 Good evening. Welcome to the Wilson Development Review Board meeting of August 23rd, 2022. My name is Pete Kelly. I'm the chair of the DRB. If you are a Zoom participant, please sign in and rename yourself if your name is not on your participant toolbar. This is a hybrid meeting taking place at the police building here in Williston and virtually on Zoom. All members of the board and the public can communicate in real time. Planning staff will provide Zoom instructions for public participation before we begin. All votes taken at this meeting will be done by roll call vote in accordance with the law. If Zoom crashes, the meeting will be continued to September 13th, 2022. Let's start the meeting by taking a roll call attendance of all DRB members participating tonight. Paul Christensen. Present. John Hemelgaard. Present. Scott Riley. Here. Dave Turner. Here. Nate Andrews is absent and chair Kelly is present. We have five members of the board. We do have a forum. Tonight we've got a number of a number of applicants on the on the docket on the agenda. We're starting out with a manager sign plan for 426 Delceau Avenue. Then we've got Home Depot requesting a discretionary permit for a site plan modification. And finally we have DP 22-06, which is a discretionary permit request for a car dealership at 2626 Williston Road. We're going to the public forum. I'll turn it over to Simon to walk us through some Zoom instructions. Thanks everyone for attending. Please take a moment to make sure you are named accurately. You can do this by clicking the participants body. They'll bring up a side panel. You can hover over rename. Click that and then you can type your name. If you send your message in the chat, I will rename you. If you are in person tonight, please make sure you keep any laptops or phones streaming off to ensure we don't get any feedback. For those of you on Zoom, we have a number of pictures on the toolbar. On the left-hand side, we have the mute button. That turns your microphone on and off. Please keep your microphone muted when you're not speaking. We have the stop-style video for your camera. Camera is optional. We have the chat button, which you can use if you need to ask for technical help. Please don't give public testimony of chat. If you get public testimony, you can signal you'd like to speak by raising your hand using the actions button. You can be using screen chat tonight. This is so that everyone can see the same documents. We do recommend you use side-by-side mode. Your Zoom should automatically default to this, but if it doesn't, you can switch it by clicking the view options next to the green rectangle at the top of your screen, scrolling down side-by-side mode and clicking it. And then using the vertical sliders in the middle there, ringed in red, allows you to adjust the size of the video and the screen we're looking at. Lastly, if you are having a bad internet connection, you can try a number of things. You can try turning off the video. You can try closing browser tabs, computer programs or phone apps, or you can use your telephone to speak with the microphone. You do that by clicking the up arrow next to the mute button, clicking the leave computer audio, and then dialing back in on the phone. Okay. Great. Thanks Simon. Before we go into the public forum, I do want to note that agenda item number three is communication, final plans and other business. That's when we will take out the final plans for DP 18-06.3, which is the Vermont Hotel Group LLC. At this time, we're going to agenda item number one, which is the public forum. This is an opportunity for anyone participating in tonight's meeting either in person or via zoom to comment on anything that's not on tonight's agenda. So if you have something that you would like to address the board or staff, please identify yourself for the record and your address and ask your question or make your statement. Is there anyone who would like to address the board or the staff on this public forum? Do you have any raised hands? Almost any raised hands in person? Well, do you have anything? No. Okay. Anyone in the room? Public input section. Okay. Agenda item number two, public hearing. First up is DP 09-17.1 white cat ventures LLC 426 industrial Avenue, requesting a master sign plan. Amendment. And, so are you here? Yes. If you would say your name. My name is Norris Stanislaus and I represent white cat ventures. Okay. Thank you. Staff goes next. That's me. So, this is a request for an amended master sign plan at 426 industrial Avenue, the white cat business park. They recently got a green health taking 18,000 square feet coming building a new rent this way. As a result of this, I need to amend their master sign plan to allow signage on the building. The changes comprise four new wall signs every green health on their section of the building. So be an additional wall sign on the east elevation of the building. And then we're also tying things up a bit by relocating for previously approved signs that have migrated in the 13 years since this was approved last. So the, there were no changes to the 47 square foot free standing sign or to the directory sign. So you can see every health going in here. And then there's four new wall signs that put a new sign over on the elevation too. And then just a few minor recommendations. So the staff are recommending that you approve the application recommended. The conditions is drafted. The total signage increases to 341 square feet, which remains well below the same limit. And then you have relocated all signs your position on building so as not to obscure architectural features on any exits. We have your motion here's the findings of fact, the conclusions of law and the conditions of approval. And they're just on minor nonstandard condition to tidy up. And what, and what nonstandard condition is that condition to just to clarify that one of the full signs is illuminated as much as illuminated on one. And the free standing entrance sign that was approved back in 2009 is just marked as 32 square feet. And the site plan was clearly approved at 47 square feet last time. So it's just clearing up that discrepancy. I saw a group of ministers these a few discrepancies you can have. Right understood. Okay, have to the applicant have you read the proposed conditions of approval. Yes, we have. And do you have any concerns with them as you're after you do not. Okay, the RV members any questions. Members of the public. Any comments or questions for the DRP. There's no right stands. Okay. It's pretty straightforward before I close it any last comments. Anyone. Tom with design signs. I'm just here as support for norm if you have questions regarding materials or anything like that. I'm happy to take those questions if you have any. I think I think the DRP is satisfied. And so this is going to be a quick one. I'm going to close the P09 dash 17.1 at 711. Thank you very much for coming. Okay, next up is Home Depot. MP 23 dash 01. Home Depot requesting a discretionary permit for site plan modifications to permit additional outdoor storage and sales area Home Depot at 759 harvest lane. In the mixed use commercial zoning district. I'm just here representing. I am. Go ahead. I am Alejandro Baica. I'm a development manager for Greenberg Faro here presenting Home Depot. And we also have in the room. Jessica Miguel, she's the store manager. So, Jessica, your address is the store address. Okay. And, and sir, what is your address? I'm in New Jersey, Somerville. The specific address please. Sure. Sorry. It's 92 East Main Street, Suite 410 Somerville, New Jersey 08876. Okay, that goes next. So this is a discretionary permit request at Home Depot on harvest lane and mixed use commercial zoning district. A notice of zoning violation was served in May 2022 for health or sales and storage in the northern parking lot, which is beyond the limits. It was imposed on the last discretionary permit that they received in 2008, which is self is a violation of the bylaw. And in that zoning violation, Claire has also noted that that area was accessible to the public, which was resulting in the danger to public safety for the interaction of pedestrians, vehicles, equipment for materials. This application is submitted in response to that zoning violation. And it poses additional storage and display areas. Seven in total. One to the west front of the building five to the north of the building and one to the rear. So staff is recommending that the DRB take testimony, discuss the site plan with the applicant, particularly regards to landscaping and pedestrian safety, close the hearing and live breaks tonight. Staff is recommending approval with conditions. We have received comments from both public works and the fire department. Those are attached in reference to a relevant in the report. In terms of the mixed use commercial zoning district itself. The plan meets the dimensional standards in that there's no land there's no outdoor sales or storage areas proposed in the setbacks from 89 or harvest lane, nor in the landscape buffers. So in this district. Outdoor sales are acceptable in all the yards front side and rear. Outdoor storage is acceptable in the side and rear yards. So we should probably well aware of people's entrance is along here. Along with that sort of pre existing display areas and hot dog stand and so we do consider this area to be the front yard. So area one up here is located in the front yard it's annotated as being for sales and storage. We have recommended a condition that has clarified that final plan stage to ensure that there is no outdoor storage in that area to comply with the biologic and before sales. So we're in nine feet of the boundary. There is no landscape buffer through this. I guess it's the west boundary this map is actually flipped so north is down and south is up to the west boundary, so just merges in form up a lot. There's down here so we've got a very large storage area area four which uses most of the north parking lot. We've got a lumber storage area two. We've also got pro parking which I think is just an existing use of parking. We also have a tool rental storage area here and a display area to outdoor