 Thank you and welcome everyone. Welcome to the Development Review Board of Tuesday, April 6th. My name is Dawn Filibert. I am the clerk of the board and Brian Sullivan who's on the board and is the acting chair is not able to be with us tonight so I'll be chairing the meeting. Hold on a second. I'd like to introduce the board members tonight and the staff with us tonight is Mark Bear, myself, Alyssa Eyring, Jim Langen, Stephanie Wyman, and we have and welcome a new board member tonight. His name is Dan Albrecht and he is with us on the phone. Welcome, Dan. Thanks very much. My name and attendance from the city of Burlington is Marla Kane, Development Review Planner and Delilah Hall, our zoning administrator. So, with that, we'll jump into the agenda. The first agenda item is, are there any additions, deletions or changes in the order of agenda items. I want to post that if we wanted to, we can move minutes and other business to before six and seven, if you think they'll be quick, but if not, we should keep it the way it is. Okay. All right. Because Jim is from six and seven, that's why I brought that up. Right. So we, so we see how the evening goes or do you want us to decide that now. No reference. Okay. Why, why don't we see how it goes would be my suggestion and I'm hoping that this meeting will be done by time. So, any other additions, deletions or changes in the order of the agenda. This meeting is being recorded. Just so you'll know announcements. Are there any announcements? I would just like to read you announced now that a few more people have come on if you're not on the board or on stuff or an applicant that is currently being considered, please mute yourself and keep your camera off. It helps us keep track of who's participating when. Thank you, Marla. Great suggestions. The other thing I want to announce is we're going to try something a little bit different in terms of sign in tonight. So if you are interested in, so please bear with us. This is a totally new thing. If you are here to testify or speak for public comment for agendas items. Number four, which is for the airport or number seven, which is for Hickory Hillside. That's a better application for South Village. You can sign in by putting your name and email address in the chat box or sending me an email at M. K. E. E. N. E. S. Burl dot com S. B. U. R. L. If you are here. For items five, which is for black rock construction or agenda item six, which is for Alan Long at 1720 and 1730 Spear Street. We are going to try something new. We're going to put a link to a sign in sheet in the chat box. And you will click on that link and put your information in there. The board has certain obligations in terms of keeping track of interested persons and we think that will go a little more cleanly. So we won't do that until that application is open. But we will be clear and I'll say it again then. Marla, it's Don. People still need to sign in, even though they might not be providing testimony, correct? That way they can be considered a participant. If you may provide testimony, you should sign in. If you provide testimony or send a written comment, you are not considered an interested person. Again, I'm going to repeat, somebody is not muted and it's really interfering with our conversation. So please mute your microphone by clicking on the green microphone at the bottom of your screen. We really appreciate that. Thank you. Okay. Again, anyone who wishes to participate in the hearing should sign the virtual sign in sheet and anyone on the phone who would like to sign in can send an email to Marla and provide your email please. I would ask that you mute your phone or computer so we don't catch the ambient noise in the background and comments and questions from the public not related to the agenda is our next agenda item. Does anyone have comments or questions not related to the agenda hearing none. I think we will go ahead and take up the first item on the agenda. The first agenda item is a sketch plan application SD 2109 of Burlington International Airport to amend a previously approved plan for an airport complex. The amendment consists of constructing an approximately 34,660 gross square feet of two story addition to the south end of the existing airport terminal at 1200 airport drive. Who is here for the applicant? This is Larry Lackey director of engineering and environmental compliance and I have four other people with me if they could introduce themselves. Sure. Stu Moncree here with Jacobs engineering group. Okay. Carolyn Orban from Wagner Hudson landscape architecture. Hi Carolyn. Hello. Chris with Angle Birth Construction. And Jackie Digest from EIV. Okay. Thank you. Does anyone on the board have any disclosures to make or need to recuse himself from from the presentation and participation of this application. Hi Don, this is Stephanie. I need to recuse myself from this project. Okay, thank you Stephanie. Any others. Okay. So this is a sketch plan application, which is not a formal hearing. It's really an opportunity for the applicant to provide kind of a high level overview of their project, seek some board input to help them shape their further application as they move toward preliminary and final plat. We don't swear in witnesses. We do ask for any public comments at the end of the present at the end of the boards, going through some of the staff comments. So, at this point, I would like the applicant at the applicant to provide to provide us with a fairly brief overview of your project. We have a tight agenda tonight. So if you can just tell us what you have in mind and give us highlights, we'd appreciate it. So thank you. Okay. This is Larry Lackey again, director of engineering here at the airport. We were going to kind of do a team presentation, which we'll make quickly. I'm going to do some introductions and talk about the purpose and need. This is from angle birth. We'll talk about the building. Stu will talk about the site. Carolyn will talk about the landscaping and Jackie will give us an update on on the permitting status because a month has passed since we made this application. I'm going to draw this, this big yellow space is off airport circle, which is directly off airport drive as you enter into the airport. It's total, total square footage first and second floor has been refined in the last month to 33,440 square feet. Delilah or Marla whoever's driving. Can you go to the number two PDF of. Well, I wanted to, okay, we can, we can do a quick view. If you're coming down airport, you want to go through this Marla, or would you prefer? I wanted to kind of give an overview. Larry, if you can refer to the pages in the packet, I would be able to find it for you. Okay. Number, it was the number two after the application was number one. The presentation was number two. Sorry, Larry, the packet as opposed to your application. So what we sent to you on Wednesday last week has everything come into one PDF. Okay. Okay. So what is, I think you're probably looking for the plans, right? Yeah. Okay. So we just talked about the location. Keep going down. Yeah. Okay, there. Okay. Stop right there. Okay. So this is coming around airport circles. Everybody's aware of coming into the airport to do drop offs or parking. Delilah, are you driving or is Marla driving? I am. Delilah can just go to the next slide. Okay. So basically, the long term plan here, this is from our master plan. As you can see the two red areas that says to be demolished that's very long term that's the north and south concourse. And so, and eventually we will build a long airport terminal consistent with typical other airports. The reason for this is, as you can see from the north and south concourse is the little legs. The airport was built for small regional jets, 50 to 60 passengers per flight. As time has progressed, the number of flights is reduced, but the number of people going on to airplanes is increased. We're building 100 to 180 seat aircraft, which this airport wasn't built for. So the long term plan is to get more consistent with a typical airport where the, rather than these legs and airport bridges going off these legs, you'll have one terminal where planes will go perpendicular, which will give us a lot more apron area. That said, the purpose of this project is to consolidate our TSA into one location to make it more efficient for passengers. As I said, you know when you're only having to fill 60 seat airplanes at a time, you know, passengers can make their way through our two small TSA locations, however, when the aircraft is bigger and they're all coming through at the same time you're having hundreds of passengers all at the same time very early in the morning. And before the pandemic, we even had times here at Burlington at our small airport where people missed their flights because we couldn't process them fast enough. So we realize this as a problem we access funding for this project. So for that we propose to build this first phase of the project, which is what we're calling the tip to terminal integration project. Delilah if you don't mind going to the next one. That would be great. Okay, so that's basically the footprint we're going to, we're going to move forward with that's two floors 33,440 square feet. Delilah if you can go one more. Quickly, this is just on the inside of building which I know you're not that concerned about but should understand. So once you come into ticket like you always have you'll take it and rather than going left or right in the future once this is built you will go right through one TSA location with multiple updated scanning and TSA security points. Pass through this maze of of lines you'll go through the scanning devices. And then if you're going to hit the south concourse initially, you'll take a left, come back around and hit the south concourse just like you would now. If you're going to the north concourse you would go straight directly forward you'll see two escalators stairs and elevator, which will take you to the second floor. The next page please. So this is basically the second floor where people going to the north concourse will just make their way to the left or to the north, to the north concourse. So, our plan here, which we have secure funding for is to build this 3430 3440 square foot building. Delilah the next one. Okay, so I'm going to at this point I'm going to turn it over to Chris Yandell from Engelberg construction who's our design build engineer we went out for an RFP, and we selected Engelberg for the contract and he's going to talk about the building quickly, and then we'll move on from there. Thank you. Yes, thank you Larry. And my life I could have you turn back to page 14 of the PDF will start there. Right, correct. As Larry had said this building addition shown in brown on the right hand side of the page is a pass through building for interior purposes only, and it's for convenience of the passengers. Once they enter the airport and to streamline TSA processing. In general, it has no front door passengers will continue to park in the current facilities and enter and exit through the current main terminal and lobby space, just as you do right now. There are no projections for increased passenger trips as a result of this addition at this time. The existing parking facilities will continue to handle the vehicle storage needs as they are currently in existence. Today has previously reviewed the addition, shown in brown and provided an initial approval of its size, its shape, its location orientation and height. And we've just now submitted about a week ago for final approval with updated details such as building and roof corners they want to know, both horizontal and vertical dimensions to the foot. We have updated them with new dimensions which are still within the box that was previously approved by the FAA. We have met with the fire chief chief Francis and reviewed the addition in the context of applicable building and fire codes. You could move to page nine please. We began the design process in this particular arrangement with the airport. We are responsible for the design as well. That's why we don't have an architect with us this evening presenting the architectural team that we've hired our combination of national and international airport specialists and also local architects to help us with the local design code. The placement of the building when we started design was, was, was developed relative to the entry drive approaching from airport Parkway as you see it for drive for drive and and it fits how it fits within the curve road and the established vegetation already in place. If you move to slide or page number 12. That meeting. The, the existing building we, we are queuing on the existing airport building that is the theme of this project is to queue in on the building aesthetics and theme. We are already been well proportioned and developed over years of project renovations and additions at the airport and you'll notice in the existing construction. There are, there are vertical elements and there are horizontal window elements and so that's what we've brought forward into this building. It's as you approach and get on to airport circle. We felt it was, it was necessary to continue this theme from the existing bill. The airports master plan, as Larry had mentioned, this building is the basis for that continued master plan. So we felt we wanted to maintain the existing relationships of the old building. And, and into the new. And if you, if you turn to, I think it's page work, let's see, further down, please, down. It's the, it's the second to the last that one right there number 17, please. I'm sorry. So this is the theme that we are projecting of the addition. And as you can see, it maintains the horizontal relationship and theme of windows from the existing building. And it carries through on the vertical elements with the pilasters that were developed and are very evident on the existing building. There's a lot of glass on the upstairs. The TSA directive on the first floor, which is where those screening elements are asked that the last be minimized for a safety and security purposes. The materials on the building are also consistent with the existing construction. They are metal panels. And we've actually added and continued with the sunshade theme that was from the existing building. There is vegetation around the building, which Carolyn will also talk about in a little bit, but still that concludes my explanation of the building itself, the building design itself. Okay, thank you. Christian again, Stu Monk grief here with Jacob's engineering group and Delilah if I could have you go to slide number 20. Okay, I'm just going to discuss the site layout and this is really fairly simple. And I'm just going to discuss this one slide so I'll be brief. The rectangular shape that you can see shaded in light gray. That is the proposed building footprint that matches up with the south face of the existing terminal building. As Larry mentioned 16,720 square feet on each level. And it's all within the existing airport fence so it's on the secure side. And as a result, the existing work area and shown with that dashed line around the perimeter. Everything within that line is currently impervious area, it's all cave. So we're not adding any new impervious area as part of the project. So that diagonally hatched line towards the bottom of the improvement area that is area that's currently paved and that will be returned to landscape area as part of the project and Carolyn will discuss that in just a moment. So as part of the site improvements we do need to reroute some drainage and sewer line around the southeast corner of the proposed building. And that's the top right part of the building as you see it on this plan. So that will be rerouted around the building footprint, water and electrical will come into the building from the west side from that service road that's off airport circle there. And gas and communications will come from the existing terminal building there will be no new services for those. So the work area proposed is about 35,000 square feet of disturbance area and like I said, that landscape area there to the to the west of the building is about 6500 square feet that we're returning from impervious to to a landscape area so relatively simple in terms of the site plan overall and I happy to answer any questions you might have later but now I'm going to turn it over to Carolyn Orbin from Wagner Hudson to discuss the proposed landscape. Okay, I don't know what slide it is but it's a, it's a just the only landscape drawing in there it's a hand drawn color. Thank you. Yeah, that's it. So the concept behind the landscape design is a theme we introduced while putting together the airport landscape master plan, and, and that is the idea of emulating the look of a Vermont native birch grove in the forest to reinforce that concept. We're proposing groupings of birch trees along the existing entry drive within the planted islands. This is also meant to visually lead one through the drive and to the main entry to further this concept several additional birch are planned to be added to the front of the addition to highlight the facade. Now those actually aren't shown on this plan at this