 Williston Development Review Board for Tuesday, June 22, 2021. I'm gonna call the meeting to order at 7.04. First order of business is the public forum. This is an opportunity for anyone in the audience to make a public comment on any topics that are not on tonight's agenda. Is there anyone out in the audience on Zoom or present here in the building who would like to comment on something that is not on the agenda? It looks like Paul Christensen joined from the waiting room. If you're attending on Zoom and you'd like to make a comment, you can use the raise hand button on your toolbar or comment in the chat. For the past 15 months, there's been a statement read by the chair now that we are back in session, but in the kind of a modified session, is there a modified statement that needs to be read? I know we don't, not right now. I don't think so. Secretary of State says we can go back to in-person meetings, but now that there's a Zoom component, there's still a kind of informational out there that probably needs to be presented. So something to think about. Right, yeah, I guess for tonight, what we can say is that because board members can participate live during the meeting virtual and in-person that they can vote and hear testimony and vote and that if for some reason there is a technical difficulty that the meeting would get continued for the next meeting, July 13th. And we can write up a statement for Pete for the next meeting. Great. Okay, so no one out there for the public forum, correct? So far I'm seeing no raised hands and no chats. Okay. Okay, then we'll go directly into the public hearing. There's three items tonight. The first of which is Pizzagalli properties, LLC. Requests a discretionary permit to construct a sidewalk in front of a building to access parking lots at 188 Harvest Lane. Mr. Bouchard, welcome. If you would please state your name and address for the record please. Robert Bouchard, Pizzagalli properties. 462 Shelburne Road is where we reside. The property under consideration is 188 Harvest Lane. Thank you. Staff goes first. All right, I am sharing the staff report. This is a request for a discretionary permit to construct a sidewalk along the front northern facade of the existing office building at 188 Harvest Lane. A discretionary permit is required for this project because more than 1,000 square feet of site work is taking place and more than eight new luminaries are proposed. Tonight we are recommending that the DRB take testimony in close and approve this application with findings, conclusions and conditions as drafted. Project history created in 1987. This building was developed in the early 90s and not much has changed since then. This project was not subject to conservation commission or historic advisory committee review. Public works comments are included. They mostly pertain to how the sidewalk is constructed and it's with fire did not have comments and neither did police. No public comment letters were received at the time of mail out or to date. Everything that we're proposing in this application is a standard condition of approval. The parking lot, the sidewalks will connect the main entrance to the employee parking lots. The one condition that is noted is that the short-term bicycle parking be in compliance with 14.8.3 and I've been working with Bob Bouchard on that for final plans. No changes to the landscape buffers or street trees are proposed. The decorative landscaping in front of the building will be retained and outdoor lighting of luminary ballards along the sidewalk are being added. What follows is findings, conclusions as proposed by staff. Thank you. Okay, thank you, Emily. Bob, have you reviewed the proposed conditions of approval? I have. Do you have any that you have concern with? Only all the item five. No, I'm sorry. No, I don't. There's a comment that's made in the staff notes with regards to outdoor lighting that implies that they felt that our lighting plan was an error and I wanted to state the record that it's not. Oh, okay. Okay. Yeah, they were showing a single point of illumination as 12-foot candles. All the other illumination levels were between one and seven-foot candles. The DRB can approve this higher level of illumination along a pedestrian way. So I wasn't sure if it's an error or it is true and that's fine, this can be approved as a brighter point of illumination for a pedestrian way. So are you saying that 12 lumines is an error on the plan? No, it is not an error in the plan. Okay. It's correct. It's correct. Okay. Yeah, they're three-foot tall bollards and I guess sometimes maybe they get a little bright right where they are. Okay. Okay, I just wanted to understand. Okay. Yeah, on the plan, that data point is graphically under the bollard. The bollard? Mm-hmm. Okay. Thank you. Bob, anything, any other comments? No, all the conditions are fine. We'll go to five feet wide with a sidewalk, not a problem. The bike rack, Emily, not a problem. Does the board have a desire to have the bike racks out front, out back? The bike racks, what we have right now is undercover and the new ones will be undercover. We're just gonna put the ones in that