 development review board of Burlington for August 2nd. And I'm assuming there's people here that I'll just say that we take up items that they are on in the agenda. And when we do call each item, we ask the people who are going to speak, either participants or public demos or comments, Scott will admit them to the meeting to participate. And we will swear people in as necessary. I will say on the agenda that three items have requests for deferral. And if people are here for 362 South Union, 8688 North Winooski, or 136 Sunset Cliff, we're not planning on discussing those tonight. So you may not want to stick around for that. Communications, everything is posted online, right Scott? Minutes, I may have one or two minutes, I have to sign, I'll double check that. So it brings us to our consent agenda, which is 7779 Pine Street is the applicant here for that. Uh, yep. Great. And Chris, it could also be Chris should join as well from GBA. Grace, are you with Nettie? I am with Nettie. So I'm representing Nettie. And I see Chris is here too. So this is on recommended for consent. So I'm assuming you've seen the staff's report and recommendations. Is that correct, Grace? Yes, I have. And, you know, I, I'm not sure. Do you, do the members here feel familiar? Do you, are you familiar with kind of our ask initially? And this is, this is recommended for consent, which is, unless somebody objects to it, we're going to approve it. Good. So, sorry, Brad, I wasn't sure. I wasn't sure if you wanted me to say something. No, you could, I mean, we've got a short meeting. So you, if you have a poll, we want to read or something like that, I guess we can go for it. But right now I'll stick with the agenda item. Definitely. I'm good. Okay. So does that be on the board object to treating this as a consent item? I don't see anybody. And Scott, is there anybody in the public who wanted to comment on this? You'd like to comment on the 79 Pine Street application. Raise your hand, please. I guess not. Jay raised it hand and lowered it. So we'll take that as a no. Okay. So, what's somebody like? All right. So his hand is up again now, Brad. So we'll take that as a yes. Okay. Can we find out who that person is? Jay White. Did you want to speak on the 77 79 Pine Street on the request for changing the compliance for their mechanical system screening? I just want to confirm that as a neighbor, we support what Nettie wants to do. Okay. Good. Okay. We got that letter. Yeah. I'm sure that they'll be happy for that. Great. Thank you. So I'll make a motion around a motion. I'll make a motion. Okay. On Zp 22 398 77 79 Pine Street, I move that we approve the application adopt staff findings and recommendations. Seconds, Jeff. Any discussion? All in favor? I'm accused. Okay. So thank you. Thank you. And you're approved for your alternate. Thank you all so much for your time. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. There was a second item also under consent that has a request for deferral. Is that to a date? Certainly, Scott. I don't have that right. This was my project, Mr. Chair. The matter has been resolved outside of zoning. So the application now will be archived. So we have no action we need to take. You have no action you need to take. Thank you. Okay. Then the next item that we're not going here is 8688 North Winooski. And that also, I don't know if she opened it up. Was that also a request for deferral? That is correct. And do we need to answer it? We're not sure. They need to pay their application fees before we bring it forward. So they don't have a complete application right now? Correct. Yeah. So we're not under the time clock? If the application. Well, I guess we deemed it complete. And then we went through DAB. And I saw that they didn't pay, follow-up application that expired. So they reapplied. They haven't paid the new fees for the new application. But they also have violation fees pending from last year that are tagged on to this application. So they're questioning the violation fees. But anyways, it's pending payment. So it's a complete application. I don't know if that would have to fit within the six months time. Yeah, I think it does. Does the applicant is the applicant here? I don't think so. I told them that they, but we're just going to defer it because of the lack of payment for the application. So it sounds like we would not defer to a date certain if that's. Yeah, uncertain. So I guess I'm going to do clocks keep ticking on this one? Or is this the clock? Yeah, the six month clock will tick because it was deemed a complete application a few weeks ago. So it's six months, but we can get you into a public hearing with DRB when they when they're ready. So we want to make a motion to defer this to not a date certain. I'll move. Second on that, Brooks. Any discussion? All in favor? Okay, unanimous. Thank you. We also have 136 sunset cliff. That was also deferral. I guess the conservation board wants to do a site visit before it gets referred to the DRB. And had questions. It's not a public hearing, so it doesn't need to be recessed to a date certain, but conservation boards aiming for first week in September. So I think this would probably be the second meeting in September. Okay. And this September 12th meeting is the conservation board meeting. Yes. And that's and that's mandatory, right? We have to go through the conservation board before we can't we couldn't hear it till they resolved it or till they heard it. Is that right, Scott? You shouldn't hear it. Yeah. And the applicants again, okay