 This is the Tuesday, November 15th development review. Board of the city of Burlington meeting. I'm going to call it to order. We have a quorum. And we proceed through items. As they are listed on our agenda. I don't. The only agenda item change that I'm aware of is that item two of our public hearing ZAP. 22 dash. 460 22 dash for. 89 chestnut terrace that is an appeal. The appellants have withdrawn their appeal. And so that is removed from our agenda at this point. So the next item is communications. Scott has posted. The communications online relevant to the applications. Are there any additional ones Scott have any others come in that we should know about? I think we're up to date. Are we all up to date for VHS Mary. Okay. Yeah, there's a fair amount of material for 52 incident. Institute road that has been posted. So. Assuming we'd all read those. The next item is minutes. This is for the board. If anybody has any. Things they'd like to add to the minutes. I've signed our last set and. I suppose we can talk about that. In our deliberative. And so. With that, the first item on our agenda is listed on our consent agenda. The city of Burlington. ZP 22466. 187 South Champlain street. The city of park, the city of Burlington department of public works, parks and recreation. Is seeking renovations to a city pocket park and site improvements. And I see the applicants been called up. I'm not going to swear them in for a consent agenda item. So let me do this. What? I said, you do. All right. Well, Mr. I'm recused from this matter. I was going to ask you whether you were going to or not, Jeff, Mr. Madalinsky, can you raise your right hand? Yes, I can. I don't know if you can see it. I'm sorry. We're not. We don't put them on video yet. So. Please raise your right hand and state that any testimony given this matter will be true and correct under the pains and penalties of perjury. Any testimony I give on this matter. You can just say I do. I do that work. So this has been put on our consent agenda. Which means the staff has reviewed it. And recommend that we approve it without a hearing. Do you have any issues or concerns about them? No, I do not. Okay. Is there anybody in the public here to speak on this agenda item? If so, raise your hand. Looks like not AJ. All right. Well, do any board members have any questions for the applicant? All right. Well, then I'll make a motion just to move it over. On application. ZP 22466. I move that we approve the application and a daft staff findings and recommendations. Second. All those in favor. All right. That everybody. All right. Enjoy the pocket park. Thank you all so much. Okay. The next agenda item on our, the next item is a public hearing. ZP 22-528. 447 main street. That's dress learn Seymour. Demolition of existing carriage house to construct new accessory structure. And I see the app Ramsey Gord is one of the applicants. Okay. Thank you. Hi, Brad. Okay. Can I get all of you to raise your right hand, please. Will you, do you swear to. That the testimony given regards to this. Matter will be true and correct under the pains and penalties of perjury. I do. Okay. Has Marcus Gonzalez been unmuted? I'm here. Okay. So. We have the staff comments and we have the recommendations, but why don't you tell us what you're looking to do. And if you want Scott to call up any plans. We generally don't enable screen sharing. But if there's anything that you need to do, I think he can arrange that. Or Mary can. I'm not sure who's driving this bus right now. I'm driving it. Mary is the project manager. I'll do a share screen. So why don't you walk us through your project. So the. What we're looking to do is replace this existing structure. In kind. With a new structure. The existing structure. We generally don't enable screen sharing. But if there's anything you need to call up, I'm not sure what you're looking to do. I'm not sure what you're looking to do. I'm not sure what you're looking to do. With a new structure that the existing structure has no foundation and is. Really just staying up by habit. We've been through. Design advisory. And they asked us to provide better documentation of the existing details. Which we have done. And then. We're going to look at how we are essentially. Simulating those details. In our proposal. The. The biggest change to the design is the addition of a dormer. From the existing. Change from these sliding doors to the. Carriage house style garage doors. And then we're going to look at the design. And then we're going to look at the design. And then we're going to look at the design. And then we're going to look at the dormer there. Did you see the shed dormer on the upper right. And skylight. So the size and massing of the building remains. The same as the existing. But essentially we're. We are saving the form because it is about to just. Decay and fall into the ground. By building a new structure. In its place. We're not dealing with, when I first saw this come up. This board has dealt extensively with. Demolition by neglect on historic carriage barns. So I'm happy to see that we're not dealing with that here. And that you seem to be making a pretty good effort to replicate. The historic elements that made this. Carriage barn historic. That's our intent. Yeah. And I, I, you know, I know this board has struggled with how to deal with those demolition by neglect. Agenda items. Does anybody on the board? I mean, is that. Is that generally it or anything else you'd like to add to it? No, I think most of the changes are really to meet the requirements of the energy code and the building code. To bring the structure. Essentially the, the same use that it has or similar use that it has. To within current. Energy efficiency and to code requirements. We will be like the new siding around the backside of it will be. Non combustible siding. So when we consider how close it is to the property line. We're eliminating the fire hazard there were installing egress windows were providing a code compliance stare. So there are a number of issues that we're addressing in the new design, but really trying to keep the integrity of the fabric of the community. Scott, I'll note FYI that you're getting a 404 error on your staff report. For this agenda item right now. I was also getting that and I refreshed the page and then was able to. To actually get it so. Yeah, I'm looking at it right now. Yeah, I'm getting that. So anyway, I mean, I've read it, but. Does any board members have any questions for the applicants on this one? Okay, just one. I think staff, the staff report notes. There's not an application for an accessory apartment or accessory use. For the structure right now is that consistent with your intended use or are you expecting to apply for that just so we understand. It's a continuation of existing conditions. It is currently an accessory structure. accessory dwelling. Well, let's, let's be clear. I get, I get a little confused by the nomenclature of these things. Let me, let me ask my question. What use is it today? It is a one bedroom apartment over a storage space. Okay. And