were specified. Do you have a, let me ask that question. Do you have a specific bike rack that the town has specified? This is what Emily had sent to me, which is just the reverse who? The blind lock says, should be visible from principal entrance, maybe short-term bicycle parking may serve buildings with multiple entrances. So I think where it's near the building entrance, whether that's the front one, probably the most sense or wherever it is currently is probably approvable as well. Okay, again, does the town have a spec that would like, for example, if I may present this, we use these a lot. Yeah, those would work as well. Mm-hmm. Okay, yep. Bob, would you mind leaving that with staff and we'll put that in the minutes? Thank you. Thank you, just for the record, thank you. And quantity? Quantity, how many do you want? We can follow up with that in final plans. It's based on the number of parking spaces. Okay. We had the bike rack there now. I know it does not meet current town specifications. It does not get a lot of use. Just, you know, there's not a lot of obviously, so the public that come to this facility, very intensive in terms of the security element at this property. That's all, just putting that out there. But I know we have conditions that we need to meet. Yeah, well, it'd be both for people visiting and also workers. I understand. Yeah. Bob, could you describe or let me inform me where that existing bike rack is? Yeah, it's in the rear entrance currently. That on our plans. The rear entrance. Thank you. At the back of the building? Right. Yeah, it's under cover. It's under that little port for share. The TRB may reduce the number of bicycle parking requirements where the location and or nature of the proposed development makes the use of bicycles highly unlikely. So I think there's a lot of vehicle parking. So the number of bicycle spaces that's required might be a little bit higher. So maybe one or two of those racks would be sufficient as opposed to like five or six. So that's something that we can work out at final plan. Okay. Members of the DRP, any questions? This side won't be open to the general public, right? Just for your employees. No, it's available to the public. General public. Yeah, but there's visitor parking out front. So I don't really see them walking from the visitor parking across grass to the sidewalk. They walk right into the front entrance. So this is, it's, you know, primarily there for employees. Scott, anything? Also. Steve or Paul, any questions? Nothing from Steve. I'm good too. Okay. Last call for questions. Bob, any final thoughts? Nope. No raised hands from the audience. Yeah, that was my next question. Yeah, the only question I guess I had was, does this require an additional review or do I have all I need? We'll follow up its administrative steps after this where you file things to our office and staff will prove them. Great. Yeah, so what will happen is we'll have a deliberative session after the public hearing and we will, I'm gonna close this hearing. So that means we're gonna make a decision on this tonight and you can check with staff in the morning. Final decision. Final decision. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. We're gonna close DP 21-14 at 7.15. Thank you, Bob, for coming. Yep, thank you all very much. Okay, next up, DP 21-15, Sign Pro Inc. Who is present from the applicant? That's Tracy. Tracy. Hello. Hi, Tracy. Tracy, would you please state your name and your address for the record, please? Certainly. Tracy Becker representing Sign Pro Inc. 60 Westfield Drive, Plantsville, Connecticut, 06489. Welcome. Thank you. Staff goes first. All right, this is a request for a master sign plan at a single tenant industrial building located at 71 Leroy Road. Tonight, we're recommending that you take testimony and close and approve this decision with findings, conclusions, and conditions as drafted. Fire Department did not have any comments. No comment letters were received at the time of mail-out. And I think I'm getting a little bit of feedback, Tracy, so I'm gonna mute you for the moment. Overall, this master sign plan complies as proposed. They are proposing a wall sign that's larger than 24 square feet, which requires a special finding and standard findings are shown below. The overall street-facing building elevation is 3,600 square feet. The maximum allowed sign area is 288 square feet, and they are proposing just below that at 260.3 square feet. What follows are findings, conclusions, and conditions, which includes the signage table, and we're recommending approval. Thank you. Okay, thank you, Emily. Tracy, have you reviewed the proposed conditions of approval? I have, and I don't believe we have any problems with them. I don't believe there's a free-state thing, so I don't think any of those conditions apply. So I think we are good. Okay, do you have anything to supplement to Emily's staff report? I just wanted to mention that all of the signs we are proposing are non-illuminated, so they should just fade away in the evening, so that won't be a problem. I believe overall we are proposing fewer signs in a smaller overall area than what