time that's something that we've added recently. But you can see sort of a yellowish green area in front of the building and that's where the, I think two more birch are going to be added to reinforce the birch theme. So we have to be able to do something more abstract and sculptural. We're proposing a series of white light columns in heights ranging from 10 feet to 16 feet interspersed along the front of the building. And then bands of low ornamental grasses will form the ground plane and soften the base of the sculpture. These fixtures, some of which are lit and some which are not those that are lit are all full cut off and fully shielded. And then in order to respond to the architectural treatment of the facade, linear bands of decorative gravel will be planted with tall ornamental grasses and centered on the building's architectural fins. That we were just talking about a few minutes ago, and those will run from the building to the curb. We're enlarging the existing dumpster enclosure, and in order to accommodate the existing dumpster that's currently located along the service drive. The existing fencing, which now runs on the east side of the service drive will be rerouted away from the front of the building, and we'll go around to the back of the dumpster, and then connect into the end of the addition. And this leaves that nice grassy area that you can see in the drawing where we have planted honey locus trees. In addition, we're screening the dumpster with some native plant material, and we're also doing some screening around the existing transformers that are in the planted islands. Our preliminary cost estimate indicates that we will have a significant amount of funds for the gateway project. And I think that's all unless you have questions. Jackie, if you could give them an update on the permit status of where we are with all the permits. I'll give a quick overview of key permits. We have submitted our act 250 permit application. That was on March 22nd. We also submitted our individual construction stormwater permit with the state. We have a pre application meeting for operational stormwater permit with in our later this week. And we'll be submitting our site plan application to the city after we have that meeting with in our. We also have a drafted fire and safety application. And I did want to note that we've updated our joining property owner spreadsheet and you'll see that with our next submission. I would also add a draft active 50 permit has been issued with the public noticed. So, so that's our presentation. If you want to move to staff comments or whatever you'd like to do. Don, we appreciate it. Thank you. Or ask any answer. Any questions at this time or go through comments, whatever you want. Thank you very much. I'm going to shut my window because the 35s are flying overhead. They're closer to me. Okay. So, let us proceed through the staff report comments. And so, let me just open my line on the iPad here. Okay. The first comment. The board asked the applicant to describe what the role. What role this building addition will play in terms of the appearance of the site and exterior of access and circulation. It seems like we've heard some of that in your presentation. But board, do you think we need to hear more. So I think that presentation I thought covered that basic concept. I think that you mark. Okay. Any other board members. Do you have anything to add. No, go ahead. Okay. Thanks. It looks good to get this level. This is enough detail. Okay. Onto the second comment. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. This is proposed to be 36 feet high. Allowable height for a principal building in the airport district is 35 feet. Staff recommends the board asked the applicant how the proposed height will compare to the height of the existing terminal and the adjacent parking garage. Chris, do you want to handle that? I will. I'll take that. Thank you. I'm going to go ahead and say three feet above the ground. We believe that that value was consistent with the existing building. We are currently evaluating and looking internally at floor to floor heights. And ensuring that we stay relatively close to that value. We do not intend to be any higher than the existing building. We do not intend to be any higher than the existing building. We do not intend to be any higher than the existing building. High-laster elements in the front of the existing building. Are what we're trying to mimic in form and shape, but not necessarily height. So again, we're not trying to have this addition. Be the monument for the airport. Just a continuation of the previously. Design themes. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. I have a quick question. The rendering you have, which is slide 17, the one that shows the, you know, the exterior of the building with the fins and the horizontal glass. You know, it looks like it's the perspective of it is the inner sort of road. Like the inner circulation road. I mean, you know, from actual airport drive, you know, the actual road, the circulation road in the airport. How prominent is this going to be? Or is it going to feel like it's sort of set back behind, you know, the landscaping plan and behind another road? So I can add a little bit and then maybe Caroline can add. Basically this is the inner circle. This is off airport circle. Okay. So I'm going to add a little bit. Well, we, you know, the existing landscaping in front of this area will be maintained along with the additions that Caroline represented. And also the area now that is currently. Impermeable. Well, now we come an area in front of this building. Landscape as described by Carol. I have a question. I'm not sure I understand that. So this road on which we see those three vehicles. Is it going to be a new road or a new road? No, it's, it's existing. If you want to go to the site plan, I can show you that. Or the landscaping plan, whichever one. Yeah, just go to the landscaping plan. It's actually an existing service road. It's not the road that takes you past. The front of the terminal building. It's basically utilized for deliveries. It's not the road that's accessing that dumpster enclosure to the right there. But it's not how you would actually approach the airport from airport. Okay. That's helpful. Thank you. Visually without the landscaping that Caroline has shown. Yeah. I mean, I think it's a little deceiving because it looks like the, it looks like the service road is running parallel to the building when it really is not. And so it doesn't look like there's a lot of space there for landscaping, but it looks like there's a lot of space there for landscaping. And there, there appears to be, I guess. Thank you. I'm concerned with it. I'm just saying as right now, it's hard to visualize what it's going to, how it's going to be perceived as an addition to the airport. When you're coming in on the airport circle drive. I think it's going to be fairly well. Sort of veiled in, in. Tree tree branches and. It's not going to be a straight shot. I guess is what I'm trying to say. There's, there's a lot of existing trees that are already there. And then we're adding quite a bit more. So I think it's going to, it's going to feel quite integrated. Okay. The slide, if I may, the slide on page nine. We'll give you a, a feel for how the new building sits behind the vegetation. Yeah. That would be good to see. Thanks. So the, the orange circle was our attempt to place you visually as to where the addition is going behind exactly behind that existing vegetation. And, and, and, and we are proposing even more vegetation on this right hand side median. So. To go back to the previous slide where there's a road, the road Carolyn spoke of when people enter the airport, they're not going to be confused about what road to take. So. No, no, it's already there and they don't use it. Okay. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions from board members. About number three. Oh, I'm sorry. I guess that was number two. So I guess. Just have a quick question about that height. So is that. The desire to stay close to 37 mimic the other building, but on the other hand, we're over the 35. So is the board customarily grant waivers for this kind of thing? Yes. So the board has granted a number of height waivers for the airport. Generally it's evaluated on a building by building basis. There's no blanket waiver. But historic board has been comfortable. With things that are consistent in appearance and well integrated things that are the new buildings are proposed adjacent to. So. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Chris or Larry of the parking garage at the end of its nearest this proposed addition. It is. It is much less than that. I mean that parking garage at the south end only has the two levels. I don't know the exact number. Address in a future application. Okay. Okay. We'll move on. Okay. Number three. Staff recommends the board to ask the applicant to describe how they believe the above three criteria are met. Staff recommends the board consider the relationship to the existing terminal and the existing parking garage when providing feedback on this criterion. Applicant. Do you have thoughts about this? Chris is ready for this. Yeah, we do. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you for that. I think another construction we spent a lot of time with the airport when we were first brought on board in terms of looking at the master plan deciding what the elements we were going to. Match or meet. Felt very strongly that the existing airport is such a theme felt as this addition in order to make it look as though it is not a separate addition or a separate entity in the that was just planned there we felt we really wanted to carry through these strong elements of you know vertical pilasters and horizontal windows which you see in this theme here we did we did continue also with the sunscreen elements again because this the most of this glazing that you see on the addition is West facing we felt equally important that we wanted to continue those sunscreen elements from a strong massing standpoint the existing airport because of the pedestrian program that that has to be met for again bringing folks in and out of the existing main entry doors there was the green canopies that were built into the the original airport we don't have those here because we certainly don't want the public thinking that this is an entryway so we focused mainly on the the building the lay of the land that's why the service road was not changed we wanted to tuck it and keep it in the back keep it behind the vegetation and then continue with those same elements from the existing building out into this one thank you questions comments from the board ready to move on number four staff comment number four staff recommends the board have a frank discussion with the applicant about whether the approved overall landscaping plan remains a workable solution to landscaping at the airport this is Larry Lackey I'll address that we feel strongly as you know we became before the board a year or so or more ago and spent months and weeks getting that master plan approved we did submit several weeks ago a plan of the first phase of that what we're calling the gateway which is off Wilson Road which the board asked us to start on first however when I submitted it and I'll take full responsibility for this my computer didn't tell me it didn't go through however and I didn't call Marla or Delilah for a couple of weeks after that and you know we were busy with everything else and lo and behold we found out when we got this comment that it was never received from from the city's help rowing and so it's Myers you know I typically follow up with my own Delilah when I submit things the the phase one of this which include who's the gateway project the first phase off Wilson Road includes enough costs to include what we had committed to with regard to the hotel their their commitment to what they had to pay the addition of the cost that we can't provide length you can hear directly on the site in that and a little bit more so we have submitted that I did get that string down with Delilah and Marla they do have that now and we'll proceed forward with that if you have any questions thank you any questions or comments from the board or staff about that is that frank enough is that frank enough to discuss is that an enough of a frank discussion Marla yeah the purpose you know the airport is great opportunity with the overall landscaping plan no other PDD in the city has this kind of plan to sort of pre-approve some landscaping and you know it just kind of there's been four applications that used it and so I forward to seeing it actually take an advantage of with this application yeah we're looking forward to it too because it really adds to the whole area you know from Wilson Road all the way back to Airport Parkway as you know because you reviewed it thank you I am having trouble seeing the top of this document I think that's the last comment isn't it Marla it is yeah so we can entertain additional discussion from the board and if there is none maybe take a couple comments sure okay board members any comments or discussion you'd like to have about this I'm gone I'll just weigh in on this I think that the project itself you know it's a nice little addition project and it's not a small addition but for what the airport provides it seems as though it's a needed addition not seem to be like it's going to be intrusive I'm not going to affect traffic I can affect parking it's not going to affect circulation seems to be you know they've decided it's a good location for it the design of it seems to be well you know thought out and sensitive to the actual airport with good landscaping that is make it sort of fall into the I don't see any issues with it you know at the sketch by level well those are great comments from an architect mark thank you for those other comments from the board hearing none I'd like to entertain any public comments about this project how let me see do we in the chat box Marla and Delilah know how many people what we didn't ask them to register so right so if you'd like to make a comment please either say your name or write your name in the chat box or just say I would like to make comment and we will entertain everyone in turn anyone want to start off with a public comment so does the board anything else from the applicant or can we can we see them at preliminary foot kind of feeling like to move to preliminary flat I think we've heard some good testimony and and address the issues you've identified board does anyone object to that okay so do we well we don't do we Marla we just conclude the hearing yeah we'll see you at preliminary okay thank you for your presentation and good luck with your application thank you all thanks so much okay moving on to agenda item number five continued final plaid application SD 2106 black rock construction for the 6.91 acre wheeler park wheeler parcel phase of a previous previously approved master plan for a 450 acre golf course and a 354 unit residential development the planned unit development of establishing three lots for the purpose of constructing a public road 22 dwelling units in two family homes and 10 units in single family homes at 550 part road who is here for the applicants Benjamin Avery from black rock construction and with me tonight I have Brian courier and Paul O'Leary from O'Leary Burke civil associates and we also have Joseph happy from main drilling and blasting okay thank you any recusals or disclosures before we start to view those staff comments hi now this is Stephanie I need to recuse from this one okay thank you Stephanie oh and then I believe you probably all been sworn in except Joseph the drill expert for Maine is that correct that is correct okay what is your last name Joseph yeah hi I'm also with me I have our supervisor Pat Poquette he could speak more of the technical terms to blasting whereas I'll go through the project on the engineering side of management my last name is happy HAPP why I like the mood great great great lesson would you both please raise your right hand and swear that the information you're providing to the board tonight is is true and under penalty of yes okay I heard one yes I need to hear two yeses and I need you both to say yes Joseph you on Pat Poquette yes did you say yes yes okay thank you all right so I feel like we've had the boards had a lot of testimony about this project so I'm not sure that we need an overview of the project this is the continued final plat application which is kind of the final phase before the board deliberates and makes the decision no guarantee that it will conclude tonight we'll see how it goes but I guess before we start going through the comments I wonder then do you have any anything you'd like to say about the project that's in addition to what we've already heard of what you said no I think that you know really this this hearing is just about supplemental information that's been provided and follow-up if the board is okay with it staff is okay with it main drilling has been very gracious to make time for us tonight so if it's if it works for you folks I'd love to give them the opportunity to go