with us. I got to see a hand up. Is that the applicants okay with us doing this? Well, let's see Bill. Let's see if that's Bill DeVos. Hello. Is this Bill DeVos or? This is Bill. Okay. Great. So I suggested that we have a site visit second week or the first week of September. I'm wondering if that site visit goes well, which I suspect it will. If we can, will we need to meet with you again after that or can we kind of come to some resolution at this stage? Well, the conservation board makes a recommendation to the Bell and Ryu board. So it'd be cart before the horse if DRP acted on this without the conservation board waiting in. Right. Okay. I just read the little excerpt I was sent and it seemed like it was seemed to have a favorable outlook. And so I was wondering if we need to have another, wait for another meeting after the September 1st meeting. Not that I'm in a rush, I just, but Tom LeBuff asked me to, to mention that. Okay. Well, we're, we want to have the conservation board recommending recommendation before we take our next step. So we'll wait for that. I mean, I will note this was listed for consent approval. So assuming a conservation board's okay with it, it should be relatively quick at our next meeting. Great. Okay. I appreciate it. Thank you so much. We have to recess it to a date certain. No, it's not a public hearing, but we will put it on the second September meeting. We don't need any action on this. Uh, your action would be to defer period. Well, our motion to defer this item. So moved. Jeff. Second. Chase. Discussion. All in favor. closed. Okay. Well, that, then we have one other item of other business. And this is a request for reconsideration of our decision to grant an appeal for the administrative denial on 203 South Cove road. And I think maybe we all remember what that was that we felt that the, the set front yard setback which is only going on. It's tries to create following the neighborhood patterns. I think our view was that it ended up. And as you know, I'm accused on this. You're recused on this. Okay. Dave, wasn't this on the last meeting agenda too, by the way? Yeah. And it was deferred to this meeting along with the annual reorg. Yeah, that's what I thought. All right. So I say Stan Weinberg is here and he has his hand up, but we're not really actually doing anything with this item other than the request for reconsideration. We first have to decide if we are reconsidering and then we would have set a time to take evidence. Is that right, Scott? Yeah. Right. So it's a two step process for reconsideration. One is you're right. Board needs to decide whether or not you want to reconsider it or entertain reconsideration. And the second step is if you do decide to reconsider it, then we would schedule a hearing on the merits and get into the weeds. So I just, I have a brief comment just to frame this to the board if I may. Okay. So I'll start out by pointing out acknowledgement. I'm just going to jump in procedurally. I don't think you can let the requesting party speak and not the other parties. If it's just the board to consider it, then the board has to just consider it. Well, typically the request for reconsideration, the requester says why without getting into the weeds of the merits. But I'll leave it to you, right? Especially because this is an appeal of administrative action. And I think maybe we're all sort of aware of what the issue was with this thing that we thought that we could make a different interpretation of the zoning ordinance relative to this item. And there's no doubt that we went a little over our skis on this one, maybe, but Dom and also I think we had a conversation about it. So how do people feel about this one? Whether it's something we want to revisit? I would not like to revisit it. I feel like the process happened as it should and having, ideally, you know, if the scenario like this came up again, if there were additional evidence, I would expect staff to have it from the start. I don't know. It feels odd to have the back and forth on overturning the appeal. It feels like that's what our role should be. And going back on the overturning, it seems very convoluted. I agree. I agree with that. I think we talked about it. We made our decision. I'd like to move forward. I also agree that just for the sake of process that we should move forward, it's interesting to me, though, that at the last meeting, there was a request to reconsider, and we did take it up. I believe I understand why we took that one up. And some of this, I agree, is a case-by-case basis. I lean towards not reconsidering, even though I voted against this, but I also want to seek some consistency, I think, and I just think that we should, amongst ourselves, know when we're going to reconsider and when we're not going to. I think at the last meeting, we just postponed this decision. So that folks who are talking about. Yeah, it was a different issue, Chase, that we. Yeah. Something like, wasn't it like a terrorist? That was not an appeal, though. That was our decision on the initial application. So I do think that is different than what we're talking about here, Leo, if that makes you feel more comfortable. Any thoughts, Jeff? Well, I was not here for the decision on the underlying case, so I don't think I'm going to participate in the decision on whether to reconsider, but I guess just as a policy matter, I think those considerations are always going to be pretty fact-specific, so it's hard to have sort of a standard rule to say, yes, we reconsider in these