was currently on the building or Harvey Building products. So I thank you very much for hearing our application this evening, and if you have any questions, I would be happy to answer. Great, thank you. DRB members, any questions for the applicant? Okay. So the one condition that Tracy brought up was that a freestanding sign must be landscaped at the base. I calculated this banner sign on the street as a freestanding sign. That's up to the DRB. That should be considered a freestanding sign and landscaped or not. Okay. Tracy, do you have a position on this? Would you have any angst if we had considered this a freestanding sign and you had to do some landscaping around the base? Actually, there are a couple of other people on the Zoom tonight that might be better than I can. So Matt Lehmann and Carl Ulfdrag are here from PowerPlay. They are actually the sign company manufacturing the signs. Yeah, I'm here, Tracy. Hi, everyone. So good evening. If you would please state your name and your address for the record if you are going to speak please. Carl Ulfdrag, PowerPlay Imaging 705, Johnston Willis Drive, Richmond, Virginia 23236. Matt Lehmann, PowerPlay Imaging 705, Johnston Willis Drive 23236, Richmond, Virginia. Okay. So the topic we are discussing is landscaping around that sign in question. And my question to you was, do you have any concern about doing some landscaping at the base of that sign? I wouldn't think, as long as it's not Augusta National golf course, I think we'll be okay with doing some landscaping around there. We're going for Shinnecock Hills, okay? Much better. I'd prefer Shinnecock. Yeah, I mean, as long as we're clear on what kind of landscaping is required, I don't think the building owner would have an issue with that whatsoever. The only challenge that we've come across on this property is there's, because there really is no traditional monument sign, as their customers drive by this building, that flagpole is really the only thing that they have to get them into the entranceway. That's why we actually moved the building sign over a little bit in between the trees so you can at least see it as you're passing by, but there's no other signage to direct the customers into the parking lot. Staff, so what are the landscaping requirements in a situation like this? Is there quite a bit of discretion? Paranium. Let me pull that up. The base of all permanent freestanding signs shall be landscaped with perennial and or annual plantings. Yeah, there's a lot of discretion. Usually people do a little mulch bed with some low lying annuals or shrubs. Not extensive. This could be a circle with some hostas and that would satisfy that criteria. No problem. This is not Augusta. No, it's not. It's a dog track I play on. That's fine. Municipal golf course. This is a municipal track. One par five. Okay. Any other questions? Any other questions from the board on this master sign plan application? Paul or Steve? No. Okay. Any members of the public that have comments on this application? If you're attending on zoom, you can use the raise hand button on your toolbar or comment in the chat. I'm seeing no raised hands and no chats. Okay. Final call for questions. Okay. Okay. We're going to close DP 21-15. At 723. Thank you very much for coming. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. MP 11-23. This is for the. Isham farm outdoor events at 3515 Oak Hill road. Who is present representing the applicant? Hi, Helen. Would you please state your full name and your address for the applicant? I'm from Houston. I live at 3515 Oak Hill road. Which is the Isham family farm in Wilson, Vermont. Representing the Isham family farm. Thank you. Okay. Staff goes first. Who has this one? This is a request for a reconsideration of the conditions of approval for DP 11-23. The D.R.B. approved on April 13, 2021. Among other things, the approved permit amendment allows outdoor performances to be held adjacent to the banquet facility at Isham family farm. The D.R.B. conditioned the approval such that no amplified sound would be permitted outside the banquet facility and the applicants are requesting a modification to this condition to allow amplified sound outside the facility. The properties located at 3515 Oak Hill road in the agricultural rural residential zoning district. The properties currently developed as an operational farm with retail sales of farm and forest products and a historic farm used as a banquet facility. Staff is recommending approval of this application with recommended conditions as drafted. So the project history is presented and, you know, in 2011, this DP 11-23 permitted the use of the restored barn as a banquet facility and successive amendments have added parking and modifications to parking and access. And then the most recently considered amendment was April 13, 2021, where modifications to parking and access outdoor performances in conjunction with the banquet facility were approved. And this is, so this is really the second time the D.R.B. is reviewing this particular west. So there were no advisory boards reviewed this and no other departments commented on this application. Five comment