through the blast plan because that's sort of the one new item tonight and everything else is follow-up and supplemental information mostly on design so following main drilling and blasting the Bryant courier and I can go through those supplemental materials okay so you're suggesting we start with the blasting testimony that is correct okay so just for to remind the board and to give the public public participants an overview we had a very full staff report that we have gone through and we have some items remaining and that staff report that we didn't get to at a previous meeting but in addition to that we have a memo from Marla that kind of highlights some of the issues that we've already reviewed so if the board unless anyone on the board has an objection I would suggest we move right to the blasting issue because that seems to be a significant issue that we need to clarify we'll go back to the other issues right pardon me we'll go back to the other issues absolutely absolutely yeah so I'm sure yes just just for the record I do know Mr. Avery from our project through work at Chitton County Regional Planning we do run a Brownfields program that helps hire scientists to assist in redevelopment of properties and Mr. Avery did approach our Brownfields program and our Brownfields Advisory Committee a few years ago and they're wrapping up a project and we pay CAS engineering to help with a redevelopment of a parcel in Essex junction that project's wrapping up here I think of the next month or two as far as a commitment stuff okay I disclosure do you feel that in any way your former relationship or ongoing relationship it sounds like with Ben Avery Wood in any way bias you and your professional opinion no none at all I mean this is a small town so I'm familiar with the engineering firms the development community of course it's just kind of the way it is but just for the record I would like to be known okay so please talk to us about the blasting plan Mr. happy yes sorry I was on mute good evening everyone yeah so basically we were hired by BlackRock to provide a drilling service to identify the rock surface for his project which we have provided I don't know if you guys are versed with the with the project but we have shaded areas on the Google overlay where rock is to be removed to get to design elevation for buildings utilities roadway and such our blast plan main drilling and blasting is a very safe reputable company throughout the northeast and you know down south we take pride in safety and this blast plan really represents what we do for the project and how we progress through you know start to finish I don't know if you guys have a blast plan in front of you or where you'd like to go with that Marla is it helpful to bring up the plan that was submitted with the original packet that shows the shaded red areas is that not in this packet then I don't see anything that looks like that in this packet oh shoot well I'm very sorry yeah I can pull that up I'll just be a second right I'm gonna stop sharing then okay then we lost for you on April or March 3rd right correct okay and you would have had a copy of both the main drilling and blasting blast plan as well as that illustration and then I think the only supplemental material was you requested a letter stating that they would combine with all of the city ordinances so the only supplemental you got was the letter okay I'm just weeding through pages of architectural regions my way towards the blasting plan she's looking for that I think that as I recall some of the issues that the board and the public have raised in relation to blasting is the noise and safety issues so I this is the blasting plan that from the last pocket and I can hold it here so the portions of the regulations that blasting are very difficult to share and good other things at the same time are in the last couple pages of the staff comments and they pertain to oh my gosh I'm sorry I don't know how Julyla does this okay so they pertain to oh my gosh all right the extent of blood removal methodology of removal mitigation if there is anything that relates to our performance standards which are about noise and vibration we need information on the proposed machinery operations and products amount in nature of materials to be used mechanisms and techniques to be used method of delivery and disposal or recycling of any hazardous elements and other information is necessary we also need to provide conditions pertaining to warning systems monitoring reporting and then handling of materials storage location and hours of operation so anything you can testify to further those submission requirements or help us write those conditions is what we're kind of looking for here and that's all that stuff that I read is on page 16 of this week's packet okay so that was a lot of information I don't have page 16 but I can certainly run through question by question and give you answers would that work for you sure do you want me start at the beginning then you know you the packet as well okay so the first information is a description of proposed machinery operations and products okay yeah so we will be using a t30 track drill these are soft contained drills with air compressors on them built on so no trailers or anything they're on tracks and basically they utilize a hammer to vertically drill holes in the ground to a specified diameter in order for us to fracture the rock properly to be able to dig it so you're drilling holes that you're going to then use as like a pilot hole for blasting we will drill holes in a series and a pattern for say like on a six by six pattern we will pull holes wherever meets blasting is needed okay so amount and nature of materials to be used and mind that none of us are experts so to the degree you can dumb it down to a high school level that would be great yep for um so on a daily basis we will bring to the job site explosives and self-contained certified containers on pickup trucks we will load the drill holes with explosives fill the top portion of them with a stemming stone material which allows the explosive blasts horizontally and not vertically like unbearable um this will vary on a day-to-day basis the amount of poundage that we will utilize per shot um anything any of our material explosive material that is left over on a given day will be brought off magazine sites and in New Haven Vermont anyone hear me if you're not participating in this part of the meeting if you're not on the board or an applicant we're we're going to public comment there okay so the next one is mechanisms and techniques to be used in restricting the emission of any hazardous and objectionable elements as well as projected or actual emission levels so in this case could be noise or vibration okay so all of our all of our drills were running are all emission certified they all run the DEF system which is an additive to the diesel for the clean fuel emissions that's standard now company-wide um sorry sorry sorry as far as um environmental all of our explosives will are non-soluble to water so when we put those in our low and our drill holes they are packaged in motion and don't dissolve in water which creates a really good efficiency for blasting in us in a wet area once these explosives are detonated they are no longer you know explosives they fracture the rock and dissipate thank you and method of delivery and disposal for recycling of any hazardous chemicals again all the explosives will be brought to the job site on a daily basis in a certified container on our pickup trucks and or trailer we will what we put in the grounds for explosives will be detonated before we leave the site any unused explosives will be returned to the magazine site offsite from the project in our certified containers storage units um as far as environmental hazards there will be none I'll slightly off both question because I think that this is sort of of interest to the board and board if I'm way off base here just shut me up is there any chance you will use a method other than blasting for the magnet to the project the duration would be astronomical so is that a no I'm gonna refer to Ben on this Marla are you asking if they're gonna chip the rock um well that's one thing I don't know what other methods are available maybe digging if it's like Ryan or something I think if if the question is sort of any interest of the public who have had a lot of commentary on a nearby project where they shipped it I think Joe's answer and correct me if I'm wrong was given the magnitude of the rock that needs to come out that would be incredibly inefficient which is why they are here to blast and to clarify main drilling blasting is not in the ledge chipping business they're a blasting organization so we have retained them to manage the rock removal on this site via a blasting method so we have not retained them and nowhere in their scope is any sort of chipping of ledge so this is John on your job on the area of photograph or drawing there are pink areas dark very dark pink and you know very light pink areas what explain to me please kind of give me the key because I can't seem to see it on the screen yeah just go through our blast plan here on my bigger screen so what we've identified here is the circle around the parameters the industry standard 250 foot pre-blast radius on the outside of the blast zone the lighter pink shaded areas are the shallower depth rock to be removed generally in the three to five foot range the darker shaded areas are the deeper rock which were will be in your five to 10 12 foot range so when I say 10 to 12 feet we would be drilling 10 to 12 feet and then in the earth to blast 10 to 12 feet of rock out to achieve the design grades for the mom you know the structures and the utilities so the lighter shade again is the shallower off the deeper shade is where your deeper rock concentration is for the project in this scope we've highlighted these utilities blue is the water line green is the sewer and orange is the storm drain these utilities will have to be blasted in order to get to the inverter these pipes you so they can be installed for the project per spat thank you that was very helpful um board what other questions do you have about blasting safety noise whatever or Marla I guess in terms of last protection for adjacent properties and neighboring communities you know what type of and I want to say I guess I want to say guaranteed you have this won't be affecting you know the adjacent properties when you do the blast yeah it's a good question so each blast that we do is is designed and a software and verified through our company that to ensure that the blast will the amount of explosives we use per blast will fracture the rock and contain the blast in the blast zone we will utilize blasting mats on this project to the proximity of the existing us town roads so we blasting mats are a rubber tire it's a rubber tire mat they're 12 feet wide by 24 feet long that will be placed on each of our blasts in most cases we will double mat this and that just goes on top of the ground on top of our blast holes after they're loaded and when we detonate the blast it contains debris from flying and really puts weight on the ground to fracture the rock properly for the construction of this project okay and then that follow-up question to that how long you know I don't not familiar enough of blasting to know how large of a scope this project is and how many blasts and how long and how many a day I mean what's what's sort of the timetable and this is coming from you know the project the last summer which was chipping you know chipping and we were told you know a month and then it was two months and it ended up feeling like it was all summer long all day long you know I'm wondering if you do you know can you give a schedule and hours of operation timing you know anything like that yes the hours of operation will be to the to the specs south Berlin conspects which in this case I believe are 8 a.m. without looking in our blast plan or the specs right now but 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. of generally speaking we will do two smaller blasts per day and different parts of the project so yes to two blasts per day is what we're aiming for in this in this case as far as duration I don't have that in front of me then I can look it up if that's important right now it is I don't have that in front of me either but we can certainly get an answer pretty quickly and then from a impact standpoint from like a noise nuisance ordinance standpoint let's just say you know how close could you or how far away would you be and not here or even notice that blasting is occurring so the blast is no more than what we refer to for the public is a thunderstorm it's it's millisecond shot you know when we detonate that blast it it's literally like one one thunder clap and you know you're going to feel the air the airwaves not not at a far distance but it's very very contained very well-designed and it's not your typical like western style blasting you know nowadays everything's just very strict and we have strict rules that we had to buy to home bold sea and federally okay but like you know I see your blast radius red line around the property sort of touches the driveways of the development across the door set you know will the people in those homes here or feel it each time you do a blast again they'll feel like airwaves which is no more than you know a thunderstorm or whatnot but it's all right so let's go back when we do these blasts we use seismograph and and megaphones that monitor ground vibrations and airwaves um anything within any any structure whether it's inside the blast zone or outside the blast zone we have to abide to state and federal rig regulations which for an air blast is 133 decibels i know it's a lot of terms for you guys but and for um uh ground vibrations it's two inches per second at any structure within the project or the next closest to the project all of our standards that we do in main we will be within standards and we will stay under the two inches per second and we will stay within the 133 decibels air blasts these are all studies that have been done from ancient history two inches per second um is at your old school um blaster foundation studies have been done to show that at two inches per second you will not get airline fractures or anything of such so these standards are very strict um and we you know all of our blasts will be designed to stay within criteria at the closest structure to uh to where we're blasting okay i guess i would like to get the information as to the schedule of blasting how long this is the duration this is going to go on for well i think that just jumping back in mark i you know two things first of all let's just call space babe we're talking about comparing this to long drive and making those kinds of estimations is exactly what got us in trouble there so i'm not particularly interested in us or any of our subcontractors representing that it's going to take exactly 21 and a half days to do this project and not only that but the the reality is having worked with these guys on a blasting project last year in williston um the the the blasting really those two blasts a day are only one piece of it uh because as they work through the project um they do a blast and then there's there's an activator on site that's doing what's called blast support and that excavator's job is to remove the blasted material um so that they can continue the work zone and there's all kinds of logistics involved with um the rock that's on site and moving stuff around and making sure these guys can continue to work so you know it's very very difficult to say um that it's going to take a specific amount of time because it's not as simple as them saying oh there's going to be you know 20 charges and we do two charges a day so it's done in 10 days um it's just more complicated than that and and and you know um i think if there's anybody from staff on the call uh i don't think that city staff wants to deal with the calls that they dealt with last summer where we gave some sort of a timeframe that was not helpful to anyone not to us not to staff um it just it creates an expectation and the reality is um these things are under the ground and you know we do our best to you know these guys have a ton of technology they can tell you what rock is there but just the physical time to remove it and the the variety of activities going on by multiple subcontractors is just very hard to gauge i hear what you're saying then i'd actually be more comfortable with joe just given his general knowledge and experience saying historically a project this size might take a month or something like that where we're not getting into specific time frames joe do you think you could sort of uh with the caveat that it is a total ballpark should you ballpark something for us just a project of this nature um would take um one to two months to complete when i say that um our duration is in days not including weekends and i think you're right there in the month time frame adding in weekends i believe you're around the one to two month period and that's blasting every day every day that's warranted right um we have to deal with weather um you know weather