up coming closer to the unique rock outcropping that is which I don't have a marker to the sort of bottom ish left right of the the building shown there will also be and then as we've progressed with the design of the site we've also are trying to create an interesting procession from Williston Road up to the building and so yes it's someone on your team wants to use a pointer there are annotation tools to point out things you're okay so how do I find those I would like to do that but I haven't found them yeah there's something that looks like a paintbrush a little arrow next to it really or a little ribbon above your go-to meeting that says um trying to yeah I do not see anything like that you're the second person to say that tonight chat settings and some it's a separate bar that shows up when you hover over the presentation part of the screen sometimes if you move your cursor to the right of the screen it it becomes visible it has a little camera at the top and then a plus and a minus let me try going to uh I don't want to hit the wrong button and lose you all well if someone else on your team knows what you're talking about and has the tools they could do it too yeah does anybody see it on their screen I'm not part of the presentation but I see it on my screen if you'd like me to point um yeah I would go to the right image actually it's going to be kind of awkward well the basic gist of it is is we're we're evolving as we learn more about how the production is going to work and as we're focusing on how we're designing the building and what and the key features we want to have and as the building sits on the site some of the net zero features we want to emphasize and you'll see in some of the future slides are um where we'll have solar panels on the roof we're going to have um skylights we're looking into geothermal heating and cooling so and also site features as we do the plantings trying to work with native species and and and manage those with you know low water not needing a lot of water and everything so the area and yellow you see there is a rock outcropping which when we get to further descriptions of the building you'll see it creates a unique gully which is like a natural amphitheater that folks can sit in and it would become part of our entry possession into the building and also tying in how the public access is the site so if we can go to the next slide here we're is the next iteration of the plan the building unfortunately isn't in color yet but what you can see on the site are walkways that connect all the way over to aviation drive sort of along that um the area south of the building there's aviation drive and then there's a gray line that's a walkway we'll have other walkways that will work through the site we're looking at a boardwalk along the wet area potentially to engage you to the wildlife that's there and then to these the eastern edge of the building which is sort of the bottom corner of the building we're maximizing the features the rock features there the cliffs and putting in pathways sitting areas and what we've discovered walking around the site which you wouldn't expect is there are unique views to the green mountains you can see um and to the north as well as to the airport so part of our building design wants to take advantage of that so you it grounds you in the site and it also gives you a great visual of what's happening at the airport and that will be open to on the on the on the outside of the building side to the public um as well as to uh beta employees um and we can go to the next uh slide I think oh yeah that one so in order for us to you know let art probably take this over because he's more versed in that we have some options to try to mitigate or to to find solutions to or the parking dilemma or um parking challenge less about a dilemma more about a challenge um as as uh Joel said we're learning more every day about this project we uh will be fast and we've been um very thankful for all the support that we've had from staff to date from the various state folks that we've talked to and and help us get to this point it's been a collaborative process today and it'll continue to be a collaborative process as we go forward so what you see here in the numbers number one a public park number two a commercial building and number three an entry drive these relate directly to the staff's report where uh let me just open up those pages on page six of eight on the staff report under parking and they were identified these potential solutions to the challenge that we have with our building and that is that the the back of our building is actually the front of our building on the airport because we're producing airplanes and we need to roll them out the back so it's it's very challenging to put cars in the back as you might expect as well as trying to work through that with any FAA guidelines that may say you know you if it's a vehicle on the tarmac then it has to go through certain clearances and and be um certified and Larry can speak definitely better to that than I can but suffice it to say that we've identified really the front of the building as it's defined by the land development regulations as really the only place to put parking and so in order to comply with the land development regulations we're working through this very these various components option one was to put a public park in as defined by my Marla and I believe it has to be about 150,000 square feet the other option is to put a commercial building along Williston Road of a size that would meet the land development regulations thus having the parking behind that commercial building in number two and then number three would be to reorient the entry drive in a way that you we you try to um adjust where the front of that building may be so more the