letters were received at the time of mail out and two additional comment letters from the public were received after mail out. So the D.R.B. is being asked to reconsider the conditions under which outdoor performances associated with the banquet facility could reasonably be allowed. Okay. Hold on a second. It seems like Helen, Helen, are you having a hard time hearing? Only because somebody entered the house and there was a lot of noise. I'm good to go. Okay. I was just wondering if the microphone wasn't close enough. No, it's all good. Thank you for that. Okay. Good. Sorry. So during the, during its previous review of the, of this proposal, the use of the restored barn as a banquet facility could be expanded to include outdoor events near the barn provided these events didn't have amplified sound. The applicants have asked the D.R.B. to reconsider this condition because some of the performances require the use of amplified sound. So the D.R.B. should consider whether this can be permitted in conformance with the bylaws specifically chapters 31 and 18. So as far as the discretionary permit procedures are concerned, requests for reconsideration is not something you often see, but it's permitted under Vermont law. This is considered a request for reconsideration rather than an appeal or an amendment because an appeal of a D.R.B. decision would be submitted to Vermont environmental court. This is not an amendment because the applicant is not asking for anything different from the previous proposal rather that the applicants provided additional information and asking the D.R.B. to reconsider a specific condition of approval. So staff is advising the D.R.B. to focus the discussion on that specific condition of approval being being asked for modification. So permitted uses in the rural residential zoning district. So commercial non-agricultural events are only allowed in a converted historic barn. There's no discussion in the bylaw related to holding outdoor events in association with a converted barn or banquet facility because outdoor events weren't contemplated at the time of this bylaw revision in I think 2011. In your previous review of D.P. 11-23.4, D.R.B. decided that the first Earth summer series could be allowed in conjunction with the banquet facility. The D.R.B. established hours of operation under conditions 17 and 18 and the applicants are not requesting modification to the permitted hours of operation. There are some provisions of Chapter 18 governing noise which this modification or this request for modification has to is dealing with. So basically the applicant is requesting to hold these the first Earth summer series outside the barn. Sound levels are regulated by the Wilson noise control ordinance and enforced by the police. But they're also dealt with under Chapter 18 sort of referring to the noise ordinance. The applicant's original proposal lacked specificity regarding anticipated noise levels. They've submitted additional documentation regarding anticipated sound levels and staff is recommending that that documentation seems sufficient to demonstrate the proposed outdoor amplification can comply with Chapter 18 and the Wilson noise control ordinance. And so I've included a table with the bylaw excerpts and how the applicant has addressed those. So the applicants provided a sound study that's demonstrating that they can, that the anticipated sound levels are going to be in compliance with Chapter 18 and the noise ordinance. The conditions of approval, the findings of fact, conclusions of law and conditions of approval are the same as the previous review. Only a number 17 C and D have been highlighted. And I've not drafted a revised condition, but that's the condition that is being requested that you reconsider and discuss. That's all. Okay. Thank you. Helen, what do you have to add to Melinda's staff report? Recording in progress. I agree with what Melinda said that we are definitely asking for reconsideration for the highlighted areas. That's really what we're asking for is for all of us to take a look at our research that we did in regards to the noise levels and that they comply in terms of the decibels and the timing. And that we take a step back and look at it in terms of whether or not they do fall in with the plans of the noise ordinance, both with time and decibel levels. Is there. Is there a commitment on your part to measure. The decibel levels during an event? Yes. And I really appreciate that question. That's a great question. Yes, we are. And I have taken upon myself. To create a one page document that creates parameters per. Performance that comes to the farm. And the parameters, specifically state the decibel levels that they may not exceed and actually, and also the time of day that they may not exceed beyond. And. I am working with the person that is the big sound person with the Flynn theater and all the events that work at Flynn, such as the touring companies that come to the Flynn stage. And the gentleman that works as their, the Flynn stage sound person. And he also works with people such as Vermont stage, who's coming here and he works on the decibel levels. And I'm working