breakdown stuff like that but we aim to blast every day yes uh to be productive um in a real world it doesn't happen every day but that's going to be our goal what kind of weather would interfere depending on when the project goes if it snows right um if it's uh you know raining we drill in the rain we um typically won't blast in the rain so um things like that drills are very they're pounding rock every day uh they break down often um so we'll have days that we'll have um you know of some sort of delay to our to our business um but it's something we're we're equipped with thank you i i gotta weigh in on this a little more um you know mr happy i i obviously main drilling and activation highly reputable company i'm sure you this is you've got this down to as as much of an exact science as you can given that it's underground you know legend stuff i'm just pretty concerned to hear one to two months you know two blasts a day and then you got your support mechanisms going on which is not rock chipping but it's not quite either you know hauling the rock dumping throwing it into the you know the dump trucks which is going to be the banging and rattling you know for one to two months with no guarantees it sounds like it's trading in chipping for blasting and rock removal but on a similar type scale to long drive this past summer which i guarantee you that the staff getting the calls is nothing compared to the neighbors living at during the height of a pandemic when you're trying to have your windows open and enjoy the outside and it's just this incessant pounding so those types of unknowns i'm going to need a little more information in terms of some you know technical information in terms of the audible decibel you know so i'd bring it back to the regulations a little bit the board has some authorities in this and i think that you know it sounds like there may be some interest in exercising some of this authority um the board i'm going to share my screen again it's probably easier than just reading it so this is a packet um and the board has the ability to impose conditions on the following and this is you know the storage handling hours of operation i think the real operative one here is hours of operation um warning systems so that would include you know notification of neighbors notification of the city um and i'd love to hear from the applicant you know how what what you think is appropriate and then the board is obviously going to consider what what they think would be appropriate and then um the other ones are you know monitoring and reporting what would you guys be doing um which is the board want and then are there any other restrictions and then the only other thing i want to remind the board is that of the we invoke technical review um you know i love that we're getting all this information but if at any point we figure out of our depth um we can get technical review of the testimony i would still like to hear it in a public session so that you know we can get technical review of all the information so marla it's don my question would be what what is um if they come forward with information and if we were to invoke technical review um what are the alternatives for them if it turns out that it's excessively noisier the duration is too long i mean there's rock they want to do some building what would be alternatives or would that essentially kill the project no i think that would be um something we would be looking for the technical review to recommend so i have contracted i've contacted um a technical reviewer and they've said that they can um you know help work with us you know they may come back and say wow main drilling blasting has really done the best you possibly could um and that's going to be the recommendation that the technical reviewer would perfect provide to the board or they may come back and say you know we think they missed a thing or two here or there and we think i ended up a little bit you know in these areas and then it's up to the board whether to implement that recommendation so would um would now be the time for the board to vote on i don't know if it needs to vote but indicate whether it wants to invoke technical review or would um would it be more appropriate when they come back with specific information to do that i would suggest um asking and if they would like to provide more written information on these um potential conditions and what you will be comfortable with or if you would rather provide it verbally now and then we can kind of proceed with technical review there is the opportunity for a little bit of discussion on the provided material so it's not like it's not like the technical reviewer is working in a vacuum they they take on the role of staff and they can have conversations with the applicant while they're doing their review so the next the next step would be for the applicant to provide us with a written written information about what they testified on tonight with more detail i i think what would make sense is we can ask main drilling and blasting to uh you know to provide some you know written follow up to this discussion tonight for staff to review um you know this is with these situations um i'm oftentimes a fan of a technical review simply because most of what main drilling and blasting is talking about is over my head um and is you know most likely over everybody's head so they're trying to disseminate technical information that we're interpreting as lay people and and that um can be uh challenging and so what i don't want to do is believe your this process and talk circles for two meetings about something that really none of us have a deep understanding of so i would agree with marla that given my experience working with this company i can't imagine that a technical review would turn up anything um earth moving excuse the fun um so we would uh we would certainly be open to that you know all i would say is that um you know much as with the traffic study that was done on this project um which we were very comfortable having done uh because we were confident in its outcome uh this sort of falls in the same category i'm not overly concerned with it so certainly if technical review is going to make staff feel better and in turn make the board feel better um we're we're open to that and and i'd be open to expediting that process and did you have a question well i'm just curious if the city has had a database of where blasting has been done before and and mostly from the standpoint of establishing a track record of of what historically blasting experiences sound like so that when these issues come up now or when they come up for a different application there's a understanding among staff and drb and the general public of what blasting entails i think it's new to a lot of it it's new to me but that's all if i'm perfectly fine with moving forward to technical review and and it's Greek to me as well too so i think a third party look at it would be great so lila did you raise your hand i i i don't i just briefly to speak to dan's point we don't have a database per se but the most recent project that incorporated some blasting um in the southeast quadrant was um the construction of midland avenue and south village that was about a year ago i guess i would like to know if the board would like to um go forward with what ben has proposed which is um provide some additional written testimony on specific criteria in staff report and then we'll go ahead and have that reviewed um by a third party technical reviewer i think that sounds like a great plan other members okay great yeah me me too mark okay jean okay good so we need to make a motion to invoke technical review correct yep so i'll make a motion that we invoke technical review for the purposes of reviewing the blasting plan thank you mark do i hear a second i'll second thank you elissa okay so we've heard the motion all board members um those in favor say aye hi hi hi all opposed so it sounds like it's a go marla okay great i think that started tomorrow um that is going to require we continue hearing and we can talk about that later but i would suggest um may may six i guess may fourth okay okay so should we move on to um non-blasting stuff and yes i'm just looking for the memo here um should we go back to the memo and work our way through it i think so the memos organize a little bit differently than usual in that um some of the previous staff comments are lumped together so the first thing in the memo talks about that old staff comment number one and two pertaining to pre-construction grade and height um don do you have me to read it since i've got it open yeah i'm trying to find it i want to make sure go ahead marla that would be helpful thank you okay so the first staff comment in this week's memo is since the purpose of the single story area is to avoid an abrupt change in the land and building massing at these high visibility locations staff recommends the board declined to change the condition of preliminary plot and instead require the applicant to adjust their proposed development plan for these homes these being the homes in the eastern most single story area to allow them to meet the condition staff considers that this should be done prior to closing the hearing otherwise the record drives will not reflect the grading which facilitates construction of unit 17 and 18 so if we show the overall site plan probably and jelilah i promised you links and then i didn't do it so i apologize um page 17 actually maybe even better 19 brian if that it's the grading plan would that be helpful uh why don't you go to 20 it's kind of strangely cut off here yeah it's the site plan's cutting it too because the site's uh a little too big for one so what what we're talking about uh you want to go to the southern for the the lower plan to lila is unit 17 and 18 we had a fairly detailed discussion last time we were in about pre-construction grade and how heights measured in the city of south barlington unit 17 and 18 are in a predetermined zone that required them to be single story units there was no requirement for height just that they were single story units and 17 and 18 are being constructed on the low side of the road and because the the existing grade drops off as you move down that hillside the difference between a the finished floor grade our desired finished floor grade of the units and the existing pre-construction grade left us with about a height of 12 feet for those two units last time we discussed that we for future homeowners we desire a positive grade on the driveway we really don't like setting the garage floors below the road unless there's some some sort of agreement between the applicant and the drb in our opinion these units are going to be they're going to look odd and frankly i think they'll look like a mistake if they're set with negative grade pitch on their driveways so i went through and established the pre-construction grade elevations for the two units and a desired garage floor elevation and as they've been proposed to you today unit 18 would be 23 feet and unit 17 would be 25 and a half feet now you allow a required height of 28 feet and the board was was posing a 20 foot requirement for the single story units and that was mostly in response to a mezzanine portion of the regulations that we weren't intending on pursuing but was caught by staff at the preliminary stages if my recollection is correct so we're really just asking for 23 feet and 25 and a half feet not the allowed 28 feet board mark you're the architect or in consideration here is the part that leads up to this stuff comment which sort of explains the background of this standard and how it came to exist which i didn't know paul had to tell me about that mark does your architectural training help in any way with this no but possibly one question i have for you um brian the year 17 and 18 you know i i see that it's clearly going to be a walkout you know basement um but how you know what's the height of the structure on the back of those two buildings yeah so as they're graded right now they're both created as walkouts in the rear so the height of unit 18 is is 23 feet the way that the city measures height and 17 is 25 and a half and so when you're when you're standing on on the path you know you'll see you'll see a sliding door entering the basement and then you'll see the you know the ground floor above it but from the street as all the single story units being constructed with a proposed roadway you'll see the single story unit that's required in the district and i just like to reiterate that we're we're not asking for any waivers we're strictly uh asking for um you know the board to um allow us to build to um well less than the required height in that zone and we're still keeping it a single story unit the the biggest issues for us is is putting a negative slope on the driveway you know those both those units are located at the bottom of of the loop um you know a negative slope on the driveway um you know is definitely not ideal for a new new homeowner uh for either one of those units can you ask then the only thing you end up with is a trench strain sort of along the width of the driveway you know in front of the garage correct yes it's it's still not an ideal practice i mean the the land is still sloping towards the house right we try at all costs to stay away from the situation like that so what would be the alternative uh i i think uh uh alternative that was uh acceptable to the drb about a month ago was allowing a us to build to the required height that's allowed in the zone while still keeping them single story units do you have elevations of 17 and 18 in the packet yep where would we find those hey mark can you really be closer to your microphone you're pretty hard to hear thank you where would we find the elevations in the packet they are cherry and spruce so spruce can be found on page 76 and cherry is 82 and that's essentially what you're going to see from the uh from the roadway yeah it's just it's a technical you know it's it's south burlington just measures height kind of in a in a different way is really the the issue here so right so from from foundation you know you're talking about it looks like it's about a 15 foot tall building measured to the midpoint of the the roof plane correct yep you when you take into average grade around the perimeter of the house correct bumps up to 23 feet yes yep 23 and 25 and a half for the one next to the yep so all the single story units on the high side of the road on the upper part of the plateau we don't have this issue with but essentially they'll look the same from the road and those won't have lockout basements correct those will be this grade around the perimeter likely i think the duplexes might be uh garden style you know four foot window in the back but essentially they'll look the same from the road yeah i'm i'm generally with it you know but i guess my concern is that the fact that it's so close to the road in the back and you have you have grade up to the the back slider and then you're you know going up essentially two stories on the back of the building i'm just concerned about how it's going to be perceived from the bottom of the hill as you drive up the hill and you see these how how well screened are they from a vegetation standpoint so on these the eastern side of the units the site plans do do east i don't know yeah on the on the eastern side of the of the units is the the 27 foot type one uh required by the nrn zoning you know screening buffer and the the grade on the rec path mark is 390 and what i got on the back of that unit is 393 okay so it's not it's not way up there yeah and what is a definition of a type one whatever berm oh it's it's uh it's a very long it's a very long rigorous uh table what it's gonna actually what is what is it going to achieve it's it's designed for screening purposes it's specifically proposed along both uh the areas where the project abuts the rec path so it goes it starts from behind unit 17 and 18 actually curls around where the where the sediment forebay is and wraps all the way along along the project and all the way up on the extended dorsal street okay so brian this is the this is the dense narrow firm yes uh it's a type two type two so we said yeah type two 27 feet wide uh we're used to a creation pile 20 27 feet wide yeah so it's 27 feet wide and has certain like limit specific amounts yeah it requires a certain amount of shrubs trees it's very specific on you know density of plantings there must be this many you know trees within this distance and um yes it's it's a very specific uh screening buffer okay so it says that the combination of shrubbery has to occupy at least 50 of the area at the time of planting all of which shall be distributed through the minimum buffer with yep and i believe our landscaping plan has exactly how we're implementing that buffer i think to mark's point um you know the language that's exerted from the settlement agreement talks about the appearance um or the transition from this neighborhood to the adjoining natural area and i think that what you guys are talking about right now it really gets to um the core of this question this question is does it meet the settlement agreement with these heights with the