how is that one bedroom apartment used. It's used as it's under the new ownership. It's used as a guest. Facility it's not used as a rental property. Okay. And I'll ask this of staff, is there a. Permit for that. We repeatedly ask the applicant if the intention was to have a discreet unit and the answer was no. There is finished living space on the second floor and it's been acknowledged by the assessor's office to have been there for some decades. It's not clear that when the permit was issued for an antique shop. It's not included living space, but it appears to have been finished space since the antique shop was there. Does the application. Like the application that was filed I can't pull it up. Seek only the construction, or does it state specifically the continuation of the use. The continuation of expanded living area associated with a single family home. But this is an independent living area. It is not a complete unit. There is no kitchen. Correct. The wording on, on staff documents is that the upstairs is, is, is acknowledged by the assessor's property database as existing finished living space associated with the single family residents. The applicant does not seek a discreet second unit. So it would just be like extra living room space basically. It's like a detached guest room. Okay. I think that's something we're going to have to figure out how to define in our approval, because at least I'm concerned, right? Of creep in the future. So, okay. I mean, I think it's a nice project. Does anybody else on the board have any questions for the applicant? Anyone in the audience here to speak on this application. You're muted Scott. I don't see any hands raised AJ. Yeah, I didn't see any other. Okay. Well, and there's nothing else, then I suggest we close the public hearing. And I will we will deliberate on this maybe tonight. Depends on how long the other agenda items go I suppose. And we'll get a decision out shortly. Thank you. Thank you very much. All right, well, the next agenda item, which I just lost my agenda is certificate of appropriateness because 89 chestnut terrorist is chestnut terrace is out. Certificate of appropriateness ZP 22-546 52 Institute road. City School Department demolish and remediate existing high school and construct new 250,000 square foot high school slash technical center. I'm recused from this matter also. Okay. And I also want to state before we, I don't know who's here to speak on this from the public. But I know this was a recent ballot agenda item the city of Burlington, whatever it may or may not cost is not something that we have any jurisdiction or authority over so to the extent anybody would like to talk about what a proposed cost word that's not something we can really take testimony on without being able to see the scope of the audience. I don't know whether that's something people had intended to speak about. Also, our review is limited by statute. We're only able to review certain elements of this by state statute. So I just wanted to start with that because this is a large project in the city and I don't know who's here to chat about it but Otherwise, do we have the applicant with us. You do Joe wife. They do an agent. Good. So we, if I could just maybe just do a broad introduction because we do have a large contingent here of our project team and development team. Let me swear everybody in first Joe. Okay. Because so if anyone intends to speak on this application, could you raise your right hand please. And answer do you swear to tell the do you swear that any testimony will give on this application is true and correct under the penalties of perjury. I do. I do. You're welcome to introduce us to your team and start wherever you'd like to start with this. Okay, sure. Thank you. So again, I'm Joe wife with Weinberg real estate advisors, we are the overall project manager, working with the district and we do have several members from our design team and project team. Including everyone by name of this, you know, briefly say that we've got well other than Lyle Smith, who's director of property services with the school district he's on the line but we have several architects, our civil engineer landscape architect, traffic transportation consultant, and also our environmental consultant and construction advisor on the line tonight so I think we're pretty well covered in case you have any technical questions that you want to ask. But what we would like to do is that we have a kind of a very brief kind of high level project overview presentation that we want to just quickly walk you through. We'll have Brian Lee with Freeman French Freeman architects, walk you through that and present the project. And then after Brian, we'd like our landscape architect. Mike Willard with VHB just to say a few words and specifically address one of the conditions that was included in the conservation boards recommendation last night that we include in our landscape plan only native space species so he would like to say a few words about that. And then we'll finish with our traffic transportation consultant Jen Connelly with VHB who will just say a few words regarding our the TDM plan that we submitted and our proposal to not require the district to purchase car share partnerships, but she'll kind of walk through that real quickly includes some reasons why we don't think that that would be necessarily beneficial to our TDM plan. So with that, I'll have Brian kind of lead us through the project. Sorry about that. Now you can hear me. All right. So we're looking at the overall site plan. We've already rendered for the project. The new Burlington High School and Technical Center completely replaces the academic buildings, which will all be removed from the existing high school. The existing building a is roughly in the area of the technical center here. And if you're familiar with the current site the existing parking lot is roughly in this area, marked high school. The project introduces a new access road to the south side of the building off of Institute Road, and creates an entrance facing Institute Road for visitors during school hours and entry to the first level of a multi-story commons at the center of the building that connects through the building. So going down that access road, we have the entrance to the technical center program with its own distinct entry at a lower level that only exists kind of in this southwest portion of the building. The existing access road up to the west side of the site is slightly realigned and gives access to screened loading and service area. It functions both for loading. It's also going to have the fleet vehicles associated with the school, and those are screened with coniferous plantings around the south and north edges. And then we have the loading dock. I'm sorry the double tray of parking up in the area where the buildings see through F for the current high school are located, which also provide access to the north side entrance, which is on level two of the multi-story commons in the building. The only existing building on site to remain is the