with him on understanding which implement I must purchase to make sure these decibel levels are under the noise ordinance of Williston per event here at the farm. And that. Instrument is stated in the appeal that we. And thank you. Melinda for clarifying that there. The request, I believe that's what. Is the correct word. The tool that we're looking for that. It is just. It basically is a, it meets the requirements of the American national standards and just to, in regards to decibel levels. And I believe that's also stated in the noise ordinance of Williston. The sound level measurements shall be taken with a sound level meter that is the minimum requirements such as that. Okay. Thank you. Yep. DRB members. Any questions. Will there be any reporting of the, of the maximum sound level that were generated during a given event? Well, there will be recordings in regards to what? And like playing it back for someone. No. To report back to the enforcing. Entity, which is in this case, the gentleman sitting over here in my right. That is going to be tasked with. No, it's, you know, you can say that it's going to be no more than 60. And you've done all the research and got all the instruments, but if it comes out, it's actually 70. Then we have an issue. Yep. I hear you. Thank you for that. Thank you for that clarification. So what I understand is what you're saying is when. I do take the measurements to monitor the decibel levels that I. Write those decibel levels down so I can have a charts, let's say, so I can show that for future references. I think that would be very helpful for us. Yep. That ultimately all of the best laid plans actually work. I hear you on that. And I, I will make a note. Yeah. That is on my plan, but I will. Star that down. Okay. Thank you, John. Any other questions from the DRB. Scott. No. Paul or Steve. I'm just searching it up right now. This is Steve. The Williston noise ordinance. I'm looking for it. What are the, what's the decibel decibel limit allowed by that ordinance? I couldn't find it at night. I believe it's 60. 60 at the day. And what's the definition of night. I think it's after 10. Okay. Conditions that they're not going to be. So 50 doesn't apply. Okay. Okay. No. No, the times are stated. No. In the noise. Yep. The condition, the original conditions of approval, which are not subject to this reconsideration already meet the definition of. All everything is a day event here. It's not a night event. But that, but it's controlled by the noise ordinance. Okay. Ellen, one of the things that we're going to be talking about in deliberative session is, is, um, and what, what will come from our decision is, is TBD. But one of the things that we're going to be talking about is what the possibility of you submitting evidence of compliance with the noise ordinance. And, um, and so that would, um, that would require either an automated measuring measurement with this device that you have yet to purchase, or some type of, um, manual reading and logging of the readings during an event. Um, I don't know what the board will decide on this topic, but it's something that we're going to talk about. Um, would you consider buying an instrument that has some type of automated recording. Of a decibel levels. Yeah. If I, if I understand your question correctly. That is what we are purchasing that it does. Record and measure. And if not, I will make sure that it does record. Record along with measuring. Great. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Uh, yes. Any other, any other questions from the DRB. Uh, members of the public, if you would like to weigh in, please raise your hand, please. Uh, Debbie Ingram has raised her hand. Okay. Uh, go ahead, Debbie. Thank you very much. Appreciate the opportunity to speak with you this evening. Um, sorry, I can't see you. Uh, but, uh, but I'll use my imagination. Actually, I do know some of you. Um, and, uh, for those of you, um, who might, I haven't met, um, I am, um, I, I served, uh, Williston on the planning commission for six years and then, uh, on the select board for six years and, uh, was, uh, most recently a state senator, uh, representing, uh, uh, Williston and other parts of Chittenden County. Um, so I, um, I just wanted to come this evening and say, you know, I know that you have a, um, an important and difficult job to protect, um, the, um, the application of the bylaws. Um, when I was on the planning commission and select board, I helped to, to write the new, uh, the new bylaws and the noise, uh, ordinance. And, uh, I know your job is to, um, as a quasi judicial body is to interpret, uh, the laws and apply them, um, uh, so that, uh, so that we're honoring all the, all the residents of, of Williston. Uh, so you have a very important job. Um, I would, I would commend to you the, the staff report. I think it's extremely well written, uh, and has considered, uh, all of the, the various factors. Um, uh, you've gotten a lot of letters from different towns, people who, um, you know, have listened, have cited other reasons why, uh, they want to support the, um, um, family farm series. But I know those aren't, those aren't really, they're