equipment there. These are all buffered from the public ways by the size existing landscape buffers. We also have a set well in the side yard. And then lastly we also have an outdoor storage area at the back. So the destruction safety was highlighted as an issue in the zoning violation. So to ensure that that's maintained and to minimize conflict between store materials and people access in those materials. And then the storage areas and sales areas or demarcated on the ground like those for the fire lane as well, which you can see, lined in red sort of circles in the building. So moving on to access connectivity. The main consideration here is safe pedestrian access. So for area one, which seasonal displays and people strikes and crosswalk, which leads it directly to the existing garden center. They're also posing some fencing at the seasonal sales sales area. You can see an example from there. See that's here type of thing they're posing to sort of contain that area. And take people with it. And I guess they also have improved that security there. The pedestrian access will not be allowed to the area four, which is the parking lot. They are going to secure vehicle access at the existing sort of drive aisles with Jersey barriers, which probably some landscape and screen down here. But it is sort of visible as you come in. There has been a sort of confusion going in there. So it's something for the people to discuss tonight, whether we should look at fencing off this area up here as well, and pedestrian access. And then lastly, on access. We have sort of four separate areas up here with storage. We have an equipment display area for sort of heavy duty equipment. We have the tool rental storage and we have the access to the tool. So we're recommending that some consideration be given to pedestrian safety by striping, even striping a crosswalk to make people across from the tool rental centre to the display area. Or looking at reorganising this to sort of be more compact, sort of strung out on the drive. So we should probably get the app and start on that. In terms of street parking, the current bylaws, the site has a maximum of 392 spaces minimum of 340. We're going to be left with 377, which is combined after we lose 266 spaces. In terms of landscaping, area one, which is the sales area up here. Total is about 16,000 square feet. So it is subject to our requirements to provide parking lot landscaping, which generally should be the provision of at least 5% of the area with landscape islands or medians with shade trees to break up this area, but with pleasant environment. So a quick rough calculation sort of indicates that the area provided by the applicant is about 500 square feet, which is just over 2.5%. So we're recommending that a final plan to secure a more detailed landscape and scheme to get all the details of tree planting and soil structure and the like. So down here we do have additional evergreen screening planting between existing street trees. That should help screen it from harvest lane and reduce the use of the stored materials. And then the last area is the area up here, which is a sort of sales and display area that is not large enough to trigger the requirement for landscaping. And then lastly, parcel is not subject to a master sign plan and was not part of this application. We can approve a certain amount of signage administratively, but indeed there might be a master sign plan in the future, particularly if there are data for some of their signage. So we do have fine needs of fact, conclusions of law and conditions drafted. And there's a couple of conditions, Condition 2, which sort of deals with regulating the storage sales areas and condition 8, which deals with landscaping. We'd like to do a comment on that. Okay. Thank you. So staff has posed a couple of questions for ERB to deliberate on their highlighted yellow. And we will discuss those probably in deliberative session unless ERB members want to discuss them in this public forum. I would like to say that have you read the conditions proposed conditions of approval. Yes. Yes. Are there any that that you would like to highlight or discuss. I would like to discuss condition to see if possible. Go ahead. And that one has to do with adding a fence around area number four. I would like to say that there are a number of conditions that are proposing to use Jersey barriers. The only concern that I have is adding a fence will be a little detrimental in the sense for deliveries and snow removal. That is my only concern with adding a temporary fence around that area. If anything, I would rather have some additional chevrolet. I think it will be better and still provide the years of barriers, the years of barriers are orange, you'll be, you know, easily visible. I think it will also be easier for it to be moved when trucks are coming in to drop off product. So overall, I believe the years of barriers will be a better option with additional landscaping, if that is acceptable. Okay, so any other comments on the proposed conditions of approval. No, not on my end. I think we can comply with everything else that is being noted. Is there anything that you would like to augment staffs. Staffs report. And do you want to add. I think the staff really went through it really in detail. I think he pretty much cover everything. Okay. I think we can add the RV members questions. I just have one around the area one since the seasonal and assuming it's like the summer seasonal stuff that you do now and in the wintertime will that go back to the parking lot area. For a period of time it will be used also for Christmas tree sales, as well as during the fall for pumpkin cells. So we were hoping to use that area year round, rather than call it seasonal. Yes, but during this, but during snow, yes, the fancy will be removed because it will be a temporary fencing. So the winter, the hard winter months, yes. Will be sold there and January, February, March. The only items I could think of will be snow blowers, but may I agree, January through through the beginning of March, I think that area could be empty. So it will be sold out to the park. No, it will be open to the cars. Okay, okay, so would be returned to parking for a brief period of time in the first couple of months of the year. Correct. Any other questions. Are these sites covered under the master sign point. Oh, the question I guess the point I have is there's a nice picture in the packet of a huge sign at the road that says road sale. And I'm thinking that this is a bunch of stuff I'm guessing that's not part of their approved signage package. So that I think let me just share the screen so that everyone can see what we're doing. So you're correct. That is not part of their. They don't have a master sign plan. That's not part of there. I was not approved. And also, these images are taken from Google Street view. And I think this image is from 2017 is not there at the moment. Correct. Okay, so I saw the messages. Just make sure that you work with staff and understand what is allowed and what's not allowed. Sometimes. Merchants in good faith, but science that are not compliant that, you know, are kind of a variation on neighborhood garage sale. Except that it's home Depot and it's a lot of traffic and it's in here subject to a master sign plan and and so proceed in a compliance, you know, to be compliant. And if you have any questions, you know, ask staff they can, they will help you. Thank you. Okay. Okay, any other questions from the RV. Um, so I'm a little concerned, I guess, in that the, the fancy here is temporary. It would face it could easily be moved, and then the approved area gets bigger. Also, I am not sure is there a greater need for parking in the January timeframe that you indicated you're going to increase number of parking spots on site. That would not mean the increased parking spaces. So I guess I would ask why you wouldn't put up some permanent barriers there to kind of really say this is the outdoor story there. Or I'm sorry, outdoor sales space that is in place and we don't have to worry about them. You know, somebody innocently nudging them three more spots down the aisle. And then, you know, your neighbor saying, Hey, you're using up our parking spots. I just, I'm just wondering why, why that isn't concerned. I have given the fact that this kind of it has appeared and grown over time. I just, I'm trying to make sure that it doesn't continue to do that. I agree. I don't know if we can go back and revisit that area. Yes, we'll do. Like I said, again, my only concern is during the winter months. That's where the temporary fencing is ideal is able to be taken outside. There's no can be clean out. That's the only concern we're putting a permanent fence. Understood. That's that's a valid one. So you wouldn't have a problem putting nice permanent orange paint, where these Jersey barriers are so if we happen to come by and notice that we can see all the orange paint is Jersey barriers now, moving down towards Walmart. Pretty, pretty obvious that it isn't where it's supposed to be. Yes, no issues at all. Yeah, we can do that. And I think those are islands that you're concerned about that are permanent. So those were anyways, you know, the Jersey barriers are just an area for the Jersey barriers or area for area area one was proposed for temp fats. And why don't you pull that pull that graphic back up again. So, so on the, so on the west side, it's, it goes close to the boundary line, which is a contiguous parking lot with Walmart. So that's, that's a little hard to know. If you're just in that parking lot with your, which property you're on, because it's just as well, right. It changes color actually so. Oh, it does. I didn't realize that. And then to David's point you've got curve on. I guess that would be on the north side. That boundary is, is defined. It goes to the end of the, of the parking stalls on the south side. So I think, I think it's, it's, I think it's pretty easily identified. And the zoning administrator will. I think the zoning administrator can, can, can know whether the boundaries are being expanded in that area pretty easily. So I, I, I tend not to be that