screening and the elevations relative to the red path do we have the language from the settlement agreement in the packet anywhere yes it's immediately preceding the red comment in blue okay good two okay so the blue paragraph in top of h2 and that includes site design standards that require compatibility with adjacent natural areas anything else about this issue before we move on since if the board is going to say you have to make them 20 feet high they need to go back and redesign them um so it'd be good to get some feedback from other board members on where we are on this question well i think if i can jump in i i i think the concept of um and mark can certainly weigh in the concept of of chopping five feet off that roof line um unless we're going to build flat roof you know houses is um uh you know is is not ideal so um i think the alternative answer would likely be to sink those houses and have an inverted driveway um i think just to brian's point um that's not ideal and and uh it's gonna look a little wonky as you come down the street so uh you know really i think that some of i could see the argument both ways we could talk about what is the visual impact to the bike path and what is the visual impact to the streetscape because they um you know they are both affected by or one of the other is affected by what we do here yeah don i'm going to just leave it with this that you know there's a specific reason for the settlement agreement language and i'm not talking about flattening the roof or anything but i do think that we we really i'm personally leaning towards requiring it to meet the 20 foot which means if you need to depress it slightly there's a reason that this area of the site has got that requirement and it's so that you know maybe it might feel a little wonky to you as the developer but i think from a site design for this purpose and why this was done this way to me sounds seems appropriate if that's what you need to do to be able to get two more units into the um the development or you don't do those two units is the other option if that's what if you want those two units you're gonna have to meet the intent which might be depressing the the slab's a little bit so that you can meet the 20 foot i do agree that i'm sorry but once you factor in that it's elevated up and you got a major walkout on the basement on the back of it the house feels like it's lifting out of the air so it doesn't meet the intent of what they're looking for for this corner of the site understood we can we can sink them down there and i'm just one board member i'd like to see if you know obviously dawn's running the meeting you know make sure that we're in agreement on that yeah i'd love to hear other people's opinion dan jim elissa others anyone anyone ferris bueller's day off um comments i guess marlo what uh what should we do with this yes i mean it's i would really like to provide some feedback to the applicant um if the board is unwilling to weigh in on this at this time i guess um we'll just have to do that either they'll have to read between the lines and make the decision for themselves or um you know you guys vote in a deliberative session to share some additional information okay all right thank you um i did get a note from elissa who's just having connectivity issues what um elissa is having connectivity issues oh okay all right okay i feel like we need to do a time check it's quarter of nine um we still have a lot to go through for this application and um we have some other um at least one other significant um actually two agenda items to get through and then a third one that's not hopefully going to take that long but i'm feeling like we need to perhaps conclude this hearing not close it but conclude it and pick it up another time what board members what do you think about that i guess one question i'd have before planning on going that route because obviously in my mind um the architectural is is a major component the elevations of the the buildings that still needs looks like they still need some work to be done on them and then the technical review from the blasting standpoint is a major element in my mind you know if we're continuing it i want to make sure we're continuing it and be productive at the next meeting um not just sort of pick it back up where we left off i'd like to be able to get some additional information incorporated into these as we move on and keep going to echo to echo what mark's saying um you know uh obviously we're anticipating some additional design comments and if we don't know what those comments are tonight then we're simply kicking the can to a may meeting and then to a June meeting um so i you know i think the other items can probably be talked through and those might be conditional uh items but um uh you know i do i agree with mark if if there is specific back and forth on on design issues um spending a few minutes now would be helpful okay let's do that can i suggest we skip directly to staff comment number 15 so the applicant has um provided a draft condition that they suggest would so we at the previous hearing talked about um the administrative officer some flexibility and accepting designs that don't exactly match what the applicant is and the board said why and then come up with come back with that proposed condition so they have written that um Delilah that's on page seven if you can pull it up um and then you know anyone can zoom in using the zoom button on the side of their screen um they provided that draft condition and what they would like is to have the ability to modify the exterior colors deciding the trim the roof slope the porches and decks the window placement and foundation type um staff comment here is well if you're modifying those things um what good are the elevations you have provided and so we have proposed an alternative is not just an open-ended question and the alternative is to um do something similar to what other projects in the sq have done um i know rye has done this cider mill has done this um south village has done this with providing a um design requirements document that says something like um you know no two adjacent home shall be identical in order to be considered not identical they should vary in three of these seven ways um and so yeah i guess is that that is not a way the board thinks that this elevation appearance issue could be resolved kind of creating a palette to choose from this is don i think that's an excellent idea i i think that it's no it's not going to come as a shock to the applicant that we're still really not happy with um the elevations we're seeing and there is some not any and um especially the single family homes are not very interesting and i think that would be a good place to start create to create some of the thinking around how to have enough how to incorporate unity and variability at the same time and what are the elements of that and what's the guidance around that so that's my thought i think that my concern there is that we have had challenges with staff in the past on items that have ambiguity or require a lot of subjective thinking and things can get hung up perpetually and so it is our desire to even if this takes us the next eight meetings to hammer this out with the board um simply because uh the way it works um with a zoning administrator approval is things can get hung up perpetually so i'm i'm i'm trying to pitch something to one person who's trying to interpret their view of how the zoning is written and then and then the actual outcome if we don't agree is i wind up back at the drb and so what we don't want to happen is some sort of a process where i'm winding up back at the drb with every other house in order to litigate this exact same issue and so you know i think there's value in hammering that out now i think i think ryan's um ryan's summation of a condition here is a good one because it doesn't close the door if if somebody wants to come and do a different roof line you know or change a porch or a deck first of all that would add additional varieties of the neighborhood based on west design so i don't think that's necessarily a bad thing but it also gives us a guideline to work from it's very easy for the zoning administrator to say no this proposed item does not meet the regs so your choices are build what was approved or don't build anything um but in a situation where it's left open-ended then we wind up in a situation where there is no call back there is no alternative so if we can't all get along then we wind up back in front of the drb on a house by house basis and that just doesn't seem to be an efficient way to manage the process so i'm going to weigh in on this please go ahead all right um i i agree with you ben and i agree with you know staff's position i think that you know there's certainly we've certainly done other projects where we've had given the zoning administrator the flexibility but there has to be clear direction and guidance in that flexibility um you know and you know doing a design review requirement guideline or document that gives you the flexibility to i would i would call it from my standpoint a kit of parts pattern language or a kit of parts for the residential design you know you sort of present an options of you know a typical porch column one or two typical porch column designs you know what type of pitch roof you're looking to do you like no more than no less than five twelve no more than eight twelve something where you know you want to give the zoning administrator the flexibility but if you come in with a you know 1212 roof pitch it looks totally out of place but it hasn't been pre-approved you don't want to come back to the drb for that but we also you know should have some guidance as to what's been reviewed and approved so i would say that you know if you present to us you know one or two acceptable elevations with a bunch of different options that you can mix and match throughout these elevations that type of document gives Delilah the flexibility to review them you the flexibility to to address market conditions for individual buyers and us the control over what we would expect to see out there when all is said and done well and i think that what i'm saying is that i'm comfortable with being having my feet held to the fire to build what is approved as a part of this drb process so what i'm looking for is a fallback so if if if if all else fails i can build this and and it was present each building in the site in the development and say i'm building this one here this one here this one here this one here and that's exactly what we've provided literally lot by lot and so a lot more work done on those designs as don pointed out and you've heard our feedback well i you know this is the problem uh with and this is the challenge mark um and and you know it's not effective for us to keep cycling 18 different designs and bring them back each time i would rather have an i'm fine if the board feels comfortable with mark giving me specific marked up feedback i'm i'm i'm happy to take that feedback this is not if we shared um design guidelines from at least three other developments that are currently pulling permits right now and usually don't run into snacks when they issue their permits because they have that kid apart that mark is talking about well do we have the authority to do that to share those documents they're public they're public documents they're part of the decisions with those with those particular projects approvals okay thank you what we can do i'm chair we can certainly take a look at that um obviously this particular zoning district has its own uh specific set of rules but we're happy to do that what i would really very much appreciate is written feedback from the board and again it could be marks that designated the board but it is very very difficult we could be here for months of you folks putting up with me if i'm simply forced to redraw these things again and again and again and again and again um i i've run into this with other boards i am not um an inflexible person i would much rather have you tell me specifics that you would like to see you'll note that in my recent middle somebody said they wanted screen porches their screen porches um i don't have a problem doing that but what i can't do is ad nauseam just guess at what i think the board might want um frankly in this market um i could sell anything so let's get some if we can get some solid feedback to us with specifics i'm happy to modify the designs in a manner that is in keeping with what the board would like to see just the interest well we're not interested in having you sell anything we want uh hello we want to see excuse me we want to see designs that um we believe contribute aesthetically to the neighborhood and and are somewhat unique so well and i feel like we're providing that and if the board is in disagreement then i'm welcome i'm welcoming the feedback i don't i don't see what the issue is with us getting specific feedback um chair yes i'm sorry who's speaking please it's dan albrecht board member yes i'm sorry thank you um yeah i i'm familiar with the the design guideline concept and maybe at the end uh as it as the progress as the project's ready to move forward they will they can provide that template that are the palette but i think the applicant's pretty clear again i'm new to this i did read the minutes from the prior meetings um it seems that the the board wants to provide exact clarity and so i what i'm hearing the applicant saying is the applicant wants that so you tell him we will tell him exactly what what should be built and it's the aesthetic and other concerns that the board has so let's take the time to tell it exactly and if it means marking up the elevations and people drawing on them i don't have the expertise for that um giving it to the applicant and then and then away we go i think the applicant's really demonstrating that he wants that exact feedback so let's let's give it to him and he can either live with it or not and we'll go from there thank you thank you dan so um i'd like to take a pause here we're approaching nine o'clock um and i i i need marla's input and the board's input um we still have several agenda items should we just keep going on this one until we get through the comments we need to make a decision about how to proceed with board input for this project um but we have two other projects to review tonight so what are your thoughts about how we should proceed this is really a procedural question and i'm kind of new at this so marla what what thoughts do you have um i would suggest that we continue this item i know there's a lot of people in the public who have attended the meeting and listened to the feedback from the applicant and from the board um hopefully that's been helpful to you um i think that we are probably unable to make time for public comment tonight that does not mean that we are closed to public comment um we will make especially in the situations where we have no time for public comment at hearing we will make an extra special point to leave time for public comment at the continued hearing and as always written public comment is always encouraged if you're unable to attend so i would encourage the board to continue the meeting to may 4th the board has reviewed all of the public comments that have been submitted up until noon today so i should have confirmed with you an email that it has been shared but if i did not please be assured that every email that in my desk before noon today has been shared with the board view those and if you have additional comments on things you've heard tonight please feel free to submit those in writing or provide testimony i think to need hearing um so unless anyone has anyone on the board has any objections i would suggest continuing to make so stopping this now and proceeding with the agenda yes okay all right um does anyone on the board have any objection to that i should say elissa had um is still having connection issues so she had to jump off signing back in okay uh excuse me don this is john bolsage can i just chime in one one thing before i time off here because a lot of us have been here for two hours so we're not going to give any comment tonight if that's what i'm understanding we can submit things to marla and they will get our comments either in writing or emails for the may 4th meeting is that correct is that what i'm hearing people say yes it is and um i hope that um people who are interested in providing public comments have been somewhat enlightened tonight by some of the comments and maybe that's clarified some issues um but this is going to be an ongoing process i know you've sat through a lot of testimony sometimes that just happens and thank you for your interest yeah we understand that and and we know you get a busy agenda and so i'm very appreciative of that i know i speak for others would you ever consider having just a meeting on this one topic where we could just talk to you about the issues because there's a lot of people here we don't want to take up time with the may 4th agenda and because maybe a half hour's worth of comments would it be worthy to have just a meeting where we can speak to you on this just on this issue as as opposed to taking time on an agenda so