for okay Doug I do believe we are good to go we are recording I pushed recording does anybody see that little red button yes okay because I don't see it um the attendees are coming in we do have somebody on iPhone 13 I know that we have a presenter Bob parent joining us that may be him um you a quorum of the board my clock says 6:34 I think we're good to go all right thanks Pam sorry everyone to interrupt this amous media um can we just wait five minutes I just want to double check something this for those of you of the public attendees we are waiting for media to check something and get back to us that we're good to go all right everyone thanks for waiting we're good to go all right bam you're good yes I am good good welcome to the ammer planning board meeting of June 26 2024 my name is Doug Marshall and as the chair of the ammer planning board I am calling this meeting to order at 6:36 p.m. this meeting is being recorded and is available live streamed via amest media minutes are being taken pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 one and extended by chapter 2 of the acts of 2023 this planning board meeting including public hearings will be conducted via remote means using the zoom platform the zoom meeting link is accessible on the meeting agenda hosted on the town website's calendar listing for this meeting or go to the planning board web page and click on the most recent agenda where the zoom link is listed at the top of the page no in-person attendance of the public is permitted however every effort will be made to ensure the public can adequately access the meeting in real time via technological means in the event we are unable to do so for reasons of economic hardship or despite best efforts we will post an audio or video recording transcript or other comprehensive record of proceedings as soon as possible after the meeting on the town's website board members I will take a roll call when I call your name unmute yourself answer affirmatively and return to mute Bruce Cen I'm here um Fred Hartwell I am here Jesse major present hi Doug Marshall I'm present uh we've been told Janet Macwan will be arriving late uh she is not here yet Johanna Newman present and Karen winter here thank you all board members if technical issues arise we may need to pause to fix the problem and then continue the meeting if the discussion needs to pause it will be noted in the minutes please use the raise hand function to ask a question or make a comment I will see your request and call on you to speak after speaking remember to remute yourself to the general public the general public comment item is reserved for public comment regarding items not on tonight's agenda Please be aware the board will not respond to comments during general public comment period public comment may also be heard at other times during the meeting when deemed appropriate by the planning board chair please indicate you wish to make a comment by clicking the raise hand button when public comment is solicited if you have joined the zoom meeting using a telephone please indicate you wish to make a comment by pressing star n on your phone when called on please identify Yourself by stating your full name and address and put yourself back into mute when finished speaking residents can typically Express their views for up to three minutes or at the discretion of the planning board chair if a speaker does not comply with these guidelines or exceeds their allotted time their participation may be disconnected from the meeting all right so the time now is 6:39 first item on our agenda are the meeting minutes and uh I did not see any minutes in our packet is that correct Chris that is correct we're missing May 1st May 15 and June 5th um as you know we've been stressed because we lost a staff member but we will try to catch up by the next meeting all right great all right so now we'll go to the public comment period and at this time I usually read the names of the public I see uh we have eight attendees uh Bob parent Constantine pikov someone with iPhone 13 uh Jeff labau Jen du charm Mora Keen Melissa mcgaan which I may have Miss misspell or mispronounced and Miriam Sierra do any members of the public want to make a comment at this time on something on a topic that is not later on our agenda this evening all right I don't see any hands raised uh from members of the public gu we go [Music] on all right time is 6:41 and we'll go to item three on the agenda which is our public hearing for this evening this is a combined hearing site plan review and a special permit [Music] so see all right so in accordance with the provisions of Mass General Law chapter 40a this public hearing has been duly advertised and notice thereof has been posted it is being held for the purpose of providing the opportunity for interested citizens to be heard this is spr 2024-25 05 five applicant is the town of ammer location is East Pleasant Street at Kendrick Park request a site plan review approval under Section 3335 of the zoning bylaw public park playground or other public recreation facility to install a prefabricated restroom structure on a concrete pad along the North Pleasant Street side of the park and request a special permit under footnote a of table three of article 6 of the zoning bylaw to modify the front setback requirement from 15 fet to 10 feet parcel 11 C- 244 in the RG zoning District do we have any members of the public of the board who would like who need to make a disclosure before this hearing I am not seeing any hands raised in response to that so I will assume there are no board disclosures so uh we'll go right into the applicant presentation and then after that we'll have our site visit report uh Bob parent I assume you're here as the applicant yes I am all right so welcome and you may proceed very good thank you for those that don't know me I came on board with the town about a year ago in a uh uh position called called special capital projects coordinator just to help the town move uh a number of different capital projects forward like this one um so I've been asked to um again to take on responsibility for this project and move it forward it's a relatively straightforward project if I let's see I think I can share my screen I grab that right you should be able to see a site plan right now I believe yes so the plan that I've shared with you if you look at the bottom center more or less of the plan