kind of, uh, outside of your, your purview, your job is really just to interpret the, the, uh, the bylaws. And, uh, but I do think that with the sound study that was done, um, that, um, you have good evidence that, uh, the bylaws will be adhered to that the noise levels will be, will be met. And, um, you know, I, I certainly know Helen and Mike and know that they will have every intention of, um, following, um, those, um, the, any stipulations that you, that you make. And, and you know, as you've been talking about buying the right equipment and, you know, um, to, to ensure that, um, that they were, um, they're complying with the bylaws. And, um, just, I guess the last thing I'd say is when, you know, when we were writing these, um, when I was involved in that process, of course, what our ultimate goal was is, is to, to, um, to protect everybody and all the different residents to balance the rights of the neighbors to be able to live in a rural place and to balance the, um, the right of people like the items to be able to, um, uh, be innovative and make a, make a good living and, and bring new things to our community. And, um, so I know that's your, that's your task and, uh, have every confidence that you'll, you'll do a great job with that. And I think that, um, that in this case, um, that, that can be worked out well and the, and that staff have identified, you know, what the, what the key issues are. And I, so I do hope that you will reconsider and, and allow them to, um, to have this amplified sound as long as it's under the, the decibel limits. So thank you very much for listening to me tonight. Thank you, Debbie. Uh, anyone else? Thank you. Um, Sharon Coburn. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Um, Sharon, would you like to speak or are you just. My hand. I apologize for the clap. Oh, okay. Cool. I noticed it was angle. Good evening. And I should have asked Debbie to do this as well. Debbie, could you please state your address for the record, please? Certainly. Uh, yeah, Debbie in room 21, 20 south roads, Williston 05495. Thank you. Uh, Sharon, if you could identify yourself and your address before you address the board, thank you. Thank you. My name is Sharon Coburn. Uh, we live at three, eight, seven, six south road in Williston. Go ahead. The floor is yours. Thank you. Um, so if you look at the map, um, you can see that Helen and the items have put together. Our property is actually adjacent to the ice and farm. Um, we're right below three, eight, three, eight south road, which is where the, one of the studies was done. And, um, we have lived here for about a year and a half now. And my three year old son sleeps in the bedroom that faces closest to the farm. And I could not be more supportive of what the oceans are trying to do. Um, Helen and Mike are so respectful of their neighbors and I have every belief that if there was a sound issue, if anything came up, they're going to do everything they can to, to make sure that this is done properly by how the rules are laid out. And so we just wanted to voice that we're here to support them. Um, again, we're right there. I think you can. Yep. So if you move the cursor to the right where the house, uh, yeah, if you go to the right, that's our house, right? Nope. Down one. Right there. That's where we live. Um, and so we would love to see them be able to have this amplified sound for these select events. The times have been outlined. We're more than comfortable with it. And, uh, we just hope that you really consider, um, giving them this opportunity. Thank you for your time this evening. Okay. Thank you, Sharon. Uh, anyone else, Emily, that's raised their hand. Uh, yeah, Paula is next. Okay, Paula, if you would please state your name and address for the record, please. Yes. Uh, I'm Paula cope. I lived at 108 made stone lane in Williston, Vermont. And I'm here as a board member for Vermont stage. Um, I wanted to first thank all of you for trying to balance the law with the needs of the citizens of Williston. Um, I would respectfully ask you to please reconsider. Um, I think one of the things the items are trying to do is to provide opportunity for arts organizations and artists to emerge from the pandemic with some hope and possibility and some opportunity for them to regain their own footing. And, um, I think that this is not a normal time. Um, and while the decibel level is essential and we have to follow that because that's what our citizens. Um, ask of us. I didn't want it lost that, uh, the ice ovens are doing something that is not only good for the community of Williston, but has a very direct effect to helping arts organizations like Vermont stage and the artists who will perform at their summer series, um, regain their footing in the economy. And I just didn't want that piece messed. So thank you. And I hope you do reconsider. Thank you, Paula. Um, anybody else, Emily? Uh, yep. Is, um, Christina. Christina, welcome. Uh, state your name and address please for the record. Hi, my name is Christina. I live at 49 Russell street. When you ski Vermont zero five four zero five four. Um, so I just wanted to sort of echo, um, what Paula said