that's a procedural question so i'm going to ask marla to address it please yeah john thanks for asking that question i think it's a great one um from time to time we do have a special meeting when um projects are taking up a lot of time right now we are pretty caught up so i don't think that that's necessary but i think that if we find ourselves um slipping and you know struggling to get things on the agenda we will definitely start talking about a special meeting in addition to the may 4th and it would be um after so that you would get ample notice um i think that's a great thing to consider but i don't think we're there right now okay i just want to plant that seed and the possibility my guess is there there's going to be that needs at some point so thank you very much for keeping that online appreciate it thank you don for your work and the board for listening thank you thank you okay so do we need to vote to continue this yes okay so i would entertain a motion to continue plan a flat application sd 2106 to may 6 sorry may 4th sorry sorry um did i just make a motion or did i say and entertain a motion you are entertaining a motion okay i'll make a motion that we continue agenda s or sd 2105 to may 6th may 4th may 4th sorry do i hear a second i'll second for discussion john can we just have some further discussion before we vote on that in the door sure i've heard a lot of back and forth about the issue of providing some design guidance feedback on the individual designs um yeah it sounds like that would fall to me to provide that no pressure or anything i'm happy to do that but i don't want it to come from me i'd rather work something up give it to the board and staff take a look at and then we provide it to the applicant as a board document because you know i shouldn't be the designer on this but i'm happy to provide feedback on the individual units just on things that you know i would i've criticized and commented on and that i'd like to see some some work done on but it should come from the board to the applicant mark that's very kind of you but what is that that sounds like a huge amount of work or or is it something that would be fairly simple for you to draft up i'll just send the bill to the client right i can it's not going to be like me drawing and drafting i'm just going to do a little document this this unit i think this needs to be looked at this isn't working possibly add this type of thing you know and just go by unit by unit um i'll try to get it to staff and the board you know well in advance of the next meeting so that anyone can take a look at and offer feedback before we pass it on to the applicant does that sound like something we could do marla from procedural standpoint yes i'm uncomfortable but yes yeah i know i i i hear what you're saying normally because it feels like we're designing for the applicant yes but at the same time if the board is taking such a keen interest in the specifics of a design down to where the windows are and what the portrayals look like i mean there's an infinite number of combinations i could put together so in theory i could be here in perpetuity submitting and and it's it's it's actually compounded by the fact that there are so many different designs so in other projects that i can think of in south burlington uh for instance on golf course road where you know you have rows and rows of identical housing um that is less than a thousand feet from this project um that's pretty easy to get figured out because you're just building 80 of the same thing this is compounded by the fact that i think there's like 14 designs here so the the combinations are endless so rather than me just hunt and pack in the dark i would really appreciate marx doodles which really is all i'm looking for um to and it's not to say that marx going to do a drawing and i'm going to build it but i think if he marks it up a little bit then that's going to give us an idea of the direction that the board is looking to see and that may be the key not for us to do exactly what he says but to say okay here's what they'd like to see here's what they think is a good idea i can then modify our designs based on those notes does that make sense it does make sense and i i understand your position you if you know what you want tell me so i can i can please you kind of thing um so i would just say you know we hear you ben and you know i need to make sure the board behaves in a manner um authorized by state law and so we will take your requesting consideration and strive for a balanced approach perfect are we ready just to like quick question and we're doing this to the main meeting because um because the mid april meeting is already pretty full why so revised materials have to be on my desk two weeks before the next meeting the meeting that it will be heard on so that's today okay gotcha all right great question so are we ready to vote yes all in favor of the motion to continue the hearing until may 4th say aye hi hi chair votes aye opposed so the motion is carried and um mark oh i guess marley you'll get back to mark and we'll we'll communicate about this and um applicant we will see you in may thank you very much thank you for your patience with us no problem thank you i'm trying to make it better yes thanks bye bye bye okay so marla we have two we have three more agenda items shall we just proceed ahead or set some time limits for each of the ones still remaining um i think you should set some time limits um hickory hillside item number seven should be relatively brief okay and then minutes and other business um should also be relatively brief i would probably save half an hour for those two together um i don't know if you want to extend our soft 10 o'clock timeline to something like 10 15 or if you want to just go for 20 minutes on the next one i'm willing to extend it to 10 15 at the very latest does anyone have any objection to that no so that gives us just a little bit over an hour so i'm why don't we do that's right why don't we do um a half hour on um alan long project and then move on to the rest of the agenda items makes sense okay all right so the next item is and i know people have probably been on the phone a long time listening to tonight i'm sorry this is getting so late so the next item is sketch plan application sd 2110 of alan long uh for plan unit development on two existing 39.2 acre lots each developed with a single family home just one plant unit development consists supporting them in homes including five perpetually affordable units nine point three acres of open space proposed to be dedicated to the city of south braving teacher 720 and 730 spear street so again i would like to um remind people that if you're not on the board and you're not part of the applicant team applying please mute your microphone um so that we don't get feedback that interferes with the discussion so this is a sketch plan um as i said earlier it's kind of a high level overview of a proposal and um and we will we don't need to take uh swear the applicant in um but we will learn and give feedback on this proposal so who is here for the applicant please uh my name is alan long and i'm here on behalf of my family which includes my two sisters and my brother and three spouses my brother dan and his wife and niece are here tonight uh they can unmute and uh or at least turn on their cameras uh my wife carol is here but she's going to be in a supporting role so you may not see her okay thank you um are you the one who's going to be doing the presentation yes okay thank you oh i should also mention i'm sorry uh ryan courier who's here from uh oliri burk is our civil engineering contact and has been largely responsible for the sketch plan that you'll see in a minute he is here also and we appreciate his participation thank you uh before we get started does anyone have any disclosures or any reason to recuse themselves hi yes don this is uh jim langan um i'm going to be recusing myself from consideration of this application okay thank you um we actually never did talk about whether we wanted to move the other items up i'm sorry about that but we'll just move on all right so so don i'm i'll i'm gonna log off the the conversation but if i'm needed later just somebody can shoot me a text okay jim thanks sorry we forgot to or i forgot just those items don't worry all right take care jim okay um alan lang would you please give us an overview of your project sure so uh the the blue that you're looking at here is the combination of two plots of land that are owned by our family we're planning on combining them for the purposes of this development which consists of 49 units on 39.2 acres uh ryan took a look at the acreage that we're planning to develop versus the acreage that we're planning to conserve it's about 10 acres to develop and about 29 that will be conserving a lot of that is is an nrp area that was designated in 2006 it's the the right hand portion that you can see of the blue there uh and you can see also that the the left hand or westernmost portion is sandwiched between south point to the north and south village to the south so this is a we feel as if we've designed a a tasteful infill development that's going to fit nicely between those two existing developments in fact the city specified at the time that they approve those developments a stub road uh from each of them going south from south point and north from south village and our development our project proposes to join those two stubs so there would be a road connecting those two developments and that uh you can see on this plan here uh we're looking forward to ensuring that our infill development respects the kind of look and feel of both of those existing developments because they're they're going to be kind of tightly spaced neighborhoods and we want to integrate nicely into into what exists already so as I said the the large eastern portion of this proposal is going to be conserved as you may know this this property was one of the ones identified by the interim zoning open space committee as being a very high priority for conservation because that easternmost portion is part of the great swamp which was their number one priority so we are excited to be able to participate in the conservation of that swath of of forest and open meadow that includes the western the eastern portion of south village the eastern portion of south point and also the under hill underwood property that the the city purchased a few years ago we're proposing an easement to allow public access to that easternmost portion of our property and we have some paths that we've proposed that we can talk about to uh facilitate that access um so I just say one other thing that we've decided to apply during interim zoning and of course that means that the city council is going to have to to approve this project also um to that end we've spent a considerable amount of time sitting in on the planning commission meetings over the last year at which they've deliberated on the new changes to the land development regulations and as part of that participation I think we've come to understand that what we're proposing here is in compliance with everything that we know about the proposed new regulations so we'll be glad to entertain questions about that we've got maps that show habitat blocks and things like that and in fact there's there's one little block you can see a kind of a square in the middle of of our proposal here it's labeled it's part of the preserved area labeled B it's the little square right near that that road connection that I just mentioned that's an existing cops that's been there for for ever since we bought the property back in 1951 almost all the rest of this property was just fields but that was a nice little cops of trees and we're looking forward to continuing to conserve that even though as our as we understand it at the moment the planning commission's extent of the habitat block that comes out of the great swamp only extends as far as that connecting road between south point and south village so you can see we've got 39 units proposed here it's a traditional neighborhood development PUD there are a mixture of building types we have carriage houses duplexes single families and four four plexes we've cited these four plexes kind of just across the property boundary from the the 12 plex buildings in south village we thought that was an appropriate place to put them and I think I'll I'll just stop there and entertain questions if you want to go through the the staff report or anything else before that thank you mr long for that nice overview so with that I think we should just proceed with the comments and see how far we can get the first comment staff recommends the board ask the applicant to describe how the affordable units will meet the distribution standards of 18.02d so I checked this out with Brian yesterday as far as we understand it this 18.02 section requires that if you're going to include affordable units in a development that you spread those units across a diversity of building types and that's what we plan to do we have a couple of we're proposing a couple of the multifamily units be affordable a couple of the duplex units be affordable and one of the carriage houses be affordable for a total of five affordable units thank you board questions Marla do you have any questions I hear nothing I guess that helps us thank you I'm sorry Don I was muted I just said it sounds like they're on the right check it sounds like what they're on the right check okay good thank you any other comments board members no okay so the next comment number two is staff recommends the board ask the applicant to describe their vision for each of the open spaces including what the conceptual trails will look like and how they will be accessed and what if any amenities would be included in area C and that the board provides feedback at this time staff further recommends the applicant discuss the nrp lands to be dedicated to the city with the recreation and park committee mr long or do you have any comments to make about this sure I can I can say a few things Marla would it be possible to put up that sketch plan again so that we can all take a look at those three areas okay great so the three green hatched areas in the sketch plan are the ones that are referred to in that question from the staff in the staff report that's C there B is this long skinny one in the middle and A is the one on the right hand or eastern most side we we don't we hadn't imagined developing in the in the landscaping sense this A area at all it's it's meadow it used to be meadow it's maybe have a couple of trees in it now but we hadn't imagined just leaving that natural we've sketched in a recreation path a hiking trail through there but that's not cast in stone I think speaking in general about hiking trails on the property we we've we've always had trails we we've used them to access the the woods back on the very right hand portion of the the screen here for decades and you know we'd like to continue to let people use the land in that way but we want to also work with the folks in south village and south point and with the city because it would make sense to have you know not just a mishmash of of trails in this whole area but something coordinated that let's let's people walk in the back there maybe not accessing it directly through our developments we're not sure some of those those recreation paths and developments are are owned by the condo associations so they may not be public access although we could consider an easement that would that would change that we do want to be able to let people use that area and get back towards the great swamp it's it's a it's a beautiful area and and really needs to be shared with the general public section be there I mentioned the cops is that little rectangle up towards the crest of the ridge there next to that connecting road the rest of that is a nice opportunity to to have a recreational path along there we'd also like to to preserve the the shrubbery and trees that are along there already because that provides a nice delineation between our development and south point and we'll we've talked to the natural resources and conservation committee they're anxious to allow animals to share that path we we talked about people during the day and animals at night so that would be a nice opportunity for us to respect the the natural habitats of some of those smaller animals as far as section C is concerned that's really a small area we we haven't really imagined developing that very much we could toss in a couple of park benches we could plant some grass so people could throw a football around you know we we'd be happy to talk with the parks folks about that too thank you board any questions or comments okay marla questions okay staff comment number three staff recommends the board in conjunction with a discussion of open spaces ask the applicant to consider inclusion of community gardens in further support of this criterion mr long what are your thoughts about that well i i chatted with brian about that too we hadn't really planned to specify any places for community gardens but that that b area would make a lot of sense actually you know the the recreation path can kind of skirt along