Welcome to Leicester, VT

TOWN OF LEICESTER, VT 

Development Review Board 

Continued Public Hearing 26-11 DRB & 26-10 DRB 

June 3, 2026 

Minutes 

1. The Chair called the Continued Hearing to order at 6:00 pm. 

1. Roll Call Members present: 

Jeff McDonough, Chair 

Jay Michael 

Donna Swinington 

Bill Shouldice 

Lyndsay D’Avingnon (absent) 

Others present: 

Carol B. Shouldice 

Bill Shouldice IV 

Nathan Clark 

Sean Flynn 

Kip Andres 

Amelia L. Sass 

Matthew A. Zidovsky, Esq. (for Sass) 

Lem Palmer 

Janet Pringle 

Keith Arlund, Zoning Administrator 

1. The Chair reminded all parties that they remained sworn from the previous hearings. 

The Chair also swore in Atty Zidovsky. 

1. The Chair reopened the hearing 26-11 DRB, Silver Maple (Peluso), Section 3.7 Setback Variance and Conversion of seasonal dwelling to year-round dwelling and called on Kipp Andres to continue presentation. 

Arlund noted that copies of both the State of Vermont Wastewater System and Potable Water Supply Permit No. WW-9-3537 and Shoreland Protection Individual Permit No. 4767-SP were submitted. 

Andres submitted a letter to the board dated June 1, 2026, with a memorandum to provide additional information, context of the project and exhibits of the work to be performed.  Exhibit Package. 

Shouldice previously recused himself and remained seated in the audience as a direct abutter. 

The Chair asked about the height of the new building.  Andres state the new building would be 27’ high and within an inch of the height of the existing building. 

Andress began with a discussion of the maintenance of the existing tree line and shrubbery that serves as screening to the Shouldice property to the south.  He noted that the shoreland permit prohibits any new cleared areas.  All existing screening will be preserved to include the line of vegetation that continues along the south edge of the parcel to the roadway. He further stated that in compliance with the SL permit a dripline infiltration system will be installed on the south side of the new structure to preclude any flow into the lake front. 

In response to a question about “certain marks on some of the trees” he stated that they were apparently placed by another party earlier and were not related to any of their work on the project.  

Kipp Andress further described the portion of the project requiring the 2’ setback variance.  Most of the grilling deck is tucked into the footprint of the old building and the 2’ extension is limited to the special functions of the grill and the pizza oven.  It is meant solely for food preparation and is not a gathering place for visitors. He referred to Exhibits 2 & 3 in the package.  He further noted that Exhibit 4 shows the 2’ extension required for the grilling deck in relation to building footprint. 

In response to a question by Michael, Andres stated that the old stone steps will be removed along with the field stone retaining wall depicted in Exhibit 4.  All materials will be removed and taken off-site. 

Shouldice VI mentioned that the steps were a part of the old history of the camp.  Andres reiterated that all  these old features were being removed and this area will not be used as a walkway for the new building. 

In response to a question about the old garage, Andres stated that there are no current plans for the garage and that applicants chose to deal with the variance issue first. 

There being no other testimony or questions the Chair concluded the hearing on application 26-11 DRB. 

1. The Chair reopened the hearing on application 26-10 DRB, Clark, for the proposed conditional use of his property for a home-based business for the processing of firewood.  Shouldice returned for this application. 

There was a short discussion about the possibility of the parties getting together to talk about possible hours of operation.  Sass stated that this did not happen though she attempted to speak with Clark after the first hearing.  Clark stated that he tried to meet with Sass at least three times but was unsuccessful. 

The Chair recognized Attorney Zidvosky. 

He opened his presentation noting while hours of operation might be discussed later it was more important to determine if Clark’s wood processing fit the definition of a Home-Based Business as defined by the Leicester Zoning Regulation.  It is their opinion that it does not qualify as such.  He proceeded to read parts of the definition a copy of which is attached here as reference.  (Page 70 of zoning regulation) 

The operation far exceeds the 600 square foot size and is not contained in a dwelling or an accessory use building.   The definition further states that “unenclosed processing of goods … is an activity that may not constitute a home-based business.” 

In response to a statement from Clark that he had been doing this kind of work for over five years, and he wondered why this complaint arises now. 

Sass responded that the intensity of the operation and noise level have increased significantly in the last 6-8 months. The scope of the operation has increased along with the magnitude of resultant chain saw noise.   The level has severely impacted her quiet enjoyment of her property. 

Clark recognized that chain saw noise is an issue and he is willing to limit the sawing to reasonable times. He further stated that there is very little noise involved with splitting the firewood and preparing it for delivery. Clark stated further that the last winter was much harder than previous years and the demand for wood was much higher.  He is trying to provide a service for people needing wood for heat and keep his costs at a minimum to do this.  His primary concern is not profit but service for needy families. 

Sass submitted a copy of the statement she read at the first hearing for the zoning file. It was also stated that the distance from the Clark property to Sass is approximately 1500’ through mostly wooded areas.  A thumb drive with a chain saw recording was submitted to the board. 

Zidvosky again emphasized that the board must first determine whether this operation qualifies as a home-based business. It is their contention that is does not. It was also suggested that Clark consider moving his operation to a more suitable area consistent with the wood processing activities.  He also suggested that a compromise might be reached after a denial of the application as not a home-based business. 

There being no other questions or comments the Chair indicated that the board would go into deliberative session.  In response to a question the Chair stated that no determination would be made at the close of the session 

1. The board entered deliberative session at 7:00 pm and returned to open session at 7:45 pm. 

1.  The Chair reopened the public hearing on both permit applications. 

1.  On motion of Shouldice, second by Michael the board approved the Clark Application 26-10 DRB with the following conditions: 

1. Total hours of operation not to exceed 40 hours per week 

1. Chain saw operation limited to 20 hours per week as part of the 40 hours 

1. No chain saw work on Sundays 

1. No chain saw work after 6:00 on any workday. 

1. Unenclosed processing of wood is allowed in an area not to exceed 8000 square feet on the Clark property. 

The motion passed unanimously. 

1. On motion of Michael, second by Swinington (Shouldice did not vote on this motion) the board approved the Silver Maple Application 26-11 DRB with the following conditions: 

1. The Section 3.7.3 setback waiver of 2’ for the grilling deck is approved. 

1. The existing vegetative screening along the south side of the property will remain intact.  If any tree, or other vegetation is deemed dead or needs to be removed for safety considerations then it will be replaced/replanted with similar appropriate plantings. 

1. The old steps and field stone retaining wall and related materials will be removed from the property. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Keith O. Arlund 

Zoning Administrator