structure that currently houses the wood chip heat plant, but the new building will be completely electric mechanical system for with a geothermal water source supply so that building will be repurposed for storage and other district functions. We're showing the our understanding of the city's intention to introduce bike lanes down both sides of Institute Road. Currently, the south side of Institute Road has a series of parking spaces. So we are anticipating that those parking spaces will no longer be available. We're also showing the relocation of the bus stop along North Avenue from the south side of the intersection to the north side. There's currently a bus loop here which made that a poor location for a bus stop but by relocating the bus stop in this new design, it avoids one traffic crossing for all the people arriving to the site or departing the site from onto a southbound bus. The two drop-off areas are designed for either car or bus travel and Jen can talk a little bit more about the transportation plan. Nothing to the south of Institute Road is planned for change so all of the work is occurring on the north side of the site. We do have bike parking locations, racks and storage at each of the three entrances and also corresponding to the ability to come down from the new north end residential neighborhoods north to the north side of the building up north avenue to the south side entrance and up from the bike path to the west side of the building. I'll briefly walk you through the four plans I know it's not really within your jurisdiction to do kind of design review on them, given the district's status but it's helpful to understand. The building exists as a four story building essentially but it runs down the hill so the west side of the building is four stories that goes from lower level to three and the east side goes from first to fourth. So we're seeing that one little portion at the west end with the technical center entrance and then quarter to technical center spaces. This entrance here off of the first floor is a entrance to the first level of the commons. It's also functions as a visitor entry during school hours. So people arriving to the school outside of student arrival would have to come to this door be buzzed into the vestibule enter the principal's office. They're tagged in checked in either get their escort or directions before proceeding into the school. So that becomes the single point of access during school hours. Other elements on this floor are the lower seating pole for the auditorium and lockers and again more BTC and special education classrooms. The second level has a connected upper portion for the commons space overlooking the spaces below. To the east wing, you have the first level of the main academic program between the commons and that you have the auditorium here, entering from the back of the lower seating pole up the risers and out to the back. And then on the west side of the commons you have the athletics, the gymnasium program with both a to court gym with hardwood for varsity basketball, and also with a operable partition, a synthetic floor gym for more community which is also provided with its own separate entrance so that that portion of the building can be isolated made secure and used for community functions. In this wing we also have some design technology and food programs associated with the health and wellness aspects of the high school. On the first level we have the library taking up the center portion of the building with a glass wall separating it from the light well that brings skylight down into the center of the building. We have the balcony to the auditorium and the additional level of classrooms and art rooms, and on the top floor, one more level of classrooms. The roof is planned for photovoltaics across all of the areas that that kind of could function for that element. In addition, we are looking at adding green roofs in areas that are not as suitable to putting photovoltaics due to smaller areas or constraints on the space very briefly the elevations to the building. The large building is, is obvious from the square footage. It's about 560 feet long faces east towards North Avenue so we have a kind of a feature element to face North Avenue. And then here's the West elevation facing back into the property. This is the basic view from near the intersection with Institute Road to North Avenue. Here you can see the drop off. If you're familiar with the site, there's a pretty significant grade change from the intersection at North Avenue down to the West end of the property. So in order to make the drop off work, the drop off grade is relatively level and then comes back down steeply to remit that road at the bottom of the hill. Again, there's the element kind of facing North Avenue. And from the north side entrance from the parking levels, we have this view. A couple of interior shots I think might be coming up. Or is that what I've got? Yeah, that's it. So I think with that, I'm going to scroll back up to the landscape plan and turn the conversation over to Mike Lord to talk really quickly about the planting plans. Actually, I'm not sure is Mike on this call. I had thought I'd seen him, but Mike. No, Mike Willard was going to speak to. Sorry, I got to mix up. Yeah, he is. Let me find him. And I'm not sure he's. Yeah, there we go. And Jen Connelly might not have been let into the meeting as well. So Mike and Jen can both talk now. Okay, great. Thank you. So the, the just briefly talking about sort of the landscape design for the site. So really. In large part mostly using sort of. Native and adaptive plant material for the tree species and shrubs around the property. That sort of wind the main entry drive coming in and sort of the pedestrian walkways. So those sort of really define sort of the site design and elements and sort of lead people to the front entry to the building. And particularly, you know, coming from the different walkways and approaches from the parking lot visitor drop off. And such so we've got a sort of a mix of evergreens and deciduous trees and also some evergreen and deciduous shrubs that are sort of located around the property. We're using ornamental grasses in areas that are immediately adjacent to the building within sort of manicured landscape beds that are sort of in between the building. And the hardscape elements. And I think the conservation board was had a question about using sort of ornamentals like that on the site. So these are sort of typically used when you see them around the city of Burlington and other places. So that's really to create sort of seasonal interest. And also using plant material that can deal with sort of drought conditions, salt tolerance, and sort of handle the urban environment, knowing that this is going to be a bunch of teenagers running around the site. And balancing what the school district has for capacity for sort of landscape maintenance, weeding that sort of stuff. So really sort of really designing landscape palette that is sort of durable to the urban environment and that can handle the