and just state my support of ice and farms reconsideration efforts. Um, I am the, um, executive director of Vermont stage and is one of the organizations that will be directly impacted by this decision. Um, in fact, we have, um, 14 performances planned at ice and farm this summer. Um, that we are planning to do outside. Um, with amplified sound with your permission. Um, it is essential for us to do amplified sound. The majority of our audience space is 55 and older. Um, that means that most of our audience members have some level of hearing loss and will not be able to hear anything outside. Unless we have some sound support, um, we will not be able to hear anything outside of our audience. Um, we will not be able to hear anything outside of our audience. Um, traveling. Um, so this is, this also impacts just our accessibility efforts for the general public. And I think that that I just wanted to make sure that that was very clear that, um, we will not be able to meet our ADA guidelines. Um, doing the show outside without, um, some form of amplified sound. And I, you know, of course, there are other things that were written in the letter that we need to be sort of put on record here. So thank you so much for considering this and I, um, truly hope you will reconsider your decision. Thank you. Anyone else Emily. If anyone else from the public would like to speak comment in the chat or press the raise hand button on your toolbar. So far I'm not seeing anyone else that would like to speak. But there are a couple other folks who are here who haven't spoken. Okay. Okay. Uh, DRB members. Any additional follow up questions. After hearing that testimony. Also. Okay. Uh, Helen, do you have anything else to add? Um, I would gently. And I really stress that word because I'm all about. Making sure that I look at everybody's thoughts and everything I do. Big, big part of how I was raised was to take into consideration of everything that was said and then critical thinking comes into play in regards to. Where we as a collective move forward for the common good. And I really truly understand why Williston wants places of rural character. I get that. I love rural character. That's one reason why I stayed in Vermont and after I was raised and I proudly. State that I'm a ninth generation, Vermont or and I want to stand Vermont and why I want my kids to stay in Vermont as we all want. I mean, that's why we love Vermont is because of the rural character. But the rural character comes as at a price. It really does. And if we can't step back and look at that. And it's not just the people that want homes and the rural area. And we have to recognize that the people that have created that rural character need to pay their taxes and they need to find innovative ways to bring forth. People to their rural lands. So we can afford to stay on our farms. And if we want our homes next to these farms, we need to support them through. Just our being neighborly and connecting with neighbors. And also by recognizing that farmers and foresters and people who work these lands. Have to find innovative ways because it's more and more expensive to live in Vermont. And I just asked that we recognize that rural character is not free. It, it's not free to the homes and the people who live in the rural areas. And that we enjoy these rural characters. It comes at a price. And I just asked that the Williston board steps back and, and recognizes that we created these, or you created these laws about a rural area versus a. Industrial area versus a suburban residential area. And know that farmers have to find ways to support. The rural areas. And that's what we're doing for these open lands. And I asked that in a very gentle and open hearted way. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Helen. Last call from the DRB for any questions. Okay. Hearing none. I'm going to close DP. 11 dash 23. Okay. Okay. That's a great question. I just wanted to add seven 53. Thank you, Helen. Appreciate it. Okay. DRB is going to go into deliberative session. At 7. 54. Yep. The public. I'll put you in the waiting room if you want to stick around for the decision. You're welcome to do so. second, 2021. The GRB is out of deliberative session. It is now 8.45. Is there a motion for DP 21-14? So as authorized by WDB 6.6.3, I, Scott Riley moved that the Williston Development Review Board, having reviewed the application submitted and all accompanying materials, including the recommendations of the town staff and the advisory boards required to comment on this, Tony presented at the public hearing of June 22, 2021, except the findings of fact and conclusions of law for DP 21-14 and approve this discretionary permit subject to the conditions of approval above. This approval authorizes the applicant to file final plans, obtain approval of these plans from staff and then seek an administrative permit for the proposed development, which must proceed in strict conformance with the plans on which this approval is based. We are going to modify condition number 14 to read final plans, must specify short-term bicycle storage and compliance with WDB 14.8.3, the applicant and the staff