concerned about that. Yeah, no, no, I think, I think, you know, so there's, there's some additional islands and planting being put in at the edge of the lot. That's correct. So that does create a dead end lot from for Walmart. I don't know if there are any objections to that, but I guess we'll find that out. Yeah, if anything, we can always shift the landscape islands over a couple of spaces and leave a drive, I'll open. Just, just, just a thought. That's right. Again, it's probably not an issue because a lot is never that strong. People learn pretty quickly that that's not a great. So, so can, can you, Simon, can you expand that area? Where the island piece of the area one make it bigger please smaller. So, I'm talking about the West End. So can, can you explain what what's what's going on there in January and February, when the temporary fence is not there to facilitate snow removal. Um, is there any barrier? Because there's not a cross section there is there any barrier from driving right through there from Walmart Dome Depot or in the other direction. No. No, there wouldn't be. And so it's just, you're just losing those three parking spots and adding landscaping islands. That's right. That's fair. Yes. It's a 24 25 is the maximum number of parking spots you're allowed to have before you have an island. So it seems like 24 to be the perfect number to have there was going to be an island. And it will leave you a cheap ILL to the other. I'm assuming that 25 of the circle around means that if I count those it's 25 spaces between. Yeah, that's why we have 24 and then we have the created that landscape island at the end to conform with our requirement. That's a little confusing. I don't understand the top is 25 Israeli 24 with the island with 25. It's probably because that direct line is probably car storage. Yep, that's right. I don't see that but I'm just that's why are there 25 yellow spots or 24 yellow spots in that top row. 24 24 and then you have the we're adding a landscape island so until today there's 25 a proposal is to keep 24 and then at the landscape island at the end. Okay. Nice to be lined up perfectly with the property line. Okay, that's that's nice. Yeah. So my other question had to do with over by area for their son, as, as a regular user of the space the, the parking spots for the tool rental. Those are going to be open to the public is that right. I'm going to rent my road hotel or my floor center. You're going to be pulling in there as a member of the public. You can through where like the fire line is around the building where like the white blue and yellow will be will be open to customers, but in that brown area will not. And how do you keep people that are going there from ending up in the, in the brown area. I guess that's where the Jersey barriers are going to be full time. So we're going to add fencing to separate it, but we're going to be separated by the product that's out there. Yep. No, I said, that's a valid point. Yes, we will probably look into adding a piece of temporary fencing along that whole stretch to separate those two. You know, the brown area and the blue and the white. Yeah, that's correct. I think that needs to be separated. It's, it's pretty confusing out there, as it says right now, and if those six spots are full or five spots because it's one of them is a handy that spot that should be empty. People are going to want to pull into. So, is there a barrier on the East to not drive in there if I'm a member of the general public today area for Yeah, there will also be Jersey barriers there. Okay. And those will be moved. Right. But that's right. Okay, you don't have any objection to putting a temporary fence in that area that's been drawn on Spain. Yeah, no, no, I don't. I think I think that will be the easiest solution to put in. We may need to do some type of curve. Curve stops just so that people don't drive through the fence. But yes, we'll figure something out. Just there's a lot of holes in. Yep. Okay. I'll just comment that fire lanes got a lot of different meetings to different people in different agencies. And the fire department locally and have one definition of firing but your, your public building permit also has another, and there's requirements there. Again, we have no soundness I'm just saying this is a friendly piece of comment that at some point, you know, someone could come in and not like how it's about the width, whether there's storage between the fire lane and the building, how much you don't call those kind of things. Sorry. Oh, anything else. No, I'm just going to commit the afternoon for three years at a point. Yeah. Yeah, but you put thought into this. Thank you. Any other comments by the applicant. No. Okay, general public. Any comments or questions. Let's speak to you right now. Here again. We're going to 740. We're going to close the 23-01. Thank you. Next up. 22 dash zero state, which is green state realty requesting a discretionary permit for a car dealership and storage lot parking area and access the route to including the rating of the reader. Located at 2626 Wilson Road, the industrial zoning district. If you would. The applicant please there's three of you can you would introduce us introduce yourself your name and address for the record please. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Staff goes next. Okay, that's me. This is a request for discretionary permit for you to construct a new building storage lot parking and waiting for instances at 2626 Wilson Road. This site's currently developed for a single story and it's a building and a storage lot. And so the project cannot be approved as proposed. There are some issues that need correcting. Including not buy in front yard and for storage life and safe pedestrian access. No long term wise for storage and then the facility and the building hasn't does not have a lot. So I just have to recommend DRD here and discuss the project with the applicant. Take public testimony. Possibly continue to learn to allow the applicant to use the materials. Alternately, the applicant has discussed their ability to make certain changes. So, you know, one alternative would be to have that discussion and if you're satisfied that changes will bring them. Project compliance. You can require the conditions to be met with the submittal final plans. And staff would recommend that the DRB review those funding plans. So, basically, the, the project complies as proposed with the dimensional standards of the lot. And outdoors. Outdoor storage is shown on the site plan. Outdoor sales are committed in the industrial building district, but only within areas designated for that purpose. And outdoor storage is not permitted in the front yard. So, we have the DRV established that all of the frames along that basically the entire block. So, basically, where they're proposing outdoor storage would be in the front yard and would not be complaining. So staff is recommending that this be designated as an outdoor sales area, not storage. And because this area and I'll show, I'll show to you. So we're talking about, well, lost the share. So we're talking about this area right here. Next to the building. So that area, if it's designated as out for sales, it would still be non-compliant as proposed. They would need to meet the requirements for landscaping in parking lots because the area is greater than 4,000 square feet. So. So, Melinda, can I, if I asked a question of the applicant, am I going to really disrupt your flow? No, go ahead. Okay. So, I know you walked us through this before in the previous year and so what is that, what is that storage area being used for? Is it display cars or are there cars that are for sale? So it's not really storage, it's a sales area. Because there are cars that are being displayed for sale. Well, they are being used for sales and we're going to storage them to fix them because we're going to use the dealership rights to fix those cars. Okay. I think it's a semantics thing because I talked to Melinda twice and she was very helpful and we actually provided a sketch that we'll get in depth, but I didn't want to get out of turn. But I think I think we're going to have a discussion that's going to be pretty positive and I realize there's more items here, but I think we got pretty good answer for all four. I think it's a semantics thing because I think it is, we're going to park cars there to sell and obviously they're going to put the nice ones in the front. The ones that need to under fix or whatever, they're going to be towards the back and they're going to screw them into the bay and fix them and put them back out. So, I think outdoor sales is just, you know, put outdoor sales and I think we're covered. As far as the landscaping goes, you know, I had a sketch that I'd like to put up on the screen and we'll talk about that, but like I said, I didn't want to get out of turn. So we do have some information that we'd like to provide the board have some feedback and that's possible. Okay, so So the cars that so following up on the stage has said you all of the cars that you have on the lot are they to be sold. So, So cars that are going to come in that you're going to park in the back that need to be repaired, you're going to repair them and then sell them. And then people bring cars to be prepared to you and then we don't have people option. So you're going to option or whatever buy a car ran in parking there till you get to fix it, fix it, put it back out. Yeah. So notice every car on the launch for sale, and someone actually did buy one before you actually quote repair it if they offer you enough money right. That's my perception, but every car is every car there's for sale right. So then, yeah, this is a sale one. It's not that storage. That was our. Okay, so I know. I'm not going to see it. So at this point, and I apologize for disrupting your flow. Belinda please continue. Sure. Okay. So the existing development on the site does predate the town's current regulations is it does have existing non conformities like a drive on the setbacks front yard storage and storage and setbacks. So currently proposed project drill would result in reducing some of those non