conditions that will be sort of enduring. And then so by, I know, I think the conservation board, unfortunately, I wasn't in attendance at the meeting last night, but there was, believe there's a comment about just invasives or non native species migrating, but just want to be clear that any of the ornamental grasses that are specified are sort of clump forming, and they don't spread. So they stay in that sort of manicured landscape bed, sort of perennial areas in between the building and the hardscape. So we've got parking lots and asphalt and a lot of pavement in between them and any sort of naturalized areas around the property. So they're very sort of specific and targeted right at the building entries as you come in, again, to create that sort of seasonal and visual interest as a guest arrival and user of the property. And then I guess, Jen, did you want to speak to the the TDM question on the landscaping, just as long as we're on that. Michael, just, I just want to get clear, the green spaces like between the walks on the east side of the road and that's all available for students to hang out in that space is that correct. Right. So, any of that sort of like open lawn areas that's completely available for anyone to sort of migrate as long as the grades work you know you've got some the building floor to floor elevations change around as you couldn't move through but all that big open lawn area was sort of seen as available for the students for passive recreation and using at their leisure. Thank you. In regards to the TDM plan. We were very thoughtful about the, what was proposed. The population here is primarily a Joel no high school students who are not going to be able to use a car share. And so, given that students as well as there's a commitment for all staff at the high school to receive fully subsidized transit passes. Works to reduce the reliance on automobile trips for both of those populations in a way that is much greater than what is required by the ordinance, and much greater than what would typically be offered if someone were to join Katmah for example. Enjoy their pay, join their pay is their go, they go program in this way, anyone in the population is able to get a transit pass and use that form of transportation. In addition, as far as car share. In addition to membership. Also the challenge of locate locating cars, and if there is not a demand population nearby that the person placing the car or asking the car share to be placed at that site ends up requiring, you know, having to do a minimum subsidy to be able to keep a car at that location. So those factors combined to a recommendation to just stay with the focus of TDM on the transit. And if someone does have a need for a car share there is a car share location point six miles away. But where in a close walking distance there isn't a large population who would want to use the car share, especially given the high transit subsidy piece. I would not recommend the participation in the car share in the TDM plan is presented. Okay. You know, it's interesting, you're not really changing to mean you're, you're going from high school to high school so I'm glad to see the thought effort you put into that. But, you know, I was thinking about this myself and looking at the applications like well, sort of the same number of kids to the same number of kids ultimately. Not adding any new use to the site. You know, traffic is traffic. So, I do. One of the conditions, not one of the things in the staff report is brownfield remediation. And then I have a question for staff. How do we. This is sort of for staff. Obviously I'm well aware of the brownfield issues on the site. I think we all are. This is a question for staff. How does that compliance with 5.4.9 get tracked from a zoning perspective. Well, the steps for remediation are largely dictated by the state. Right, right, but do we not issue the construction permit until that gets finalized. The timeline will be defined by, by those methods that are going to be employed for the cleanup of the site. Okay. Do we need to. And I'm assuming they can't start reconstruction until those are completed and so where I'm going is our permits have a timeline in them. Do we need to address. I mean, that could take a while or it could take some period of time. Do we need to. Do we have the authority to specifically change our timelines because there's some. Limited extensions we can provide and. I'm just. What's listed under brownfield remediation could take a while. Sure. I want to make sure that we're not in a permit expiration. In the place where that's all getting worked out. I think I can assist with that. Of course, any federal or state permitting would toll the life on this permit issuance. But the applicants have also added a request for an additional year they've asked for four years to build in the timeline for that. Net very necessary remediation. Okay. So I want to ask another question of staff, which is. There's closing down one of the requirements is closing down a bunch of old permits. If. The building is being demolished. How do you go about closing down a permit. Do you have to close it down before you demolish it. Well, all of those open permits are going to have to have certificates of occupancy or have been superseded. Before a CEO can be issued for this project. Okay. I would imagine that a great number of those will be superseded with the demolition of the building. Of the open permits. Okay. Does the applicant have more to present. Oh, I think, I think we presented what we wanted to just to kind of introduce you to the project and some of the issues and. We're happy to answer any questions that you might have. I had a couple of quick points. If I may. Yeah, yeah, I have a couple more questions. So the landscaping conservation board recommended. Devising the landscape plan to incorporate all native species. I'm applicant has some concerns with that. I had a quick conversation with the city Arborist and city land steward this afternoon. We'd recommend in the spirit of the conservation board's recommendation to include a condition to the effect of. Working out the final details for the planting plan with an emphasis on native species, but allowing for non natives. Where there's justification for that. Such as salt tolerance, right? And that's a pretty common reason to go with something that is non native. But basically defer to final details. On that. Depending working yet working that out with with the parks department. Where the city Arborist, however you want to phrase that. The other point I'd make is the car share requirement under the TDM is just that it's a requirement. It can't be waived. If it's a terrible policy, then tell the policymakers. There's a follow up amendment to article eight that's before the city council still has been there for a few months. But the car share membership requirement is just that it's a requirement. There's wording that says, or with an equivalent or better. That would be an example of the equivalent or better. But shine of that the car share membership is needed. Scott, I