circumstances and no in those. So we have a request, I guess, take a vote on whether we grant the request for reconsideration. Union motion. Yep. I move that we deny the request for reconsideration on CAP-22-2203 South Overhead. I'll second that. Any discussion? Paul, in favor? I'm really sorry. I was muted. I just want to say one thing, and that is that I'm pretty sure, but I just want to confirm that we all agree that the issues raised in the request for reconsideration, those I believe were all things that we considered at the initial meeting, right? And I just want to agree on that. You're referring to the memo that we had from staff? Okay. Yeah, it was decided on a pretty narrow basis, as we did, and I think that's the issue of the staff, discreet with the sun. So, motion second. And I'm recusing myself from the vote. All in favor of denying the request for reconsideration. And it's five to one, one abstention. Okay. Good. So, that is, AJ, you're back. Yeah, I'm here. Okay. So, we now have our annual organizational meeting, political buttons and banners and slogans, right? So, we have to elect a board chair, vice chair, ordinance committee members, and long range planning committee. I've enjoyed being, I guess I will start with a chair. I would say I've enjoyed being chair for a number of years, and I think I'm now ready to not be chair. So, I'd like somebody else to be nominated for this position. So, do we have any nominations for the chair? I would nominate AJ LaRosa to chair the Development Review Board. I'll second that. Any other nominations? I think I can accept the nomination. Okay. Sure. Thanks. Not nominating myself, but sure, I'll do it. Okay. Are you going to vote for yourself? Yeah, but I, yeah, we have to vote you. All right. Okay. How about all in favor of AJ becoming chair with your every, okay, unanimous. Congratulations, AJ. Great. Thanks. You want to start now? So, it's your meeting. Okay. We need a vice chair. I'd like to nominate somebody. I think Caitlyn would be the vice chair. I'll second that. All those in favor? Also unanimous. Caitlyn, great. All right, Caitlyn. Would you like to know when I'm not here? Our next meeting. No. So, we need long range planning ordinance committee. Do we need something else, Scott? That's it. I, and there's, there's wording about the clerk, but, you know, the clerk is the zoning tech who is. Who's on the ordinance committee currently? Right now we have two, but that's going to slim down to one. So, you need to follow up between the two. Leo, would you like to continue to serve on the ordinance committee? I would. Great. I'm nominated about Airbnb. So, good luck with that. No, I'd nominate Leo. I would nominate. Great. I'll second that. Caitlyn, would you still be interested? And that's it. Well, this is about like, if, as, are those other seats open, if you are a chair, vice chair, we're trying to keep it spread out. It doesn't matter. I don't think there's a rule one way or the other. I'm fine with, if you'd like to do both, that's great. By all means. The only question I had is, who's on the long range planning? Is that a new? No, that's all. Do we have a long range planner? A long range planning committee meet as needed. I don't think it's met in the past year or so. I don't remember who's the rep. And it's kind of telling you if the individual doesn't remember. I'll be happy to be on that one. I'm serious. I wouldn't be. If they ever do meet, I'd show up. That's an experience to share with them. So, so nominated. So now, seconded. All in favor of putting Brad on the long range planning committee. That's why you got on the ice. That was easy, Brad. So ordinance committee, do we only need one or can we have two? We only need one. We needed two because we didn't have a design advisory board rep, but they have since selected a rep. So we're down to one for DRP. And we have two people that are currently on it. That's right. And Leo is trying to get off it. Sounds what it looks like. If you don't, I like it. I mean, it also barely meets. So. So, okay, let's do it. Well, we can do it two ways. You two can decide how you want to do it or we can just vote and find out which one of you we like better. Out. Caitlyn's going to win that one. You know, you consolidate power in the hands of somebody. It's trouble. There'll be, there'll be future years. One of you take it this year, Caitlyn, and then we can decide next year. Okay. Leo gives up his spot. I'll nominate Caitlyn and also serve on the ordinance committee. I'll second that. All in favor. All right. That's it, Scott. That's tonight. Leo, we'd all lose. We'd all lose to Caitlyn in a popularity contest. So we're done, Scott. That's our team. Mary, we're done. Mary, I said hello to you on, you were walking right by the pool place by Burton and I said hello and you just kept walking right by me. We have issues. Wasn't me. It was definitely you. Wasn't me. It's definitely you. Well, now the challenge here is we've had meetings as short as 17 minutes. So there, there you go, new chair. Just keep putting it on the consent agenda. I can beat that. We can beat that. All right. I'm talking two weeks back. And thank you for your service, Brad. Yeah. Right. Should we get you something like? No. I don't know. Can we get him something? If your decision is chair, AJ. All right. We'll look at our, we'll look at our budget and see what we can fit in there. That's right. Two liter bottle of soda from City Mart. No, not City Market from Shaw's. Okay. See you. I look forward to it. All right. Bye. Bye.