the the property boundary there and there's quite a bit of of square footage there even acreage that could be used for gardens and i think that really adds a a nice touch in a particular particularly in a development where houses are kind of tightly spaced and people don't have a lot of of yard space of their own to to use for gardening madam chair yes just a just a comment or suggestion for consideration the people that are going to need access to community garden space are they're going to be the people in those duplexes or fourplexes there along the south boundary they don't really have yards they don't have that sense of privacy i imagine a lot of people on the north side of the developments or the other are going to put gardens within whatever the building lot is out there back door so i have seen this in some other developments are you know near i live over by right side school and you know some apartment buildings near me and some of the developers have put in some nice raised beds you know they may be near the parking but you know they're the people wouldn't have to walk around somebody else's house to go into the garden space so i don't know if it's feasible to squeeze them there along the south boundary or something like that just a suggestion thank you anyone else on the board mr long well i'm just going to say we appreciate any suggestions obviously it's kind of tightly spaced there with the need to supply parking for those multiplexes but uh we wouldn't want to rule anywhere out and uh i think your point is very well taken about people not wanting to have to to walk a long way to their garden or or even jump in the car that doesn't make sense right make sense right okay thank you um the next comment staff recommends the board direct the applicant to prepare a traffic study for the proposed 49 unit development what are your thoughts about that well we're we're happy to do that i think it you know we had certainly anticipated that we would need to provide some some input to the city about that uh you know 49 units isn't the biggest development in the city but but it's a significant number of of units and uh there there will be a small but not negligible impact on the traffic on spear streets because of this development certainly so we the board could expect um a traffic study analysis in future presentations yeah we were thinking about doing that as part of preliminary plat but if you wondered it before that we could do that too no i'm thinking preliminary plat would be fine um unless anyone would like to see it sooner okay thank you um staff recommends the board asked the applicant to discuss the trail layout in this area well i already just commented referring to the nrp area to the east i'm sorry so you're thinking about the nrp area on the eastern edge of the the property is that my understanding correct yeah so uh you know we know quite a bit about that property having lived there for for 70 years now um you know there's definitely um of an incipient stream and some wetlands between the uh developed portion of this project and well you can see the tight contour lines there there's kind of a bluff there but just to the west of that bluff there's a there's a stream running through there which is pretty wet at certain times of year uh we certainly don't want to be you know building structures across that that stream but we do want to be able to get people into the woods in the back there uh so you know we'll be glad to work with uh any of the city committees that uh that uh want to express an opinion about that it may be my understanding is that south point has granted the city an easement to uh allow hikers to get through the back of their property um we'd be willing to grant a similar easement but uh it would be probably more efficient to have people use existing easements maybe even use access um through the underwood property because it's definitely drier up there and um but you know we're we're we're open to suggestions that i don't want to rule anything out and i don't want to try to specify anything you know cast anything in stone at this point so can you flip to page one of the staff comments the overview map but when you say the underwood property um i just want to show what that means yeah the underwood property is just to the north of south point so you can't see it on this sketch but it goes out to spear street and it extends across the northern boundary of the south point development and then um there's a it kind of turns down it's the northern border of the underwood property is noland farm road i believe and uh and it extends down uh so that it connects with the with the south point property south point you know it was under the same kinds of constraints that we are there's there's nrp area on the east side of that property so they they granted an easement to the city to um to allow access to the portion of their land that also um is contiguous with and forms a portion of the Great Swamp so in talking about that not for resource protection i think Delilah is going to show that overview map on page one um seems to be having multiple connection too um you know it's sounding to me board and let me know what you think about this idea if this is the city city owned property here oh goodness my computer is not catching up um and you know there's a big there's a big swamp in the middle um maybe it makes sense to talk to the recreation and parks committee about you know should this just be a connection here and maybe it doesn't make sense to come through the property um but i think that because the recreation and parks committee has been really working on the underwood parcel they would be really well positioned to provide that feedback so Marla oh sorry go ahead no go ahead oh i was just gonna also mention that there's access to the back of the underwood parcel i believe there's a city owned right away uh where no one far uh no one farm road is taking that sweeping right turn on the northeast of what we're looking at right here i don't believe it showing up as a tax map but i believe there is a city owned right away there as well yeah uh yeah generally in that location but just just another point of access yeah there's actually a city uh there's a sign that the city put up uh you know just west of that curve that you just that you just pointed out kind of at the crest of the ridge kind of near where your green line intersects the top of this this sketch that you know there would be a perfect place to access the underwood property and these contiguous properties to the south from no one farm road nice and dry up there too so board um does anybody have any feedback or do we want to direct them just to work with the reken parks committee and the reken park department and come back with some some um come back with something that sounds like a good plan to me any other board members have any thoughts about that no i think that you know working with the rec committee to come up with some recommendations great okay thank you um next comment uh the applicant is proposing a connection in the vicinity of the south village trail network to the south staff recommends the board discussed with the applicant whether it makes sense to connect this trail across the central proposed roadways and into the wooded open space be so uh that's a good good thing for us to talk about um we included we included a trail connection there to the trail system in south village they call it their quiet path and we've had some conversations since that sketch plan was drawn up uh i think we have to make a distinction between private paths and public paths and my understanding is that this quiet path in south village that you can see right along the blue property line there is a is a is private it's owned by the south village community association and it may be that we shouldn't be encouraging people to cross back and forth between these developments on a pathway pathway system like this you know if there aren't easements to the city that would open it up to you know public access as an alternative it might make sense to to to figure out what we're doing parallel to this road connection upon over the crest of the ridge there the right hand most road that you see on the sketch plan there's been talk about a a bike path along there there's been talk about a parallel uh hiking path there's been talk about uh just a sidewalk and you know we we'd like to do whatever the city decides is best but coordinating with south point and south village it doesn't make sense for us to put a a bike you know a 200 foot bike path there when it doesn't connect to anything in the adjacent developments so you know we'd be glad to work with those community associations and with the city to figure out what's best to do thank you i have a question yes so the paths on your property that are in the developed area are those intended to be open to the public as well or will those be kept private for the association we haven't at the moment thought about opening those up to the public but we're we're open to suggestions and we want to do what makes the most people happy i think it would be kind of disruptive to this little neighborhood that we're proposing to have floods of people walking along in people's backyards on the other hand you know that we really do want to work some kind some kind of access out for the the eastern most portion of the property another thing that's been discussed is that is actually uh you know public access along the westernmost section of the property there's talk about you know bike lanes on spear street maybe a separate bike path along spear street and and again along the lines of what i just said about the the the other the eastern most end of our development we'd like to do what the city is envisioning and what's being done in front of these adjacent properties it doesn't make sense to build a bike path just for 600 feet in front of our our development and not have it connect to anything on the other hand if the city wants to put in a bike path you know all the way up to swift street we'd love to participate in that so you know we're we're kind of open to to what's going on in the future along those lines okay and my question was just posed because it was open to the public we were talking about connectivity to the property to the south there and their recreation path which is their quiet path but i just thought it might be a little confusing to members of the public if they're accessing your property and then connecting into the you know private development area so that i think you answered my question thank you thank you mr long and thank you stephanie so i given the time 941 i think we need to move on the to the other items in the agenda and continue this sketch hearing sketch plan hearing so i would entertain a motion to continue the sketch plan hearing to a date marla what date might we be talking about this is where it gets tricky um you know we could put it on may 4th with the one that we previously continued um the only other thing i have committed for that agenda is a relatively short o' brian amendment they want to change their phrasing i think it should be quick i hope um so if we were to do that i guess we would probably be linking it to those three items do we think that that's a palatable amount of stuff for one night is that manageable you mean do you do are you asking if we think it's too much or not enough i guess i'm asking if you think it's too much to put this and the one that we just continued um the five are grown on the same agenda again on may 4th what do other members of the board think mark you're a seasoned board member um i think it's fine i mean we just sort of do the same thing we did as tonight you know well we'll allocate time to each of the agenda items based on you know what we're trying to achieve that night okay yeah i i if that o' brian item is really kind of a quickie i think that we could um probably do this so having said that i'll entertain a motion to continue the sketch plan hearing um that we're presently reviewing that would be sd 2110 to may 4th anyone want to make that motion i'll move that we continue sd 2110 uh to may 4th okay do i have a second second okay thank you alissa um okay all is there any discussion um i would just like to note um the same thing that i noted for the black rock application there will be opportunity for public comment at the may 4th hearing we'll make extra special care um we do hate to do this when we don't have time for public comment um at the regular at the first meeting um so it just makes us all the more um respectful and cautious about ensuring that we do that the next meeting also you are unable to attend even if you didn't attend tonight you are absolutely welcome to provide comment and writing um it just needs to be provided before the meeting is concluded anything you send to me now i will share with the board so please send it to me um m k e e m e sd url.com otherwise you'll have the opportunity to speak on may 4th thank you marla all right are we ready to vote all in favor of continuing this sketch plan application to our may 4th meeting say i hi hi nay and chair votes i so we mr long and family we will see you back um at our may 4th meeting thank you very much we'll look forward to it thank you okay our next agenda item is sketch plan application sd 21 11 of hickory hillside limited um llc to subdivide an approximately 67.6 acre parcel into three lots of 66.4 acres lot 1.6 acres lot 2 and 0.6 acres lot 3 for the purpose of constructing a single family home on each of lots 1 2 and 3 and conserving the unbuilt portion of lot 147 cheese that we wrote who is here for the applicant please i'm i'm the uh civil engineer representing the applicant nick smith from lamarone dickinson thank you um who else is here for the applicant nick is are you aware that there's anyone else for the applicant i believe brandon bluss is here he may be muted um brandon bluss is representing the applicant as well okay now again this is one of our mystery callers i'll see if i can i don't look like a lot of mystery callers there's someone brandon who's unmuted oh there is okay um can you guys hear me okay this is okay brandon yep before we move on to this um our third sketch plan for tonight um does anyone have any um disclosures or um does anyone need to recuse himself hearing none we will just noting that oh jim langan langan right yeah he's already left but he will continue to be recused on this one all right um so as you know you've been very patient tonight i'm sorry it's so late uh we're really trying to get through and um so i would ask you to keep your overview fairly brief it is sketch um so please tell us about your project and what you have in mind sure i'll keep it very brief here um this is actually um i'll go through the permitting history um after i give an overall but the overall parcel here is an approximate uh 67 acre parcel is located at the corner of hindsburg road and choose factory road um this is in the scq nrp um the southeast quadrant natural resource protection district um a portion of the project is also located within the flood plan overlay district um the applicants proposing to uh subdivide the parcel into three lots which would be uh three relatively well two two relatively small lots and one uh remaining lot um that would be used for um agricultural purposes um and i guess what i would say is that i believe that the board is likely familiar with this project um in the past it's gone through sketch plan um and preliminary subdivision plat approval um we submitted for final subdivision plat approval my office our office did um a couple of months back but um due to timing um there was no wetland delineation performed um which was what held the application up um as far as getting um become becoming a full application so um we still have not received the wetland delineation however we have had multiple uh wetland experts out on the site um and i think we're fairly confident what the delineation will be and the intention is that this delineation will be performed um within the upcoming month here as the growing season really starts to pick up so um we'll get some VEC involved thank you i thought this looked familiar we have seen it before um so there actually is only one staff comment and that is that staff recommends the board to ask the applicant to describe why they are requesting this waiver and provide feedback on whether the applicant should continue to pursue it at the next stage of review and i believe that is the waiver that puts the properties in a line as opposed to a triangle correct marla that's correct yes so um could you please describe for us why you're requesting this waiver sure um so um i we would like to point out that this waiver was previously granted in the original or the previous sketch and preliminary plat um the waiver is to locate well the waiver is to um what what comes from the regulation is that the project structures are supposed to be located within 100 feet from each other it ends up providing either like a triangular effect or a cul-de-sac effect to the lots not necessarily a bad thing but as far as this site layout is configured it becomes a little challenging for a number of reasons number one is the