it shows the proposed location of the uh restroom facility it's a proposed uh single unit unisex facility prefabricated as as you indicated um to be located on a concrete pad adjacent to what will be a new sidewalk um and I expect we'll hear about that a little bit in the in the site visit report but um North Pleasant Street is under construction right now for DPW designed um and implemented project that will include a number of different things included um a new sidewalk new angled parking on the Northern portion of North Pleasant Street Etc um and what we're requesting and have been working with the DPW to do is to locate this new restroom facility adjacent to the proposed new sidewalk um so if you see that that gray uh kind of oblong shape that's the restroom facility the sidewalk is immediately to the west of that and because of the location of the sidewalk and the position of the restroom facility that's the reason that we're requesting the special permit uh the zoning setback in this Zone would normally be a 15t setback to locate the restroom facility immediately adjacent to the sidewalk as you see here um we would only be approximately 10 ft from the sidewalk so that's one of the reasons we're in front of the planning board this evening uh to request that approval um to put this location somewhat in contact context I believe you can see an overall site plan of Kendrick Park uh the green oval that you see in the middle is the new playground that was constructed several years ago the dark uh gray or black you see on the top or the east side of North Pleasant Street is the new sidewalk improvements that are being constructed as part of the North Pleasant Street improvements um it seemed to be an ideal location for a restroom one to serve the park uh particularly during the the the the the daytime hours as well as to serve some of the nearby commercial establishments uh that have activities that go into the evening and to provide a restroom uh that's open to the public uh during the evening hours as well the if I can get my what we're proposing to have constructed this location is based on a product uh that's known as the Portland blou which I believe you can see in the screen right now um it's a product that's been in manufacturing for probably 6 to9 years I believe it was originally implemented in the city of Portland hence the name the Portland Lou uh and the manufacturing company that uh originally constructed these for the city of Portland I believe was then licensed to be able to sell this product uh elsewhere and now has several hundred installations across Canada as well as the us in coming up with this as a type of facility um we met uh both the town manager Fire Department police department myself and the Building Commissioner to talk about a couple of different alternative types of facilities and we settle primarily on this facility uh to address uh public safety concerns you know it's a fully private facility but it is at the same time a facility that can be viewed from the exterior um and one of the major concerns that Public Safety officials have is you know the potential for what might happen or be Ono going in a closed building that they have no you know no access to or not no access to but no visibility of so this seemed like an ideal uh fit where you have louvers at the bottom of the facility as you can see in the photograph and then at the top of the facility that provide visibility in terms of uh what and and sort of who in terms of of of you know is it a single person or possibly multiple people inside of the facility as well as you know if something happened in somebody fell onto the floor of the facility or something like that that would clearly be visible from the outside of the facility uh to any public safety officials uh that responded to the site uh another thing that we liked about this is it it's really you know it it's proven itself you know with the hundreds of installations that are located that are built specifically for this purpose as opposed to something that might be custom designed or custom manufactured that really hasn't worked all the and The Kinks and everything else out of the product this is a product that again has been used in a number of different areas the city of Greenfield recently installed one um if you're familiar with the parking lot areas behind what used to be the the Wilson's department store uh there's there's one of the facilities there now adjoining where the skate park is and the parking lot is city of Cambridge has several um that come to mind and and there's several other in Massachusetts that are either in or are planned to be in the facility is from a restroom facility pretty straightforward um it it has uh a toilet inside um it has a wallmounted changing table on the inside of the facility um it is fully handicapped accessible um the hand washing station is actually located on the outside of the facility uh so it's not to take up space on the inside and because we're in a cold weather environment the way that that is dealt with is by heat tracing the plumbing the drain and the supply lines uh so that the piping doesn't freeze in the winter time um let's see what else do I mention one thing I did want to note on some of the photographs in here you'll see that there's a large Portland L decal that's located on on on the unit they no longer ship units with that large decal on there the only only signs or decals that come on the facility are the ADA Compliant signage on the outside of the facility um and then in the top you can't see it this Photograph but you can see it in some of the other photographs uh there's a uh large letters that say public restroom to identify the purpose of the building the unit that we intend to purchase and procure and purchase um will actually be a hybrid powered system it will have solar panels on the roof but it will also have a connection to um the the electrical system uh primarily to make certain that we have adequate levels of of power during the wintertime uh that the typical solar panels that are mounted on the facility would be adequate to with a battery system here to to handle the lighting um inside the facility but in a cold weather climate they're not adequate to power the heat tracing that's necessary uh to keep the piping from freezing I will note that the restroom itself is not heated um but the the piping and the plumbing is heated as