parking would technically be on on the side the staff comments were great we we're working through those right now we don't have a final solution yet again this will be collaborative we anticipate working with a whole host of folks to come up with the right solution but we're open to really numbers one and two number three I'm not sure that we could actually get the drive in a place that would make it work with the land development regulations so we're going to focus our efforts on on one and two and when we come back with our preliminary and final you'll see either a solution that has the public park or a solution that has a commercial building and quite possibly one that has a mixture of both because as um was stated earlier up by number one we are looking at developing a cultural center almost concurrently with the manufacturing center and part of this cultural center and bringing people into experience aviation it only makes sense to have a park component to that since one of the things that's really great to do is to sit outside and watch the airplanes come and go and it's a much different experience from the outside than it is from the inside so again when we come back we don't have a firm date yet on preliminary and final when we come back to the board but it will incorporate some version of items number numbers one and two to respond to staff's comments thank you thank you any questions from the board before we look at the last staff comments so this is where I think the board can really provide some benefit to the applicant by um you know a sketch plan is for the benefit of the applicant to hear whether they're on the right track um so you know this is a little bit subtle and the board doesn't see this very often but how is the board feeling about you know either any of these three ways to crack the parking nut don may weigh in on this I was hoping you would thank you mark sure I mean I think that um especially given the development on Williston Road you know I suspect you're going to end up with you know more leaning towards the commercial building to block the parking and then it would also lend itself to you some some further development for the part for the for the parcel I would have loved to have seen a public park you know really create this as a like a gateway entry into this future sort of tech park you know this sort of semi-english tech park in the airport um you know leading in you know our parking standards are challenging you know with the you know parking in the front especially given your site conditions you have to work with and as you happily described you know the rear of the building is the front of your building because of the way the manufacturing works and the way the site is laid out you know you kind of are set back from the street um to provide access to the runway and the airport facilities and therefore you know you're sort of are left with the front of it for your parking which goes against the regulations so um I think that I would love I don't I agree with you I don't see number three leaning you know leaning towards being able to solve number three your entry drive I think you're going to end up with a a mix of one and two and I'm I am interesting to see how you sort of do solve it um because I think you have a great opportunity to put some sort of commercial building or a couple small buildings you know on on Williston Road to maintain that sort of pattern language on Williston Road then screen your parking in the rear from with those good comment other comments by the board thank you for that mark other comments before we move on I have a what is the cultural center I love the I love the thought of that but I don't know what it is is it kind of like a museum or a simulation what is that about how about all of the above and it is lovingly referred to here at beta as the center for awesomeness and all things aviation it really is intended to provide a spark to those that have some interest in aviation and and bring them in and even those that maybe are curious about what it is and don't have that same spark may wander in and take a look at it but it's going to include simulation it's going to include training for our pilots and and potentially even some some alliances and some synergies with some local businesses that we're talking to right now one of the curious things about the airline industry and what we're doing here at beta is that by the year 2030 we're going to need to train 10,000 pilots now some of those are going to be pilots that already have pilot license and they'll be certified on either our aircraft or similar aircraft some of those will be new trainings and there's going to be many places where that's going to happen but one of the key places could be here on property as part of the cultural center there'll be some hangar space for some general aviation so it'll be not just aliyah but if you've been out to the airport recently and some of the seen some of the really cool small planes that are floating around that are part of the beta fleet those will become part of that cultural center there could be a restaurant out there there could be a cafe out there there could be a whole host of things that center around this idea of aviation STEM education as another way to reach out to the community bring the schools and give them an opportunity to have some hands-on experience in this space it is really intended to be as broad and as forward thinking as we can possibly make it sounds very interesting sounds wonderful alright I'm looking at the time and let's take the last comment number nine and this is about the aesthetics of the building we don't have any details about that staff recommends that we have a discussion with you about how you want to create a desirable transition from structure to