conformities by providing more controlled access and removing storage from the setbacks and the DRB may require that non conformities be corrected as a condition of approval. As long as it's reasonably proportionate to the scale of proposed development. In this case. They're basically moving everything on the lot and retrieving it and constructing a new building and infrastructure and parking. And that is recommending that the DRB require non conformities to be corrected on the site. Or access. So the property served by Wilson Road, it's a state highway. There is being proposed a single point of access. From a safety standpoint, it will reduce the non conformity that currently sits in the site. Destroying access does not defy the hack review this project and their comments noted a lack of pedestrian access and recommended the applicant provide sidewalk connecting basically between parking spaces and the front facade connecting the parking to the building condition has been drafted to that effect. The parking does comply. But the, the plans don't currently show an ADA space where the applicant has indicated there will be one is provided. It should be shown on the site plan. And then they are proposing out there bicycle storage for spaces one space is required to be compliant. There is no mention in their application of long term bicycle parking spaces or in the trip facilities however conversations with the applicant that indicated that they're willing to provide that conditions been drafted. And then, let's see. Also, there is no need to show sort of snow storage on the file plan and conditions been drafted for that. Also the hack note that there's no airlock currently an airlock needs to be provided at the main entrance. There needs to be some additional notes regarding the colors and providing landscaping main entrance to define the entrance. Those last two points are not like part of fast. Rules that may be followed. It's a really relaxed landscaping along its western boundary, which, which a box another industrial site. Landscaping between two industrial sites doesn't really bear very well. So staff is recommending that not be required. And because of the nature of the site and space constraints and state right of way, staff is recommending you know screen truth be required. So, in that set that area. Along with store monitor structure. Outdoor lighting mostly complies. The applicant does need to provide some information about the light timing. Outdoor lighting, including sign language must be turned off 30 minutes after close to business and maybe turned on 30 minutes prior to the business conditions been drafted for that. And I have some draft conditions. Thanks. Okay, so let's turn it over to you guys. The staff report has identified four areas of deficiency. And I would like to address each one. As to convince this body. Why should not continue this hearing for the other day. I think it's time to turn. So, this is a total redevelopment. 10% no discussion. Nothing's carried over taking out tons of land. Why is there a discussion going on about non conformities. It should everything should be brought into conformity. Yeah, there is no there shouldn't be in my mind there should be no discussion whatsoever. If we had a 10% you know rehabilitation of a piece of property, then it would be reasonable to assume that we would have a, you know, some form of attributed. And bring the conformity or non conformity into balance. Yeah, that's correct. So, I'm just what you're what can you can tell me what your thought process is for even putting it on the staff report, because it's a fact. That is not conforming. And I wanted to list the ways that it was not conforming so that you are aware of that. And also to state the ways in which it is being brought into the performance. And then to state that, that you need to decide whether the project, you know, whether the scale of project warrants. You know, every last basically every last thing that's just stated for your information. So it's a bit subjective in your position is was just clearly stated on how you. Well, I still, I think that's probably going to be your position is going to be. You know, similarly, I mean it's a freedom, it's a completely redevelopment of a lot. And, but, you know, the staff is just highlighting an area that we need to weigh in on. Okay, so, satisfied with that. Okay. So, you have four items here. If you would start with number one and work your way through the list that would be great. Can you bring up on the site plan with the board board. I mean, the one that you say, well, that was fine. I mean, that's just an excerpt that we do today as we've said, just to talk about, but that will work fine. Well, I'm not sure we should be talking about. No, no, let's bring up the site one. The same thing, except with a little overlaid with that's fine. Is there a walk up there. So, here's the existing building obviously the entrance is fixed. It's fixed by the trends they bought the rights and came out of the right side. This line is fixed obviously that's the stormwater feature is parallel we're creating that and all we're doing is backing up a lot. This line is sort of fixed. It's just we're just backing to that. Obviously, this building configuration is not by mistake. I mean it's 88 feet this way 64 feet this way. We're trying to be as conform as we can by putting, you know, the car seat back. We had some parking spaces in the 35 feet as I said, no parking 16 spaces, and then, you know, the only thing that was really important intention is how do you get people from here to there, and we're going to go with that sketch. Because you think we move forward that that's the path forward so we'll talk about that. So number one, it says, you know, I think it's a semantics issue. Non compliant front yard outdoor storage, I think it's easily handled by like, what will in the set about its outdoor sales. We're going to put them on the lot and they're going to get fixed they're going to get put back out there for sale. So I think it's outdoor sales. The reason that we drew that sketch today is to clearly show that we don't have 24 rows so we'll talk about that. So that's number one. The number two, don't have 24 rows. I'll go over that in a sketch. It's a lot easier to sort of usually show. Okay, number two, like of safe. Before you go to number two. Okay. So I'd like to, I'm kind of a linear guy. So that's fun. Let's talk about number one, as a group. So before you go to number two. So, there's, there's cars that come in. Yeah, they're bought an auction, they're bought locally they're bought a number of different ways, how do you buy these cars. And we're trading options. Yes. So the cars are procured in a number of different ways. Some are are in a state where they're immediately put on the line and they're for sale, and some require some repair before they are ready for sale. So I, I would like an explanation as to how a car that's sitting there for repairs is, is, is ready for sale. That car that car is stored. And it's not for sale. It's stored until you repair it and then it's for sale. And she may be better suited to answer this question, but let's say somebody comes in and, you know, the bumpers that can be sold as it is and for release price or they can put a bumper on it and put it back out. So, I kind of see that it could be for sale either way. If it's something more major, obviously, then it needs to go in. And it's dependent on their schedule because they're not fixing anybody else's car is different. So, my understanding is, time wise, things are going to turn over pretty quick because I mean, they buy a lot of cars, and there's a lot of turnover so they're not going to be stored for a while. The intention is to hope. And then our job at the DRP and the most fundamental level is, is to judge projects for compliance with the bylaws. Okay, I'm not intended. I'm a business person. I'm not intending to be in an obstacle here. Okay, but our job, our charter is to judge projects for compliance with rules made by others. The rules made by others is this storage is not allowed there. And if when, and we would be this body, and of which I'm the chair would be negligent in our responsibilities. If we were to approve a project that's not compliant with the bylaws and then dump it into the zoning administrator's lap to, to then go out and, and have to look for violations. And so I'm trying to set this up so that we don't run into that last scenario, where a car comes on the lot. It's, it's heavily damaged. It sits on the parking lot in a stored state for an extended period of time. And I've basically dumped that into the zoning administrator's lap. And that's what I'm trying to avoid not trying to be an obstacle. The hardest thing is, it doesn't really say, you know, what that statute of limitation time frame be I don't think I mean we could try to come up with something like my perception from the turnover that anesthesia is talking to me about. It sounds like are we talking like a week or two. It's definitely going to be less than a month, is that correct. I mean, I don't know if we need to talk about time frame that's important to the board, but we could certainly have that conversation because we said 30 to 80 cars. That's a lot of movement. I mean, they got other, you know, big laws that they're moving. Certainly, I don't know if they'd be opposed to a condition that says, you know, you know, limiting how much work needs to be done in that car to one of that facilities they have other facilities, certainly open that conversation, but so cars there to sell. I mean, I appreciate that that's intact. I'm just trying to set it up so that it's, yeah, it's an issue later. We wanted it to be super attractive. We're going to put up a super attractive building you've worked with a really smashing design, I think, which I'm as soon as I saw the building I was just, if you see that green building now and it's too close to the road. So a lot of emphasis, like I said, was put on kind of like creating this line of people that cars behind it. That was the intention of the design. I mean, I know we're not before you because like we can't go back any