to agree on the location and the number of racks to be used. Thank you, Scott. Is there a second? I'll second it. Dave Turner seconds. Is there any further discussion? All those in favor, indicate by saying aye. Aye. Steve? Aye. Paul? Aye. Okay, six in favor, none opposed, motion carries. Is there a motion for DP 21-15? Yes, as authorized by WDB 6.6.3, I, David Turner, move the Wilson Development Review Board, having reviewed the application submitted in all accompanying materials, including the recommendations of town staff and advisory boards required to comment on this application by the Wilson Development By-law, and having heard and duly considered the testimony presented at the public hearing of June 22nd, 2021, accept the findings of facts and conclusions of law for DP 21-15 and approve the discretionary permit for master sign plans subject to the conditions of approval above. This approval authorizes the applicants to submit final plans, obtain approval of these plans from the staff, and seek administrative sign permits, which must proceed in strict conformance with the plans on which the approval is based. Thank you, Dave. Is there a second? I'll second it. Scott Riley seconds it. Any further discussion? No. Those present indicate by saying aye. If you're in favor. Aye. Steve? Aye. Paul? Aye. Six in favor, non-opposed motion carries. Thank you. Next up is DP 11-23.4. Is there a motion? Yes. As authorized by WDP 6.6.3 by John Hemmelgarn, moved with the Wilson Development Review Board, having reviewed the application submitted in all accompanying materials, including the recommendations of the town staff and the advisory board required comment on this application by the Wilson Development By-law, and having heard and truly considered the testimony presented at the public hearings of April 13th and June 22nd, 2021, except the findings of the fact and conclusions of law on DP 11-23.4 and approved the discretionary permits subject to the conditions of approval above. This approval authorizes the applicant to file final plans, obtain approval of these plans from staff, and then seek an administrative permit for proposed development, which must proceed in strict conformance with the plans on which this approval will be based. I'm going to modify a couple of the conditions. By number 17C shall read, amplified sound, compliant with the Wilson noise control ordinance, shall be allowed outside of the structure. We're going to add a, I think we'll call it D, under 17, that says the applicant shall submit a law of actual level levels for each event, that interval and locations to be agreed upon with staff. Thank you, John. Is there a second? I'll second it. Dave Turner seconds it. Is there any further discussion? No. Hearing none. Paul Christensen, yay or nay? Yay. Steve Lambrick, yay or nay? Yay. DRB members present here in Williston indicate by saying yay please? Yay. Yay. Any opposed? None. Six are in favor. None opposed? Motion carries. Okay. Next up is the selection of the chair and the vice chair for FY 2022. So that goes for a one year period starting July 1 of 2021. That represents FY 2022 for the town of Williston. I will let people know that I'm interested in continuing on as chair if there's support from the other DRB members. Mr. Hemmelkarn, are you interested in continuing as vice chair? I am. Okay. Close nominations. Thank you, Paul. Is there a second? I'll second. Dave seconds it. Any further discussion? No. All those in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Chair is re-elected and vice chair is re-elected for FY 2022. Next up is a draft staff correspondence relative to DP 21-11, the UPS application. What does staff have to brief the DRB on on this matter? They had a hearing. They requested a continuance and have since gone silent. So we're reminding them of their options. Thank you. And this is a draft letter that is to be finalized and issued. And this is simply a heads up to the DRB that this action is pending. Yes. Because I'm doing it on behalf of you guys. Great. Thank you. Yes. Yes, thank you. Okay. Next order of business is the approval of the minutes of June 8th, 2021. Is there a motion to approve those minutes? There is one correction, minor. You have myself Steve Lambert listed as being both in attendance and absent. I know you're better than they do. Well, you know, I wish I could be two places at once, but I haven't mastered that yet. I was not there. Okay. Okay. So noted, with that correction, is there a motion to approve the minutes? Yeah. You don't have me present. Okay. John Hamilton has made that motion. Is there a second? I'll second. Scott Riley seconds it. Any further discussion? You did catch the fact that I'm not present. I don't know what happened. Sorry. I'm probably Steve Lambert in disguise. Okay. So there was a friendly amendment to add Paul in attendance. Okay. You're good with that. You're good with it. Scott. Okay. Any further discussion? No. Okay. All those in favor indicate by saying aye please. Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none. Motion carries unanimously. Is there a motion to adjourn? Okay. Thank you everyone. I appreciate it.