site in light of the parking considerations we've talked about that a little bit and then Steph has some suggestions about what you should consider when you come back to us for preliminary plat do you have any comments about this and and then I'll turn to the board we do we have the last three slides in this slide deck we'll start to walk through this going to turn it over actually to Gregor Mayfield one of our architects on this project to talk us through this hi everybody so what you're looking at right now the lower image is actually the image that you would have as you approached as Joel described in the site plan the arrival through the gateway perhaps we call this aviation park instead of tech park but as you come in through that gateway the LA it bends to the northeast revealing the building gradually as you arrive so in on this bottom sketch here what you're seeing is on the right hand side the actual arrival and the turnaround and then as you move toward the left hand side headed toward the continental hangar or the cultural center is the shipping and receiving side and both of these elements that you're looking at are actual arrivals one is a more immediate arrival if you happen to be working on the floor or with inventory and shipping and the other on the right hand side is actually the arrival to the main administrative and and supplemental spaces so moving to the image just above it you can see it's a it's a slight blow up of that arrival point and what you're looking at in this image is a rather sculptural cut out of a wall of Corten Thins sheets of steel that extend 20 feet from the parapet to the slab and inside this outdoor pavilion is a two-story window wall that's open to the public that provides a view your first view into the manufacturing center where you know arguably the 21st century revolution of carbon footprint free flight is being produced what you're also seeing here just outside of this thinned entry way is a walkway through a landscape version of the terrain that exists up to a second floor area which is actually the continuation of this path takes you into what we're kind of referring to as the great lawn or the beta valley which would be seen best on the next slide so now you're looking at two different bird's eye views one from the northeast and the other from the southeast so the walkway that I just described is on the southeast you can see the cutaway for the main entry but the path would move toward your right up to the second floor and through this portal there's sort of a terrace with amphitheater staircase that goes down into the valley so what we're doing here given our tight site constraints and the nature of repurposed quarry is we're looking at using the landscape feature of the unmind cliff as it exists and in most cases we're excavating it down even further to expose more of the cliff and that area becomes a nature scape for both the public that might come to outdoor seating areas that overlook the arrival and departure of planes as well as the aliyah finished aircraft that comes out onto the apron that you can see moving to the upper left hand view this this is the bird's eye from the northeast now you're looking at this valley from the other end and the bar of building that you're seeing um running from the upper left to the lower right is this amenity administrative support wing of the building and then the larger volume that you're looking at is the actual manufacturing area the black bands which you'll see in future presentations is actually the hangar doors that open to allow the finished aircraft to come out and then this texture that you're seeing up on the roof is the photovoltaic array that we're hoping to have interspersed with skylights for natural lighting so really quickly and and i think it's been mentioned quite a bit already um sustainability is actually one of the core principles in beta's mission to produce an aircraft that has zero carbon footprint is going to be a game changer for the aviation world the cost of running an electric aircraft is one fifth the cost of running your typical fossil fuel aircraft and you know that's only one small piece of the sustainability principles that beta embraces and you know because they've got such a green attitude and response and ethic and stewardship toward the environment this building is likewise looking to do a lot of what their aircraft is doing so the parking lots that you've seen previously we're looking at we're studying the idea right now of installing geothermal heat pumps to provide the heating and the cooling for this building as you can see the pv array on the roof is an effort to offset our power consumption to hopefully make this building a net zero building that's accompanied by a super high performance envelope meaning that the walls and the roof and under this slab are all high performance super insulated and the mechanical systems of this building will all be electric electric being your primary renewable energy source so as you can see the the effort is pretty intense to make a non-carbon consumptive footprint to go with hopefully a net zero or an extremely low energy building and on this last slide what you're seeing Gregor real quick can we just go back to that last slide just want to point out two things for everybody because we've mentioned this and there we go so as you were to look out and Gregor correct me here but as you look out over that rock ledge that is where you get to take advantage of the mountain views and camel's hump so it's not just about the views near it's about the views far and trying to leverage as much of the Vermont beauty that we can and then lastly there are no fossil fuels being used to heat or cool this building picking up on the sustainability piece that Gregor just mentioned and with that