further. We don't want to get a wetlands permit. We don't want to mess with the wetlands and talk to the youth. So that's an obstacle. So we got a lot of things against us. But like when Linda said, I think we're trying very hard to basically abide by everything. And now, don't we need things in July 1st, we need to put the stormwater feature. And we look at the ortho, like if you can zoom out. I mean, I'm not, I'm not here to knock anybody else, but earthy cars has got parts like right on the street. You go by there and they're invested. That's like, that's non conforming. So, okay, DRP members, I'd like to hear comments on topic number one, please. At your facilities roughly how long is some of the cars set in the areas for repair before they're moved out. I think you must have a good experience with that. So the cars which take longer time to repair we going to keep our shop, the one we are right now and we're not giving it back or something. Yeah, so those cars that they saw can be pretty quick when I'm planning to keep them. And if they stay longer he usually takes them to the options. So we need to always to move them around. They're not going to be there forever. Where are you located at right now. 85 Dorset Lane with a future function. Other questions on this topic. With respect to, you know, I feel that the fact that it's labeled storage on the application means that's how you're looking at that as storage. And so my question is, is, if you're going to change that to display a lot or sales lot. How are you, what are you changing be able to kind of legitimize changing the name on that paper. I think I think one thing we got to say that needs to be said is we never been able to black rock. Initially, and every, and I thought it was a great idea. We want to call the store a lot because we didn't want to do any parking spaces. You don't want to strike. If we strike or we're going to ignore the strikes. And the reason that is, is, if you zoom out again, I mean the configuration of cars is bumper to bumper. They're not going to allow professional cars so that they don't get them to, they're going to maximize the space, like I showed an excerpt at pre act, a typical storage lot at pine pine street. And the reason I showed that is because they're not going to let just anybody jump in the car and move around. They're going to be tight and slide in that law, you're going to see the front line, you're going to see cars right behind it and they're going to be close together more than traditional part. So the problem is, we'll call it a storage lot, maybe the board won't make a strike. I'm like, I don't think that's a big deal. Like they're there to sell cars. We should have called it outdoor sales to begin. So I apologize that we told the distortion. If they're, if they're parked that close to one another, how can anyone go in there to, to evaluate the cars and decide if they want to buy it. I mean, literally, how do you, how do you take this hires to buy a car in this case. So usually people call for appointments and we pull out the car and they just come to see it. So we don't have like huge amount of people coming in every day like it's nonstop. And usually it's like appointments, people can stop by during the day yes, we just go and take up the car and park it in the front and drive it. It's actually pretty standard in the industry. Yeah, I mean I was stunned but I got emphasized that I was stunned. It's, it's, it's actually, I don't have any positive way of saying that. I, it's, it's the issue of the car that is. Right. I think every, if it's a sales lot, every single item that's on that lot should be for sale at any given time it's out there. Otherwise, it's being stored. And we could make that a conditional approval. Right, but how do you, but how does that allow, how do you enforce that? I know. Any given person can go up and say, I want to buy that car as it is for sale. I don't know what their licenses for it or how they can do their share. I will tell you that the last thing I want to see, I, I, I'm in theory, I'll tell you that I'm not opposed to this and I think that it's a, it's redeveloping this line. It's a fantastic idea because what's going on there right now is absolutely horrible that's been that way for a long time. So that's my personal. So I think it's I'm all for it. The last thing I want to see is a life full of dented and damaged cars. Based on what you said earlier, that's the image that comes to mind. Now I understand that the one that the row in front is are, you know, or two. Maybe are the cars that you fixed in the repair or what have you and they're they're the shiny new shiny new one, but you also said the dented and the damaged ones are parked in the back. And that's what, you know, that's what I don't want. You have a beautiful building. I like the design. I like the fact that setback. And you're improving a lot. I think it's great. But I don't want to see a junkyard. It's not going to be a junkyard. We don't have space for junkyard. Remember, we're we're like people we're going off like you say, and I understand your concerns. Yeah. I paid $500 for somebody to fix that in my car because I don't want to see any dense so I cited you on that. I mean, I don't think from talking in the stage of this is high end stuff and these people are going to move higher. So they're going to bring it in there and fix it and turn around and it's going to go. I don't think they're going to have like the car that oh my God, this thing's falling off. I don't get that perception, but hopefully you don't either. I think that clarification has to do with that. Is there anything else to be discussed on. One item. Where exactly is this bus people going to be right there in front of the facility. That's it. That's how it's going to be. That's the bus show. But yeah, by the trans. Yeah. So I know that you focus on this and it's going to be very similar. So, I don't know if it would be possible to just bring up that sketch that I sent you today and get, I know you haven't seen this but it's very, very similar just a couple little things that I want to just go over that we can make it easier to visualize. Because that's that's okay. Yeah. So the exact same sketch. All I did is throw some cards on there. Okay. And this is the lock aisle that the board is adding that we need. And we're not supposed to do it. There's a lot of this is on this. I think it's number two. Yeah. Safe professional access you're going to come in. This is shared by America gas by the way. So we're talking about, you know, the lack of, you know, between two properties. The reason that staff is recommended that we can't raise the this because it won't survive. And we're okay with putting a little bit more planning so we just can't have families in the stormwater future because you know the states that sort of nobody vegetation. The thing I want to emphasize here is, this is being shared by America gas in my client. And so, like, that's generally the area that the trend says this is the only access you can have. So yeah, we would love to have another access here we found for five months. And this is no bill. I'm sorry. I don't care about the trans, you don't care about the trans care about the trans. No, I just want to emphasize that. The color of the state highway, and they're good, you know, they're basically making us have that access. So I just want to make that clear. So, so, so noted. So walk us through the rest of the number two. So pedestrian access, we're going to do this walkable aisle right here and talk on the window about it. And that's the emphasis to get to the court for chair. So that's number two. Is there any questions on that. It's pretty straight and different material. Or is it just because of plowing and just ease of, you know, access because we get so many doors you got doors here, door here, door here, and then no debate doors here. And stuff like that, when we talk to hack the committee, they kind of understood the 24 file. I mean, we want to just, you know, be able to file it, maintain it. So really don't have to put anything, like if we put concrete here, it's just going to get, you know, really beat up by the plot because we got a plow right up to the bill. So, so I'm going to take the snow rule out, and then we're going to pave it and make a five foot walk as a line for pedestrians to get from basically this area here. So, that's what's going to prevent a car from encroaching on that walkway. Are they going to be curb stops, curb stops. So, we don't show that because this is just, you know, a sketch, but I don't think we have any problems with that on there. That sidewalk I think would have to be maintained such that it was always long, of course. Yeah, that's that's that's the idea. Okay, walk, five foot. And then, you know, we're going to paint those stripes. And then we can book curb stops. So, especially when we can't see it. No, I mean, we could put in, you know, one of the handicaps would be there and you could put in a sign so that it would sort of create a flow back to maybe the ADA spot should be there for you. So we just didn't throw that handicap. That's one more thing that, you know, that's a small thing, but we should be number three. Okay, can we go on the next one? Yes. Long term bicycle storage in a stage that they are going to have a shower. So if one of their employees wants to ride their bike, you got to put their bike inside your shower and the facility and the So yeah, they are going to have showers there. So that's, that's just as an aside, you got to, you got to designate a space that says, this is where you're going to hang the bike and this is where the shower can be. Yeah, just be the bite those in the corner. We got it. So we put formalize it. So formalize, formalize it on the plan, right? Okay. Formalize the bicycle storage secure. The fourth point was the airlocking. I was talking to Steve about it, and maybe Steve can speak better about the building, but it's under 3000 square feet. There's no real airlock requirements as far as I understand what Steve was talking about that, but in your code it says, should have an airlock. In the United States, the point of contention