have a question about that. Is that within our scope of review under 24 vs a 4, 4, 1, 3. I think it is because it refers to parking and the TDM is all about the parking standards. And how to manage them. Okay. That was it. Those are my two point. Bus passes can't. Take the place of the. Car share requirement. It's two pieces. The one piece is the bus passes, which they're providing. And the other pieces of the car share memberships. What actually doesn't apply here. Is the requirement to have on site car share spaces. I just checked that a moment ago and that's tied to residential development. Who do they offer the cautious. Memberships to. To staff. Yeah. All. All employees, all tenants, obviously for residential or employees. That's an interesting point, Scott. So I see. Yeah. They have to. It, it shall be offered the car share membership, but there's no space. Requirement. That's right. There's, there's a requirement to actually provide an onsite space for car share for residential development. But this is not residential. So they just need to provide the memberships. I mentioned this in the statute. And the staff report too, but in lieu of those two standards. The applicant can maintain an ongoing and active membership in a transportation management association that offers equivalent TDM strategies. So it's an either or. Right. But the catch there is there's no. Katma is the only transportation management association. And they don't provide equivalent or better services. Trust me, there's been plenty to be. With the follow up amendment to article eight about that. Sticking with parking for a minute. I'm curious about the layout right in front of the building. And. I was unsure. Of the exact number of spaces and the orientation. I also bring this up because there was a video. Posted. So the Burlington technical center website. And it seemed to have a lot of parallel parking in front of the school. And I was, I was wondering about that. There's no parallel parking along that dropper. That that is the morning setting where parents are dropping off their students. And moving on. And then there's a very short term pullover for the, during the day use for visitors. And is there, is there someone there in, in the morning helping to direct traffic either in front of the school or at the roadside? There's no parallel parking along that drop off curb. That that is the morning setting where parents are dropping off their students. And is there someone there in the morning helping to direct traffic either in front of the school or at the roads? We, we feel the design will allow for that. If the school district deems it necessary, but it's pretty much self serve with enough curb line to accommodate that amount of traffic. Safely at the crosswalks are all designated. So. It's certainly a possibility. I'd like to add to that. Moving on to the maintenance road that may need to be constructed. Yeah, that's in the stormwater. I was. Not at stormwater yet, but. Go on, Leo. That's a question. I was, I was wondering. Yeah. Just. There was also a question about stormwater in the last preliminary review of this perhaps you could talk about both the storm water system and the maintenance road. I'm sorry. Evening Dave. Yes, thank you. In this particular case, we did respond to the staff comment regarding access to the proposed stormwater management facility. So we have updated the application to reflect that particular feature. So to enable easier access to the various components of the stormwater management. And then we also have an open water management facility. So in this particular case, just for orientation on the plan before you. Looking at actually the southern end of this particular site plan, you'll see the track. And the football field actually just to the left or west of that is the existing stormwater management facility. It's essentially a large pond that takes the stormwater runoff from not only the school, but it also provides some level of settling as an open pond. And then ultimately discharges into a ravine that, that runs down to the lake. In this particular case, watershed consulting associates has provided a design to provide improved water quality features. We went over this in a lot of detail with the conservation boards last night. And we're happy to basically touch base on that to give you an insight into the design of the stormwater management facility. And it's a great opportunity to look at how that works with the stormwater management facility in regards to that particular critical feature in regards to how to, how we're actually not only consolidating this particular site from the footprints that are building footprints that occupies previously, but more specifically in regards to the environmental impacts of the prior site and how we're improving upon that with this particular proposal. I now we may be a good time to have Andreas Teresa touch base on that. Yeah, that sounds good. Hey, good evening. Hi, Andrews. How you doing, AJ? So I'd be happy just to give just a quick overview of the stormwater system. So we looked at what's called a regenerative stormwater conveyance and it's a newer type of treatment technology that I've actually, we've done successfully here in Vermont, but it's originally was, I was thought up in the chest peak. And it's really specific towards restoring degraded ephemeral channels like this. And it really was, was perfect for this site because in the, in the current condition, the school, all the drainage from the school ends up at a very large outfall to the west of the track. And that outfall, if you were to go down and look at it is failing. It's a large concrete structure. It's, it's broken. And it's, it's, it's, there's a lot of erosion downstream and it's, and it's carved a, you know, quite a bit of a large channel that eventually makes its way down to the lake. And so what we're proposing to do is utilize the upper part of the channel really mostly just adjacent to the track, to the west of the track. And basically restore that channel, but at the same time provide, you know, water quality enhancement through sand filtration and also. Restoring with, with native wetland seeding, stabilizing the banks, which are in some places eroded. And also just providing a lot of flow detention through basically restoring an outlet control with the, at the lower end of the structure is a large kind of a ponded area where there's a lot of debris that's accumulated over the years, a lot of brush and other trash and debris. And we're going to formalize an outlet control there. And then in the future, in the future, there'll be better flow control from the system. So it's kind of what you would envision to be a step pool. So it kind of flows from one, one pool to the next and that flows, you know, it follows kind of the natural grade down. And there's sand beds, you know, at each step, there's a, there's a sand bed and then the sand bed has some natural, you know, woody vegetations going to be left in there for some additional kind of check dam structures. So that's kind of the general