topography of the site generally we're looking at you know significant fall off the back end of the site so you know generally off a cheese factory road when you're heading south you're you're consistently dropping off of the property here so so locating a cul-de-sac style sometimes becomes a little bit more challenging with that kind of a topography going with the topography topography as well and and soil condition waste water systems become a challenge in a situation like that as you can see we're identifying three areas that have previously been tested and would be approval wastewater system areas so that would be another factor that's played into this another item uh generally the area to the north of the proposed access road is heavily ledge outcrop generally kind of brushy that's barely holding on based on the the existing land configuration there by putting one of the houses on the other side of the road to try and meet this 100 foot area with or 100 foot buffer there it would it would be kind of challenging and I think there would be significant impact to both trying to hammer out blast out ledge raising this raising one of the structures to be you know kind of an ungodly height out of the ground or significant vegetation disturbance in that area and then kind of the last item that factors into this is just generally the reduction to impacts on the agricultural field and the agricultural use of the property so another alternative would be locating this road you know farther south on the project trying to you know get into the meadow area a little bit more here yeah but I think that ends up kind of disturbing the contiguous agricultural usable space that's there so those are kind of the factors that have led us to request this waiver thank you um nick um just do any board members have any questions or need more clarity or explanation or marla do you marla or other board members uh when the waiver was previously granted was there a rationale of the board made in doing so on the record somewhere the findings I can speak to that if you'd like because I remember I remember the request and I remember at least my thoughts on it um if you're familiar with this area it's right off um Heinsberg road and cheese factory when you turn off Heinsberg and start heading um last on cheese factory you are there's a bunch of vegetation and sort of like a hill and a rise that um nick was describing and this linear development sort of tucks in behind it and to do like a cluster development we did discuss the fact that you would either be pushing the development further out into the meadow and away from being tucked in behind the sort of gnoll and vegetation or you would be impacting the this little cluster of trees and you know grading that will essentially hide this linear you know three linear houses that was the discussion of the thought process at the time okay thank you thank you any other questions from the board okay I see where um we've worked our way through the one step comment so I um I would entertain a motion to close sketch hearing and if I can jump in sorry marla good we don't we don't close it's a non-binding conversation okay so fail to continue can conclude the hearing or conclude the right so we're not voting or just if there's no further questions the meeting is ended we'll see you at preliminary plan okay it was just going to make a comment actually I think it's in the staff comments but just we are requesting that the next meeting be a combined preliminary final just because this project really gone through a rigorous design already and I think the applicants so far ahead with the conservation easement and and all these other items that are were required previously so I just hope that the board will be open to that that's all that's really your prerogative I believe isn't it marla no it's actually up to the board but the board usually says do which like it's your risk but technically it's up to the board does any do we have to vote on that no there's no problem with that there you go very none I guess you're good to go nick beautiful thank you that's all I was hoping for we'll see you back at uh uh preliminary and final plat thank you very much all right good night thank you okay the next then I'm sorry did someone say something the next item um the minutes of the March 3rd and March 16th meetings um I think I only read one set of minutes and that would have been the March 3rd maybe I reviewed them both I don't know but um do we need to vote on these marla no we don't need to take a roll call correction you don't need to take a roll call um so first ask if anyone has any corrections and if there's no corrections then you can do a voice vote okay so let's talk about the March 3rd minutes does anyone have any corrections to add okay um all in favor of approving the March 3rd minutes say aye aye okay they are approved um all in does anyone have any corrections uh for the March 16th um uh minutes hearing none um all in favor of approving the March 16th minutes say aye aye sure votes aye any nay or abstentions abstain okay thank you so the minutes are approved next agenda item sorry um did you want me to text Jim or are we gonna let him off the hook um what do you think folks text Jim please yeah while she does that let me um read this self village communities LLC has requested reconsideration of decision MS 2101 SD 2102 and SD 2103 uh we have a letter in our packet and um what are the thoughts of board members does anyone on the board have any questions about the issues identified in the memo or need more information i guess one thing that um i know what i'd like to hear is the issue of um the revegetate naturally locked unlocked 48x the area where it's a wetland it seemed as though that was unless there's just a miscommunication um we have we had a graphic before to see oh yeah i don't think i had that in the pocket that was just something i sent to the board but i still open or i can have it open here so um i'm sorry i know we talked about this earlier this is the first time i've done a reconsideration so mark has some questions um marlo please remind me what we need to do so um a reconsideration request is not an opportunity to can you hear me sorry yes you can okay um a reconsideration request is not an opportunity to take additional testimony it's um it's the applicant states their request and then the board decides whether to accept it um any sort of additional conversation should be just clarifying the request or basically the minimum information for the board to decide whether to accept the request and then the testimony on um what should have been done instead um would be something that would come at the reopened hearing so um the way robin wrote her request letter was exactly right in that it provided the request but didn't provide any sort of supplemental information and i think mark's question is also appropriate which is can you clarify um what what what thing it is that you thought we misunderstood um so what i'm sharing now and i'm going to zoom in a little bit yeah good yeah this is it um this is so zoom in too much let me try again so this is the plan for sd 2102 um where i've drawn an orange box around lot 48x um and then lot 11c which the applicant has asked has said they believe is what the condition is supposed to apply to is where um is up here is this good okay so our condition said that lot 48x which is the orange box um so the area south of us to the fence line is to revegetate naturally which is the wetland area correct that's our t-shaped area right so that condition is modified um so what i've shown in pink here is the fence that the applicant provided there's a previous condition there's another condition that says that the fence should be extended about i can't highlight on the fence should be extended along this portion of this portion of the wetland as well so what this condition that they've requested reconsideration on is referring to is the area of this wetland so don't we usually encourage or want applicants to leave wetlands um it'd be wild probably not the appropriate expression but um why would we have um so i think that you know don's question is starting to get into the area of additional testimony um we're right to say that's normal for the board to require wetlands to be left undisturbed um mark's question is what did we misunderstand here so i don't know if robin wants to speak up and explain what what it is that we misunderstood robin yes oh wait we forgot swearing in oh i'm sorry robin raised your right hand you solemnly swear to tell the truth under penalty of perjury i do thank you so what we thought there was a misunderstanding in that all of the area surrounding this little area inside the red circle is going to be agricultural and it will be mode and cut and used as it is now so all of the wetland is not going to re-vegetate because it's becoming agricultural leasehold so it would just be the corner inside the corner of the orange inside the red that would be so it was just a very small piece as opposed to it just being a recreational area which is what the area the orange area is intended to be okay so again i'm going to jump in and say that a previous condition says that their phoenix needs to be extended along here as well we we thought that the fence only needed to be along where you have it drawn in red there's a condition modifying that requires the fence to be added to right but we thought that we interpreted that to mean where you have the red line now the red line traces what you have shown on this drawing right i'm just tracing something you had already drawn thanks then we did not even read it to interpret that way because the leg that you just drew on already has been developed it was developed back when the water line in the sidewalk was put in i'm at a loss marla i'm gonna need your help with this i think that makes sense um so i think mark does that sort of answer your question he didn't think that they were protecting that southern part of the wetland at all right and sounds like they're not because it's already been developed to put in the sidewalk in the waterline well you can see where the sidewalk and waterline are on this plane and then the rec path is intended to go on the top uh alongside draw wait now try to draw can i draw can i draw i just gave you permission yeah you should see a paintbrush over here so i'm trying sorry yep choose my pen color okay so this is it's not working hmm it might just be a little pokey it's pokey yeah our connections have been slow today yep it says oh i know it's not working no no it was me it's me okay go ahead so this is the no do i need to get my pen again sorry all right yeah i'm not very good at presenting this is lila's job um so this is the there we go this is the path so all the infrastructure for it is under there i should have used a fat pen um does that make any sense because the easement for the path is way out here so we perceived that this was going to stay the way it always has been and that this area inside here was what you wanted to preserve but we thought it wasn't understood that all of this area out here is going to be farmland and cut the way it is now being cut am i making any sense i'm totally lost i'm really sorry what is what is that sort of key shaped whale tail type of shape of wetlands that's just north of the the sidewalk waterline right this is this is not a wetland this disconnects up here and this is an old farm ditch okay so and you can you can see it it's literally a ditch so where does that leave us marla and mark that's um one question and then um did you guys have another question about the was jim able to rejoin us you know he texted me back but i didn't get the chance to see what he said jim's back on jim's back i'm here um did you have a inclusionary versus affordable request we did i was just uh i got interested to hear um about the sort of the the the impact i guess robin's of the changing you know changing uh inclusionary to a to affordable um in the decision what um what impact or what you're just hear a little more about your concerns about that word change the concerns are that the ldr's address inclusionary under one set of rules and they they discuss affordable units under bonus conditions at another set of rules and all the applications fall under one set of rules or the other set of rules and we we belong under the affordable set of rules and not the inclusionary set of rules okay marla your thoughts or other board member of board members thoughts jim yeah i mean i i'd like for us to i mean i i'm leaning toward getting the language right um i don't know um so if we really meant affordable we should say so can i ask all right let me ask a question i guess this is more of marla um is affordable and inclusionary been differentiated recently in the regulations somewhat well more recently than the south village project master plan um relatively recently the i think the important thing here is that the condition that uses the word affordable inclusionary instead of affordable is pertaining to the section of the affordable housing regulations that cross-reference they have to do it says you have to do the reporting that is required for inclusionary um so that condition says references the inclusionary housing so though though i think that robin's correct that it was potentially an error to say the word inclusionary because it's a cross-reference section i'm not sure that it makes any difference we i think it makes a difference because all the ldr's under section 18.02 regarding the affordable density bonus only talk about affordable i do agree with you that when you get down there it does circle back to particular conditions of the inclusionary zoning ordinance of 18.01 but it does not it's very specific about the affordable density bonus and affordable units being different and not all the same things apply so while you're here and while i'm here and we know what you meant um god forbid we should get hit by buses or anything but if somebody else had to interpret this and neither one of us was here to explain it we feel it could be very muddled when the ldr's actually make it very clear so we're i think maybe it's just a typo and we're just asking for it to be corrected marla so um i think that unless the board has other questions on other aspects of it i think that's as deep into the discussion as we should go at this time um so the board would take a vote on whether to accept the reconsideration request um actually why don't we do a sort of a temperature of the board about whether we're inclined to accept the reconsideration request um or maybe it's better to just say let me just ask this question does the board feel that any of the other elements of the reconsideration request have merit if we are to consider or if we are to take a vote the alternative is we take a vote on our consideration of just those two items that we talked about tonight doesn't touch me like there are other issues um so limiting limiting it to two those two issues makes sense to me okay so by doing that the board is effectively sending the message that no we don't think the other changes are warranted yes so there's three items it's two issues the three items right yes right it's condition number six condition 26 and condition 22 that we're talking about reopening for reconsideration there's the issue about um also which i believe was just a typo about the number of you of affordable units in the master plan amendment because the way the notes were written it looks like we're dropped a colossal number of affordable units when the fact we only dropped very few because it's a direct percentage of the total number of units um again i don't think it's a big change it's just a typo but we would like it the record set straight i need some guidance on procedure here um so unless the person would like to take up the comment that robin just made again again keeping in mind um you know we have talked about um we have looked at it and we um you know unless you have additional questions we don't need to we can't take testimony at this time um does anyone want to take up to the potential list for voting the condition that robin just referenced okay so um i think we should have a motion to amend condition number six and 26 no condition to reopen the a motion to reopen sd 2102 for the purposes of reconsidering condition number six and condition number 26 um and we'll do and then we'll do motion to reopen sd 2103 for the purposes of reconsider condition number 22 and we'll do them as two separate motions i just felt like a lot to say all right um i'll make a motion that we reopen sd 2102 for reconsideration for condition number six and condition number 26 and we reopen sd 2103 for reconsideration for condition number 22 bless you mark i will second that can the chair second yes in favor pardon all all in favor of the motion say aye hi hi those the motion is carried thank you very much thank you robin thanks for working so late into the night you guys holy mackerel okay is there any other business i should have asked that before i guess but any other business or can we adjourn make a motion that we adjourn okay do we need to vote on that don't vote on that okay guys good night good night good night good night