is, they want to bring in the cars inside the building as well. So that airlock is just going to take up more space. But we're pretty small already. But again, you got questions, maybe ask them in a state or Steve, they can elaborate on that. Okay, so, so, so Steve, what's the, what's the code requirement on airlock and Melinda. How does that relate to the Wilson regulations. So first Steve. FPA said, if there's an exception, if the space is less than 3000 square feet, you'll need an airlock. And we're, I think we're less than 500 square feet, you don't have that much room. Most of that room, I hope they have a floor plan up, but most of that room is for, for one, you're going to drive one car and display one car inside. So, is there a floor plan? Okay, thank you. That's right. Is there a, is there a distinction in the code that calls out when an airlock is required. I mean, that's what Steve was just saying, there's a square footer special. Yeah, as an exception, if there's less than 3000 square feet, you do not need to buy an airlock. That's a square feet. Yes. With that space for the airlock and access now space and condition space. So the garage is considered not to be conditioned space. We're just talking about. We're talking about this space right here. The current employee or part right here. So this is much less than 3000 square feet. So, so a car is going to go in there for display. Yeah, pull a car and play one of the top cars, you know, right. And display and like any, any kind of dealership you always have one or two cars in your display right. Yeah, well, I guess our job is to know what the Williston bylaw says about your locks because I'm not, I don't have the building code memorized right now and I would have to go look it up, but I think there are, there's always various interpretation and maybe correct. Generally, more than just the area that you first walk into is you don't, you don't, you don't size the airlock on the single space, you know, just the lobby of the building. It's a hotel where it's the entire target. So, I'm not sure how this works with the garage. And that maybe if it's semi conditioned space, maybe that doesn't matter, but I'm guessing it's this condition space. Yes, the front is condition space. But the back is as well. Yes, yeah. But, but again, I think it's a new point because really we're not enforcing the building code. We're enforcing the Wilson development bylaw. So, so Melinda a few, excuse me David Melinda a few would I can't. Yeah, for me to read, but says for about three provide airlocks principal entrances to buildings must incorporate an error. The standard does not apply to entrances for vehicles to loading doors or to emergency exits used for that purpose only the DRV may permit other exceptions to the standard for minor entrances. And I think the point there is the fact that I don't have to figure out to bring in, you know, a white vehicle. And so that's really kind of follows the line of what she just read, but more so than the building code. The building code doesn't matter because we're talking about Wilson up there. No, it does not apply to entrances for vehicles to loading doors or to emergency exits. So, like Steve said, I mean, this is not a this is not a vehicle entrance. This is a human entrance that happened to drive a vehicle into right. So we'd have to make that door big enough, like the airlock would have to be big enough to be able to get through. So I have a separate door right that has an airlock right from separate which might be cheaper. I've heard enough testimony. Yeah, I've heard enough testimony. Okay, so that was number four. Okay. Okay, thank you for why I'm going to do that so so. DRB members. We are at a, excuse me, junction point to continue. Or delivery. I'd like people's feedback before. Inside on. What to do. I would continue to give you a chance to update with the plans that you brought in. So that we can see the actual plans submitted for change in our markets. There's enough questions. I was saying questions that I'd like to see it continue. I agree with it. I'll retire. I can do that anyway, but I think that there's enough visions to be dealt with down the road. Okay. I agree with that. So we're going to continue this. And. How much time do you need to, to update the plans and. I like that. That's one favor question. You bring that sketch that I assembled it one more time. Because this is really a lot of discussion about. What it's called. So we're almost 17 there and we're less than 24. So we don't feel like we should have to put in landscaping and islands. Because it doesn't meet your regulations to require it because we don't have a know what 24. So unless Melinda, I mean, Melinda was super helpful. She explained it super well. She spent some time with us. And that's the reason why we wanted to show you the sketch and what it might look like. And this is just a lightness only thought. For the purposes of not having much space after we do all this work, they put up this shiny new building. I guess we'd like a little bit of reprieve about, you know, putting cars on the side and making that 24 file and recognizing that. So we're going to need to have our features going to create a buffer to root to that. You don't have. It's very clear on the north of that other cars apart like right. And we're actually going to delineate our entryway. So it's not a free for all of us. That seems to be a huge non-conforming. But I went to the property today. Somebody actually. I don't know why. But they pull into the property and then they just. They just put in a lot of space. And that's the kind of thing that we want to avoid. Which is why we want to put that stormwater feature there. I think it's super important for the board to recognize how much space we can create. Between that sidewalk. Because that is the sidewalk. That he trains is going to put in as well for pedestrians. Like that's part of their plan and their right. And we're going to be putting our stormwater feature behind that. So, you know, I think you've got an opportunity to. Bring this site into compliance. And you can end up with. A hell of a project. Yeah, I just think, you know, that, that corner. Has been. A disaster. For as long as I can remember. And this is, and this is, this is great. This is a good, this is, but I think he, but I think you got to think in terms of. How to comply with the ranks. You know, and. Because we're, you know, this is the gateway to well, you know, you all just went in. There's some people like it. Some people don't. Cleaned up. It cleaned up something that was. You know, been sitting there for a long time. I think it looks great. I think they've done a nice job. You know, you're sitting right next door. Great looking building. You know, you're going to be, you're going to be the first thing that people see coming in. So I would, I would. Argue that. You need to do your best to comply with, with the, with the rules and you're going to end up with a great project. So, so I, I echo that. And I think it's great. I think they've done a nice job. You know, you're sitting right next door. Great looking building. You know, you're going to be, you're going to be the first thing that people see coming in. So I would, I would. I would argue that. You need to do your, you know, you're going to be the first thing that people see coming in. So, so I, I echo that and. And we, we will get there working together. What we're, what we're going to do is, is, as a, as a board, we're going to be providing Melinda with some feedback. Later. And you can call her tomorrow. To get some specific guidance. I don't, I don't, this is a body of multiple people. I don't speak for the board. I'm, I'm, I'm kind of a master of ceremonies, if you will. And. And so I'd like to have a discussion with the group about what feedback to provide. Because it's only fair to these volunteers. And so you can talk to Melinda, but what we need to do tomorrow, you can talk to Melinda. And so what we need to do right now is to come up with a continuing state in which we, which is fair to you to provide amended plans. And, and we can. We will be able to, my expectation is we will be able to close the hearing at that next session. Perfect. I mean, that sounds very positive. Thank you so much. Just talking about our project. Discuss this. I mean, how do we get. Are we. Are we okay with. Sort of level of. Outdoor sales. Looking sort of like that because. Moving the building around, I don't see it helping in any way. So, like. That's, that's, that's, that's the hardest thing for me to try to figure out is what we're creating sort of a rectangular movement towards the front, but trying to put cars as best we can to the side. And we would love to have more space. You know, away from Wilson road, but it's not possible because of the environmental restrictions. So like I said, I mean, I love to put the cars so that, you know, they're, they're further back. We just because of it cannot. So we're asking for help. We're asking for help. We're asking for help. We're asking for help. We're asking for help. We're asking for help. We're asking for help. We're asking for help. We're asking for help. But I repeat back as a group. You guys can decide to do it to the Linda. If there's not much changes, you're asking me when we can continue it. I mean. If we're close. At, you know, with the walking aisle and putting the ADA spot. And calling it outdoor sales. I guess my question would be like, we can gray scale the cars and show light colored cars. If that's helpful. But just give us enough feedback. So, because I don't feel like there's a lot of changes that are going to happen. I don't know. But it depends on what you're asking us to do. I feel if we're close. We'll take long at all. And that's what I'm hoping for. Okay. So looking at the. Future agendas. Okay. And we've got a meeting scheduled for September 13. Then to one. A meeting two weeks after that, correct? Yeah, correct. 