summary of the, of the stormwater system. And I'm happy to kind of go into more detail in terms of the permitting or anything you would like to know specifically. Scott, we have this plan under stormwater access that's posted online. Brian, can you fish that up? Yep. Give me one moment here. I think I have. Okay. See 2.2 is the plan. Brian, do you have the most recent one that shows the, the main entrance road, the main entrance road or path? Yes. I actually see. I have the most recent C 2.0. Is that the. It's C 2.2. If you want to see the screen, I can share. Yeah, I'll have to do that. I don't appear to have that one. Here we go. Okay. So that's the one you were referencing, Joe. With the access road. Yeah. The new outfall. Yeah. Right. So I. I can, I can just describe what you're looking at here on the, you can just see the basically the edge of the track to the, yeah, right. Where, where the cursor is there. There's the track. So we're looking just to the west or left of the track. And, you know, that's where currently where the outfall that I was describing is located where all the pipes come together currently for all the drainage from the school. And there's, there's a large concrete structure there. So there's going to be a four bay structure. And then from the four bay, the water goes to the south and it goes through these series of bays. You can see the bays and those bays are separated by these large gabion check dams. And that's kind of what controls the grades and the water kind of spills from one to the next to the next. And then finally, right where the cursor is now. It's kind of the larger pool at the end. And so that's going to be controlled by a pipe, which goes under the kind of the land bridge, which is really right in the park. There's a, there's an outlet structure there that would be, you know, controlling the water kind of in that final bay. And that would all be also cleaned up. And that's, that's the only way to keep that water away from the water. And that's the only way to keep that water away from the water. Because currently right now, as I was mentioned, there's a lot, there's a ton of debris and then brush and trash and stuff that's accumulated in that hole right there. Okay. Well, I mean, it's pretty robust stormwater system. The staff notes. Sort of. I think address maintenance on this. How do you maintain that system? So the four bay would be the place where all the solids would be removed. You know, the main maintenance point of the system would be cleaning, making sure that the four bay is clean, clean, kept clean as sediment and other debris and stuff would accumulate. And then as, as any debris would accumulate on this, on the sand beds themselves, I mean, they would be scraped, you know, material would accumulate on the surface. It would be removed. You know, periodically sand may need to be reintroduced, but that wouldn't be like a, an every year kind of a thing that would just be if it, if it started to, all the vegetation would start to take hold and. Find material would accumulate on there. It could be scraped off and then sand could be reintroduced. So, I mean, that would be the main, those would be the main maintenance items. I guess at the end where the outlet structure would be also, you know, as material would accumulate around that, it would have to be removed and kept clean. So there's nothing's, nothing really out of the ordinary in terms of the maintenance. You know, compared to other similar types of stormwater systems. Okay. Okay. Anybody else on the board have questions for the applicant. The, there's a request for a waiver on the number of bike parking spaces to be provided with ordinance. As in 480 and 136 have been proposed. Does the applicant have any sense of how many spaces are used to be provided? I don't know, given that this, you know, not right now, but formerly at the high school, how many of it needed? Yeah, yeah, we do. Maybe Jen could speak to that. VHB did do a parking demand. A bike parking demand study at the existing high school. Which. Indicated, you know. Kind of low usage. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know how our. Estimated student capacity at this new school. I think we would only need like 48. Like parking spaces, but we're proposing 136. I believe it is. But Jen, do you want to talk a little bit about the study you did? I don't have too much more to add to that. We did collect data on a number of days at the existing facility and noted, but I don't know if there's really anywhere around the facility. Locked to anything. Just assuming that it might be, you know, currently to store student demand. And as was already presented, found that that demand is significantly below. It was, you know, about a quarter of what, you know, what was being, what we're currently proposing for bike accommodation on proposed site. The results of that pike parking bicycle parking demand study is very similar to what we're talking about. We're talking about, you know, a lot of what we're talking about in the report. There is a comparison there of what the. Ordinance requires what lead recommendations are. What the bicycle parking demand study produced. And what the applicant is offering. Thanks. In a very nice little package. Is there a space next to the current parking. That needs to be, you know, to build more or to put in more. If that need should, should arise. That's something you could address. Yes, Brian. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. I was, I was just kind of, I wasn't sure if you were generally going to jump in, but there's, there's plenty of space there. Part of what we were thinking is we don't want to just add concrete and bike hoops if they're not going to get used, but we can. Those spaces could be expanded. Yeah. I think the lead standard was the appropriate level of parking in this situation, having the three major entrances. And going for lead certification. So. That's what we're going for. Okay. Anybody else on the board. Sorry, maybe just one more. I was hoping you could speak a little bit about the. The multi use. The fact that other people from the community might be coming in. There might be. Events in the evening and security and. Potential parking. Issues. I don't know if you've. Have a. Specific security plan or. Or something like that. I can jump in, Brian, if you want. Essentially, you know, high school is a community building and should be open and used by the community. And so we will have a security plan. There are security policies in place by the school district, but to reinforce that through the architecture, there'll be an audio visual system and a camera system. On all of the entry points and within the school. There'll also be zones within the school that can be secured and locked so that. Partial access to certain pieces of the school. Can be quadrant off. We've located all the entries with handicap accessibility. There are three elevators within the building carefully placed. Along the length of the school for full access to all levels and all spaces. And we also have monitoring