Gregor take us home on the last slide yeah just to pick up on art's point because I did sort of miss it if you could go back to that last slide I just want to uh the one previous to this as art was saying you can see the amenities building pokes out and what's really happening is these two walls at face north are aimed directly at camel's hump and then what's currently looking like our cafeteria our dining facility that is aimed at the the the cliff in the natural valley here so yeah we are really trying to make as much advantage of um actually a surprising number of really attractive views so with that we can finally go to the last slide so Beta's looked to be in Burlington and has as you know several facilities without throughout south Burlington and the Williston area and we're we're working to develop a language with these buildings that's more or less prototyped off of the north hangar and as you've seen and is now being constructed the materials there are a white insulated metal panel black structural steel and an accent of a quartet steel which is a weathering steel it rusts to a beautiful orange that responds incredibly delight and natural surroundings and so this first level you're seeing here are ideas about how we might utilize the quartet steel in a fin type um accent that you'll see in further developments of the building the next level down and you can also see it in the sketches that we presented the one to the right in the middle bands those are the vertical quartet fins to the left of that are scales made out of a black out of a flat seam metal panel that may be white they may be zinc or silver or they may be more of the quartet and then the last row on the bottom you're looking at a flat seam flush metal panel that has interspersed a standing metal seam to generate a variation in in the facade of what could be the manufacturing piece and that's just kind of a real quick sketch look see at what we're thinking about for how this building may materialize itself and utilize a pretty unique site with some unexpected amenities in the views and and landscape thank you it's fascinating we will we will look forward to seeing more details at the next at the next application step board members do you have any questions or comments based on gregor's overview yeah don i'll uh i'll play in and throw in my comments i think it's a great tie-in to sort of the you know the the other building that they done over uh that we reviewed and approved you know there's some common elements you know it's it's clearly continues to be an exciting company and exciting development to see happening in brimante and south berlington you know i i think it's great to see the growth i think it's you know we're going to clearly it's responsible and it's forward thinking and it's seems to be in line with their company vision and you know i i i hope to work clearly hope to work with them as they solve the the issues for this sketch plan as they move into preliminary and final um and uh sort of see some of their other solutions i think it you know as art is commented and so the other team members comment this thing is a very fast moving fluid project and i suspect that we'll see some changes in preliminary and final um from what we're seeing now um and uh yeah i i think it's it's good direction so far great i i couldn't agree more any other comments from the board marlo do you have any questions before we take public comment i do not okay that looks like you want to see you just say something it looks like dan's talk dan can you hear me we can't hear you he's speaking but we can't hear you dan he had to log off earlier and log back in i think he's been having issues okay all right marlo are we saying something no okay all right um let's see we uh this is sketch so we don't vote i'm going to get this eventually we don't have to vote to conclude sketch do we public comment i know i know we're going to get to that but um do we vote to conclude sketch no no okay so are there any members of the public who would like to offer comments hi john wilking hi john uh we just um as with my hat on as chair of the economic development committee uh we encourage uh you to uh go through your process and and keep uh beta moving along as best as possible we we think this is a one of one of one of one of the very few economic development opportunities that we have seen of this size in the last 20 years and uh are very encouraged by it thanks thanks for your comments any other public comments thanks for hanging in there till this late hour john um you thought when you got off the board you were free of that um okay uh so would someone like to make a motion to conclude this sketch plan hearing we don't make a motion to conclude oh we just do we just conclude we just say okay so thank you applicant for being here i'll get this yet mark um and um we will see you back here soon when you're ready for your preliminary plat many thanks uh from everyone here at beta and we look forward to working with uh everyone here uh going forward thank you yes we do too thank you thank you okay board we have one more agenda item and that is to approve the may 26 minutes have you had a chance to look at those i believe there were two my line i think there are two sets of minutes there are two sets of minutes but if you're not ready for one of them that's fine i did not see the june 1st did anyone else see the june 1st board members you did okay why don't you take it away then mark all right i'll make a motion that we approve the minutes from the may 26th and the june 1st drb meetings as drafted i'll second that all in favor hi hi hi so that concludes our meeting tonight we will see you on july 6th at 5 30 outside of the um the barn on a brian farm or old farm road to do a site visit of that area good night everyone