27th. And I don't have the, I looked at the agenda online, but I don't have that. I don't have that. I don't have that. I don't have that. It was only the one item on the 13th. Yeah. It's only. Okay. So I don't, I don't think the changes are going to be onerous. And what's the, what's the period of time in which they need to have changes to. I don't know. I don't know what the, what's the period of time in which they need to have changes. Staff in order to. Make the rules. Are they going to make sure we carry. Yep. That's true. So you probably will ever talk to your head. Right. You know, so when did, when do they need to submit the plans in order to be. On the plan with being. They don't have to be noticed. So they can submit it to us. What time to get out of the package? Right. Okay. I'm sure for me a look at. That's what I understood. Yes, that's what we're going to. We perforce a number 13. Yeah. If you told us. I could have a two. All right. So three weeks. Okay. So unless anyone has any dayouts, we're going to continue this to September 13. Can I ask one more question? And yeah, just let me finish. So we're going to continue this to September 13. We are going to provide. We the board are going to provide Melinda with feedback. You can talk to Melinda tomorrow. And get some guidance. And. Stop. Are you keeping your current location? Yes. Is there, I kind of heard maybe you need to this. Is there any reason you heard my concern? I'm not seeing. I'm not seeing. Cars that are dented. The dented goods. Yeah. So is there any reason to, any reason to, you know, to keep some of those cards over at the other site? Cause that's the kind of out of sight. So our problem right now. Being in the such small space. We don't have any display area to show the. Radio. Your existing location. But this would, but this would alleviate that. So. Not really. It's still going to be pretty tough with the parking spots. Cause. We turned around 3500 cars a year. So. Yes. We do wholesale too. And this part we plan to spend retail. So the cars that are going to come to this new shop. They move the electric. They're waiting. Cause he already. My husband. So he buys the cars. You know, right away. Which is retail radio, which needs just breaks. Just. Something like that. And he decides like. Does it worth it? So if it's a long project, we have different shops to. Repair them. We don't have like a lot of full time again. We have one. And we use outdoor. Shops to repair. Like those. Big, big projects. So mostly a piece shop is just quick. Enough to sell. So. So. You have a couple of records. Like that. Trucks. Big trucks or big records. We get them sometimes. Like. And three feet is like this. I think he's leaning for tow trucks and stuff that bring vehicles from one. Transporting. So this. Probably not going to use anything. All that. Cause we. Kind of like. Our location right now. There's not enough space for that. Yeah. One quick question I would have. Just a little bit. Sorry. Would you have. Your strings. If we restricted the number of cars being. For sale. For sale. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. What's your strength if we restricted the number of cars being. For sale that need to be repaired. I'm assuming. 80% of your cars that are going to be there already going to be. Your cars. So 10% or whatever. With the cars that you're going to compare on this. Or the back to. Yeah. Or. We'll tie right. I just wanted to know. I think. I guess. I want to help you guys, because you guys have been helping us. So like you said something about, you said something about like, you don't want to send somebody out to try to enforce it. I mean, if they count, let's say they count 30 cars and it's like, oh, there's two, or there's four. I mean, like, nobody wants to be chasing that that close. I mean, it had to be like clearing profit. So I guess I want to emphasize that because like if you impose this restriction, like you're going to create work for somebody that like, let's not make it. That's the thing, unless it's necessary. That'd be my only, like, just comment. It's the eyeball rule. You don't want to go out there and I walk out there and I look and I go, more than 50% of these cars are literally junkers. Right. And if I can do that, but I don't mean to make a counting, there's like, there's too many. Right. I think it's been emphasized tonight too by the state. So it's kind of, it's basically a common sense. They want to use this, they want to use this law for the high end. I think it's been pretty clear by the state. That was that was that was that we're creating a high end building. We want to go high end cars on the line. Yeah, you're not, you're not buying, you're not buying racks. Correct. Okay. Anything else? Good comment. I mean, good point. If you want to buy wrecks, you go to a guy out there on Mountain View buys and rebuilds them. All those cars, we've got the. Yeah, rebuild titles. Yeah, right. Good cars, but I mean, they're all rebuilds. Right. Okay. So 833. We're going to officially continue this to September 13th. All Melinda in the morning and she will be armed with guidance for you. Perfect. To help you navigate the next meeting. I'm curious that red line that is the state to come along and stag everything in front of that red line. Correct. I don't know yet the red line and sort of went around the state right away. Oh yeah. So the reason I was kind of curious is it looks like you have to have some development. Oh, that's that's the view for a lot of one on the first sheet. You know, because when we get approved by the trends, if you look at the overall sheet, there's there's a there's a keyboard on the side and that paper notes because we trans wanted to see just what it looked like now and their plan overlaid off to the side on top of it. So in your packet, like if you looked at she's six and seven, it's got the lines of what it's going to look like. Because you guys asked for that that pretty long one that the paint that you see has nothing to do with anything. It's just that it's just a picture graphic graphic. So yeah, that's all I did. I would sit there saying that it looks like one of your your drainage wells is like half and half or no. I should have turned off on the sketch on my fault. OK, that's fine. I would just kind of say to me, I'm going to do some work and then next thing you know, the state's going to come on and say, yeah, we decided we want that extra extra acreage. No, OK. Good question, though. I can see why that's confusing. OK, thank you. Thank you. Thank you for all of your time. All right. Next up is is communication. Final plans and other business. General item number three. This is the final plans for DG 18 dash zero six point three. Vermont hotel group. Who is present for the applicant? I'm present from G four. Name and address, please. Mark, Mark Dallin, G four design studios. Seventy seven College Street, Brownington, Vermont. Sir, five four zero one. Thank you. Hi, this is Dave Zing representing VT hotel group. Thirty four Blair Park Road, Holiston, Vermont. Welcome. Thank you. OK, so. There's been a. Two elevations provided by the applicant. And responds to. Conditions a through. And our memo dated. August 2nd, twenty twenty two. By the by the hack dated August 22nd, twenty twenty two. And as amended by the DRP on August nine. Twenty twenty two. The A through E are. Are the amended PRB language, correct? I believe so, yeah, I believe they are. OK, so the question at hand here is. By the applicant, did they. Did they meet the spirit of. This body's intent with the West elevation. And the East elevation and specifically. Item B, which is the East elevation provide provide a facade treatment on the East side. Under the gable that is similar to the West entrance facade. Using the same pallet of materials as on the West elevation. And I'll I'll start this discussion off. By saying. What I envisioned. Was. Was basically a similar design. On the East elevation that mirrored that jet out on the West elevation. So there would be that same vertical stone. The same color scheme and other material scheme. And it would basically be understanding that the that the gables are a little different. Both elevations to the extent that there would be some latitude. Due to the gable differences on each elevation. I was looking for the same materials on each side. And this is not what I personally see. So it doesn't it doesn't meet what I was hoping to see. But I'm one voice on this by other members of the DRP. Please weigh in on this. I like it. You like what I like the. So I know you you like what the applicant is proposing. Right. Breaking up that we didn't have that one solid color coming down under the gable coming all the way down to the group that up, which makes me feel better. Because now I see. Not one long building, but some breakups in my view picture and the. The white color that they added on this side. And it makes that gigantic carport sort of disappear. You sort of stick out to me like a sort of phone and mouse sort of like. Now I just see an edge versus up. So so let me let me restate the question. OK. Because because I think you're I think you're missing my point. Is is the West elevation we approved. And we said we said make the East facade treatment on the East side under the gable similar to the West entrance facade using the same power of materials on the West elevation. Does what's being proposed on the East elevation meet the spirit of that comment. And I made the position that it doesn't. I will. And Scott Mace Scott seconds that David Turner. I'm up in the air because we said the same color. How the materials we didn't tell them that we need the colors or we would prefer that. So we do have the same colors. We just don't have the same layout. And I'm not I'm not. Problem that I do. So it's three to two. I also don't like the idea of making this. Oh, that's pain. Yes. And I think that the pain is a downgraded material in long term maintenance. And it was something that we eventually chose not to recommend the last time. And I'm frankly, I'm confused why it's showing up again because it really seems have absolutely nothing to do with what we recommend. Is my my argument would simply be that if you're hitting if you're hitting West from tax orders toward you know, toward Burlington. By taking away the vertical stone element. If you lose a significant level of