points. That can be occupied either during hours or off hours. I would also add, you know, and I think there is a chart in the, in the report that talks about the. You know, peak capacity during sports events and other events. And there was a discussion and decision at the district level to. To try to support the goals of not over providing parking. And a recognition that in some cases that might require the district to do other. Arrangements with neighbors and shuttles and that sort of thing. Yeah. And certainly we're trying to limit the expense of, you know, impervious surface parking. As much as we can in general. Okay. Is there anyone else in the, is there anybody in the audience that wants to speak on this application? Raise your hand. Sharon busher. Sharon. I saw the hand go up. Okay. Sharon, did I swear you in? No, you did not. Okay. Can you raise your right hand? I will. You swear to tell the truth and that the testimony will give in this matter is true and correct under the pains and penalties of perjury. I do. All right. Floors yours. Thank you. So, I think Leo just touched on some of what I wanted to. Just acknowledge. It had to do with when. When I was in high school, when I was in high school, when I was in high school, when this process began, and it was before the planning commission for zoning. And at that time, the high school was in two zones. Which would have allowed for greater numbers of cars or a greater number of surface parking. And I'm not like, I don't want to cover the. The world with concrete and parking lots, but. I'm not like that. I'm not like that. I'm not like that. I'm not in the community, but my children did. And they went to BHS. And even after they graduated, I've gone to track events that have been regional. And I was concerned. There was a reduction as a result of that discussion. Rather than two zones, it was one zone. And for TDM reasons. And I kept, I kept. Being concerned about those events. And I know that those don't happen all that frequently, but I'm not sure it's realistic to think people that are coming from other parts of the state are going to use some neighbors. Driveway. And or, or how you're going to shuttle people. I mean, I live on East Avenue. I live on East Avenue. I live on East Avenue. And I have the. Lake monsters behind my house. And there is parking from Godderson to here, East Avenue. It's very slick. It works really well. But I don't know. I mean, that's really a close distance. And people could, if they wanted to leave early, they could walk back to their car. They wouldn't be dependent on a shuttle bus. And I think we're going to have to be very aware of that. And I think that's one thing that's really important. And I think that's one thing I did out. What I was told during the process was that the schools could always ask for a waiver. Not to reduce the number of spaces, but to ask for more spaces. And I've never heard that stated. I think that. They're environmentally aware and very conscientious. And I applaud them for that. to go through those pavers. And so you're not creating that solid surface. And I just wondered if the school now felt that their plan was reasonable. And I would like to know if they are going to not make that request for a waiver. And if they don't do it at this point, then I don't know. I imagine they could come back and ask one, but I'm not really sure about that. And so I just wanted to get that on the record that I do have some concerns about the number of spaces, not on a daily basis. Most of the time they know their business far better than I, but it has to do with those events that occur. And I think BHS has been a magnet for a lot of different things to occur there and community events. And I want to be able to accommodate that reasonably and not short us in that process. I would like to think, like so many other people, everything seems to, we seem to be moving forward with reducing parking, but we don't really have a really good, as we all know, public transportation system. We just don't have it. And so it seems like we are, and we're trying to force it, but that's not happening very effectively. So I'm concerned about this and needed to raise that with the DRB at this time. Thank you. Okay, appreciate that. I think you raised an interesting point about the overall traffic impact from high school events. Scott, do you have your hand up? I do, AJ. Okay, by all means. Just really quick. Conservation Board acted last night and I see Mary posted the minutes in the packet. I just thought I'd mentioned their recommendation. Mary mentioned the landscaping, but the other two conditions go hand in hand as to stormwater. And that is consider educational opportunities focused on the stormwater system and funding through green schools and integrate monitoring capabilities into the stormwater outfall. That really centers on, there's an opportunity here for educational environmental benefit here being on the BHS campus. So that was their recommendation. Okay, all right. Does the applicant want to address Sharon's commentary? Sure, I'll start. And if anybody, any other team members have anything to add, please do. But we have felt all along that the 362 spaces that we're proposing will be adequate to serve daily demand. And we've talked about these handful of events that do occur throughout the year where there might be more parking demand than the space is provided. But it really is only a handful of events. And we did discuss the possibility of maybe constructing an overflow parking area somewhere on the site that would basically consist of a grassed over reinforced area. And we came to the conclusion that we didn't think that it was really necessary and that it was worth the expense to construct something like that and also have to request a waiver to exceed the parking max. And we really just came down to the conclusion that we feel that we can, or the district feels that it can adequately handle those large events through some kind of a parking management plan, or maybe we park people down at the camp around or at the beach, or maybe some institutional uses further down North Avenue or something and use shuttles to manage it that way. So we're not planning to request a waiver for more parking than what is being proposed or what is allowed. Okay. Well, if no one else has any questions, I suggest that we close the public hearing and we'll deliberate on this. Actually, before you close it, can I say one more thing? Okay. Okay, yeah. So I just wanted to, we wanted to call out a couple of the recommended conditions in the staff report and just ask that you consider revising those. And we've already talked about both of them. The first one was the conservation boards recommendation that we include only non-native species. And we agree with and support Scott's recommendation to revise that to basically require the applicant to work with the city arborist to come up with a plan that meets his approval, the park department's approval and then requires his approval before we start construction. So we just wanted to go on record saying we do support that revision. And then the other one was just in regards to the TDM requirement that we purchase car share memberships, we were gonna ask if there's any way you could be flexible and not require that, we would certainly support that, but I understand what Scott is saying and I'll let you decide if you can do that or not. Okay, appreciate that. Thanks, Joe. So with that, I'll close the public hearing. Thank you all for your presentation. The last item on our agenda for the evening, which I just lost is ZP 22416, 323, 325 College Street. Do I have the applicants for that? Yeah, you do. I'll just clean up from the last item. AJ, just give me a second. Yeah, yeah. I didn't have to throw Brian out, Hila. All right. Okay, Bruce. Bruce, you can talk to us. Dan, I think is involved. Let me know if anything else should weigh in. I think it's just us. This is Bruce. Good evening, Bruce and Dan, how are you both? Great, how are you? Good. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear the testimony you give tonight will be true and correct under the pains and penalties of perjury? I do. Okay, great. So, you know, we have the staff comments. We see the project. I guess I should tell the record that I work down the street. So I'm well aware of the block. Why don't you walk us through your project briefly? Bruce, you want me to do that? Yeah, Dan, why don't you go ahead? You sure your baby? All right. This is Dan Goldsmith, the project architect for this proposal. And what is being considered here is an addition to an addition. So on the site, as can be seen in the elevations and the renderings that we submitted is the 1832 Chauncey Goodrich Luther Hager House at 325 College, a subsequent addition to the west of that from 2010, 325, 323 College. And what we're discussing tonight is a addition to the north of the 2010 piece along the street front. So three pieces, a total of 17 units in a lot vehicle and bicycle lot. So regarding the design of this proposed addition, it went through multiple rounds of the DRB, generated a robust discussion. And the majority of that was around the relationship between this four-story piece that we're proposing and the adjacent 1832 historic structure. As a result, the fourth story, the top story of what we're proposing was set back so that the facade of that fourth story is in line with the historic structure. As well, the piece we're proposing has brick cladding, similar brick, similar color to the historic piece. It has windows with gridded windows with mountains, similar black color to the historic piece. And both the piece we're proposing and the historic building have entry elements along their street side features, along their street side facades. We also wanted to tie the four-story piece that we're proposing to the existing addition. So they have a similar cornice detail. The detail along the top of the building wraps from the 2010 piece to what we're proposing. The top floor material is white clabbered similar to the addition that it's being attached to, similar color, similar trim details, the corners around the windows. And the bottom floor of what we're proposing is clad in stone similar to the previous addition and also similar to the 1832 piece which has a stone foundation. So the ultimate goal of what we're doing is to tie this whole assembly together, make them speak to each other, make them speak to the neighborhood, to the context, to the historic district. So that's the quick presentation and we could certainly address any issues the board has. Okay, I actually don't have a lot of questions. I'm curious if the board has any, particularly the architecture folks on this one. No, nobody. It's really about the issue of the original structure and the prominence and whether the new structure encroaches on that. Do you have any thoughts about that, Dan? I do, Bruce, do you want me to address this or you? Yeah, I can talk a little about it and maybe you can too, Dan. You know, we thought hard about the design standards at 6.2.1, you know, at age and then, which was, I think, adopted maybe about seven or maybe 15 years ago or so, but after the historic standards. And it requires that the any additions reinforce the existing street edge. So there's substantial sort of pulling toggles or some many places in the ordinance between them. I'd also say that if you drive by Camry and Rise, I think this board has sort of come into, come to grips with those two elements of the ordinance and the rise to the south of it is boldly forward at the street and the connecting orphanage structure. They're connected and it, and I could share a screen and show you a picture of that. And from one side, you can, you can't really see the orphanage at all. And that's not the case here. You can somewhat see ours. And as you can see from our rendering, happy to share that picture to show you that. But I think I don't, I think we meet the standards of 5.4.8 and also the 6.2.1, which requires that street edge to be consistent with neighboring properties. I have a question. I don't know what's going on with the website, Scott, but I'm having a lot of trouble. Yeah, me too. Time and time again. Different things on the website right now. So I can't really open the floor plans. So you're getting the 401 error as well before. Agenda on different ones for this. Yeah, I've been having a hard time. Yeah. Yeah. My question is, I'm trying to understand the circulation, the entrance into the units in this building, how one gets into them. I apologize. There may be in the floor plan section, but I can't access right now. Sure. To answer you. You want me to take it or you Bruce? Go ahead. Okay. So as I said, this is attached to the front of the previous edition. And between the previous edition. And the new piece is basically a circulation spine. So you, you, the main entry is along the driveway to the side. And there's a stairway there. And it accesses each of the four apartments. Which are located closer to the street front. Is that the proposed accessible entrance? Is that what you're referring to? That is correct. And does that. If you want to get to that from the sidewalk of the street, how do you walk down the driveway? That is correct. That is correct. That is correct. It seems disappointing not to have a pedestrian connection to your entrance from the sidewalk. Well, it's, it's a. A function of the space that we had. What is the front, the door that's on the front of the building. It looks like a very nice entrance. What does that connect to? The ground floor apartment. Just, and that's the main entrance for that one unit. The. The main entrance. We have a lot from the street along the driveway. For the lot coverage. We're not anywhere near a lot coverage. It's a three quarter acre. Yeah. Anybody else. Feel free. Anybody in the audience here to speak on this one. I don't see anybody's guy. I don't see anyone. All right. Well, with that, I'll close the public hearing on this one. Thank you. That read. That wraps up our agenda for the evening. And we are adjourned. So. I bruised by Dan. Thank you. Thank you.