necessary to to keep things from freezing I can show you a couple of photographs quickly this is one that shows what they used to furnish the unit with with a large Portland L decal on the end of the unit they no longer ship them with that the color you do see here and I know I expect we'll be talking about color tonight is the the standard color and the standard coating product that they recommend that they've had the greatest success with in terms of being uh graffiti resistant um they will use any type of custom color that you might want to put onto the unit um but they're not as confident in the graffiti resistance of other painting systems than the one that they typically use all the time um the other thing this is the one in the city of Cambridge again the decal would not be in the in the town's facility this is is actually the facility being installed in Greenfield uh this last fall um you can hit this this Photograph shows one of the color options that communities have chosen it's a beige or brown color so it is feasible um again it's not the recommended but it's feasible and it certainly you can get graffiti resistant paint it just may not have the track record of the painting system that uh the manufacturer customarily uses again you know some some nice looking facilities from my perspective the brown you know fitting into this environment works pretty well some interesting things that some communities have done and I have a couple of examples of this is that they go with the standard uh gray color but then they apply a vinyl wrap to the exterior of the restroom facility um and some of them have gone as far as to make it part of a public art or a public art competition you know where the winning artist gets selected uh to put their design on the exterior of the restroom facility here's another example another example there is one case uh where actually a similar type of treatment was done and this gives you a view of the inside of the restroom facility uh with with a vinyl decal on the interior of the restroom uh to help dress that up and that certainly would be feasible as well if that's something that the town wanted to do the vinyl wrap would be something that would be done after installation it wouldn't be done by the restroom manufacturer but it's something that the town would procure or could procure locally uh to have installed similar to some of like the the signage material that you see on bus buses these days that's actually a vinyl material that gets applied to the exterior of the of the transit bus U I've got more details that go into exactly how it's constructed but I I think that covers most everything um I can go back up a little bit I do want to talk about a couple of items that you might have questions about one is lighting uh the lighting that is provided with this unit is a combination of interior and exterior lighting the interior lighting is blue and you might if you wonder why the interior lighting is is blue it's because it tends to deter some illicit activities that might occur inside of the restroom um folks looking to identify a vein for instance uh will have a hard time seeing that in a blue lighting condition so this is a case where again we've got a facility that has been put into a number of urban environments over the years and has really been fine-tuned and tweaked to try to minimize the problems that can result from making something like this accessible to the General Public um the restroom facility will have uh timed locks on them uh and they will be tied into the town's fiber Network such that the lock time can be modified as desired we haven't established a specific time that's really going to be something that'll have to be worked out in the future but I would anticipate that the restroom facilities wouldn't stay open all night but they would likely be open until the late evening you know perhaps early morning or something like that and then shut down for some period of time and then reopened automatically in the morning um maintenance of of a facility is always an issue and similar to what the DPW does now with the restroom facilities at uh several Town Parks uh we would likely retain an outside contractor to complete the maintenance of the facilities and we would expect to have a firm um coming on site at least twice a day if not three times per day because in order to keep the facilities really up to standard it does require a regular level of Maintenance um and actually I was going to talk about lighting as well the exterior lighting um is a rope like lighting that gets hung in the overhang of the unit it's only a 12 watt um LED so it's not intended to throw a lot of light away from the facility it strictly shines down and kind of washes the the face of the unit um and it actually the it dims when the units in use so there's actually a a lighting indication of of the unit being occupied or not being occupied but it's very low as I said 12 12 uh watt um tucked up underneath that just uh washes the face of the building and let's see I think that's everything that I wanted to cover as I said I know color will be will be a concern um and you know we I work for the conservation Development Department work under Rob Moore I don't think we're particularly set on any particular solution in terms of color but we would like to come up with something that is low maintenance uh and is not problematic for the town and if ultimately there were strong preferences uh to go with a particular color we wouldn't oppose that all right thank you [Music] Bob uh board members I guess I'll open it for comments Jesse thanks Doug um I had a couple of questions uh first one is about the location so on our on our site visit uh it struck me that it's it's right now where it is on the plan assuming we were standing in the right place it's in a very open space so there are some clusters of trees nearby but it's right between those and as just a feature in the park I was wondering what went into that decision rather than trying to tuck it into uh visual things that are already happening because as it is now I think it it's pretty Standalone not near any of the large trees very apparent so maybe you could just tell us about the location Choice certainly and and I think you can see the photograph that I pulled up that um shows where the proposed location is it is by Design located in an open space but effectively is close to the street as