richness in the design of the. We never had we never had a vertical element on that side. We originally had that different colored. Material and where we're showing it now and. From what I remember last time people were wanting to go back in that direction and not necessarily mimic the front like. Exactly like in a literal sense. And we chose to go with with the paint because the tile material is. Is a very thick system, a deep system. So we would be running into trouble dealing with the with the P tech units, et cetera, on that side and we probably have to trim it out much more and. End up with a lot of like flashing details and stuff that would probably not look as clean as trying to keep the materials coplanar and just changing. The color to match what we had previously and also tie into the new material that's on the front. So it's trying to keep it simple instead of going with what the franchise sort of dictated for the front and not just sort of mirror that to the back. But honestly, this is not. There's two fronts here. These as these besides the pretty much equally visible and depending on which direction you're approaching that those if you go back a few iterations, this this exact thing was basically approved. And then we changed materials because of the franchise and also because of the lack of supply chain. So we went with some other things and then we were directed to go back in this direction. It seemed to me like I did. We did not direct you to go back to this direction and we didn't direct you. As I understand it, there was an application put in front of us. We approved it with certain conditions and question I believe is whether what we're seeing submitted for final plans is consistent with what was approved. And I think my answer to that question is no. No, what? No, what is being submitted final plans does not match up with the conditions of approval that we that we did. So you wanted to see a mirror of the front on the back. Is that what you were saying? Well, it wouldn't be it wouldn't be technically a mirror because or like a replication, like exactly or just the intent and the materials that you were looking for us. Let me let me think you coming off. Let me finish. It wouldn't be exactly a mirror because there wouldn't be an interest there. But it would. But it would have the same material theme. Well, all that's present on the back. That is so the when you look at that that jet out on the West side and you look at the East side, they would have the same materials recognizing that one is an entrance and the other is not an entrance. So would not have the pork kosher and and, you know, I mean, there'd be some some distinctions, but there would be the vertical stone. There would be the vertical other material elements and and it would be very similar on both sides, depending upon whether you're heading West or heading East, the vertical stone element is new to it. Like, that's not that's never been on the back. And I don't remember hearing anybody applying doing a vertical element on the on that side. It kind of doesn't make sense to me. I think it would look really chopped up on the back. But I disagree strongly. I think it's tremendous. I think the East is the West elevation is attractive. I think I think the East elevation is not. And again, they're equally visible. So I think they need to be treated and given the same. The same way it's not like this is the back of the building that's up against an alley or some other building. This is an extremely visible facade. Yeah. A major artery in and out of Willisville. Right. But the fact that it's visible doesn't mean it's and you propose like that better. I mean, I don't know. It's just it's visible, but I don't think like we're treating it like a back. I think it I think it's like what we had before supply shortages. And that was and that the only real change is because of the supply shortage. And then, you know, we did a few iterations since then. And it seemed like we wanted to go back to what we had. This is the first time we've seen this to go back. There was nothing proposed in the approval last week. Well, I mean, what was approved way back? It was very similar to this. I just talking about the approval that was given last week at the last. I'm talking about originally, like the 2019. And then we had to change things and go through a few iterations. But the question in the question in front of us, as I understand it, is whether these final plans meet the requirements that out in the approval that was given at the last meeting for that new application. Is there a mention of vertical? Not me. They do. But there's it's just materials, correct? Just pain. You said no. So so so the time out for a second. OK. So, Mark. Please refrain from interrupting the D.R.B. members when they're speaking. For an effective communication, it needs to be linear. One person speaks, parties listen, and then we give an opportunity for a rebuttal and talking over people is is something that I really struggle with. And you seem to be very skilled at that. So what we're what we're what we're saying to you, if you would listen is that what was approved back originally has no bearing today. And the reason for that is because you came in and you asked for approval of new elevations and new materials. And we provided feedback that we wanted the east and west elevations to look similar. You came back with a plan that doesn't accomplish that. We just had an informal pool here. And three people, myself included, agreed that you didn't meet the intent of the D.R.B.'s direction. And and you can argue about the original design. You can go back to the original design if you that was approved, if you care to. But if you want to amend the west elevation, then our guidance to you and our mandate to you is you make the east elevation the same. And and we'll we'll formalize this and in a in a finding when we go to the liberation. I don't I don't think this arguing back and forth is going to be productive at this point. Hi, this is Dave. Could I speak for a second? Yeah, I was I understand what the D.R.B. is saying. And I think it was partially our fault for misunderstanding the response that we got from Emily. I guess when we read the the statement regarding the east elevation, we were under the impression that it was merely focusing on the materials and not so much almost trying to do a mirror. So that is partially our misunderstanding. But since we're all here today, I'd just like to ask for some feedback since we have a single gable versus a triple gable. I agree with what Mark said earlier. It doesn't make sense to bring the stone all the way up because you kind of have that slanted portion. You don't have that flat section like you do in the in the front. On the west elevation. So I'm just asking for some maybe some feedback on what the D.R.B. is is thinking in terms of the stone and where we should stop it. John, did you weigh in on that as the as I could. But again, I'm tonight I'm a D.R.B. member and I really don't want to design these things. I can tell you that, you know, the vertical elements on the sides of that building on the west elevation are attractive and that the the scattered colors of the east elevation that kind of are just pink by numbered on are odd and they're uncomfortable and that you've got four different colors meeting in one spot on that building. And it does nothing to accentuate the fact that there is a gable in there. So the thought was in my mind that if you've got a variety of materials and you've got some more vertical elements at the edges, that was a tremendous improvement and something that's actually quite nice on the on the west elevation. And we were hoping that we could see something more like that. Given the fact that we're going to be approaching the east elevation in a very similar fashion as the west. Now, of course, you don't want a canopy on there because it's not an entrance and that would be disingenuous. So again, I don't think this is that difficult of a piece. You know, honestly, I don't like the idea of painting that material either. I'm going to bring that up again. I think that that I cannot approve something that's a reduction in quality over what was originally proposed. I believe what was originally sorry, this is Dave speaking. I was what I wanted to say is what was originally approved. There was was also cement board. It's just going to be a different color. But this is referring to the 2019 approval. Since we haven't gotten any approval on the on the east side yet on the last. The last hearing, we were proposing either metal siding on levels two and three on the east elevation or the cream color cement board brought down to level two and three. We were not reducing the material by any means, just changing the color. My point is that when you paint the cement board, now you just added a long term maintenance component to this building that is going to be very visible when it starts to to peel or need to be repainted as and that's not the case with the metal or the tile. So in terms in terms of in terms of your question, David, to where where to stop the vertical. Stone on the east elevation. The DRP is not going to weigh in on that because that's a design question. And I think G4 is very capable of coming up with with with an appropriate demarcation point for that. But I think you I think we've made our point pretty clear that that we want the the very similar look on that that gable jet out on both the east and the west elevation. And if we if we the DRP caused some confusion by using the word pallet, then then I'll take personal responsibility for that by you. You know, but you've heard what we're what we're looking for. And so I say update the elevations will provide specific feedback to Melinda and the liberation. You can speak to her tomorrow if you care to get any additional clarification, amend the plans and resubmit them and we'll have another look at it. Sounds good. Thank you. OK, thank you. OK, it is eight fifty six. The DRP is now going to go into a deliberative session. So I'm going to put you in the way to move some participants and I'll let you back in when we come out of deliberations.