we can make it at this point not in the center of the park so it might impact future use of of the open area so we were trying to trying to leave as much of the park unimpacted as possible um and also not looking to impact any of the large mature trees that are there so we did want to get it out into an open area um and we did want to put it in an area where uh the solar panels had the opportunity to receive as much light as they possibly could depending on the time of day and the time of year you know they may be partially shadowed even at this location uh but it it would be much more effective than locating it underneath a tree where again we have a risk of damaging the tree as well as not operating as effectively thanks um so I realized that I should have had the site visit report before we got into questions and answers um so three of us uh met Chris breast out there yesterday Jesse Fred and I um Jesse and Fred do either of you want to do a site visit report all right well I can say that uh the three of us met out there with Chris and we stood approximately where it is uh proposed to go on the site and uh you know the street at the moment North Pleasant Street along that section is under to uh total reconstruction uh Chris described Where the Sidewalk was going to be introduced and added as a part of that project we did discuss a little bit the the angled parking that was going to be coming as part of that street reconstruction um I think that's most of what I we did look at the drawings for the for the L itself um Chris mentioned I think that uh the drb had been interested in maybe not using a standard color but she did also mention what Bob has said about uh this particular gray being the the most proven graffiti resistant color that the manufacturer was offering so that's my take on the site visit uh Jesse or Fred do you either of you want to add anything Fred yeah this is not from the uh actual site plan visit but something that occurred to me subsequently and that is whether any uh discussion I'm I'm curious uh if uh there have been any consideration of locating this closer to the active play area um I uh have been to this park a number of times with my now six-year-old grandson uh who was figured out how to pee in the in the amongst the trees but um it's quite a walk from the active playground to where this is positioned and I'm wondering if that's practical or what consideration was given to that Bob certainly let me see if I can get back to kind of the overall plan there so so it it is probably in the order of 50200 Ft I haven't measured it specifically but it's you know it's not immediately adjacent the playground um I believe when they located the playground they did a very good job of tucking it into the existing uh trees that were located in the area I believe they only had to take down a couple of trees and were able to keep most of the very large trees that were located there and for that reason I would would still have the concern about impacting those trees if we were to um bring a structure too close to them uh this does require um underground utilities it does require uh installing a frost wall 4T deep you know Frost wall for the unit to sit on um so we would have the potential to be impacting roots and root systems um as as part of the installation um so and it is a little bit of a you know yeah it's a little bit of a trade-off um the restroom isn't intended to serve the playground only you know certainly if it was only desired to you know maybe close it be good but again you know people have different ideas about privacy and you know if it's good to put a restroom facility right immediately you know adjacent to a group of users you of of another facility or is it better to put it at a somewhat remote location not remote but a little bit further removed and and perhaps you know maybe have a little bit more privacy I again I I don't really know but that's the that was really primarily we were looking for the open space we were looking to keep it as far out of the park as possible so that we didn't impact any future development um and and and put it on a location that was very accessible uh to anybody that needed to use it all right um Ruth um I had the same thoughts initially um as uh PR but when when you said what you said about trying to keep it out under the trees not just for the uh adverse impacted excavations not just for the foundation but also the the water line it's going to go down four or 5 ft too so that's another thing that happens uh I I I thought that with that and they need to get natural and and uh and solar energy in it all seems as though you've thought about this pretty uh pretty carefully and I also thought that this is what in terms of the product you selected and the way you described it and so forth this is what good design looks like um so I'm uh very positive about this I think uh Bob you and your colleagues have have done very well and I really don't I mean I had a whole bunch of questions not a whole bunch a couple and then they progressively went away and so what I have left is really just uh um my compliments to what I think what appears to me to be a job well done so uh and I think U all I would add is that I think the the gray does sound like the appropriate color here it's it's a gray is quite fashionable these days among the Millennials it seems but nonetheless I think it will um it's it's it's a color that probably will in that area recede and I I think if it's also the color the the surface that is most graffiti resistant um and it sounds like these people know what they're talking about when they've done their design and development of this product so I think it would be prudent for us to uh adopt that particular gray color that's it for me thank you okay Bruce Jesse thanks um I had I guess some questions about I mean you said the timing of it being open is to be determined I'm quite familiar with the activities there day and night on Thursday Friday Saturday and I would imagine if it's left open those nights it'll be pretty overrun by dozens if not hundreds of excited young people every evening and so so I assume that's been part of the conversation like can of I mean I know it's been installed in urban places and I'm sure it's very heavily used um but does that have implications for how it's managed and if it should be left open is that part of the conversation and I'm not sure that's appropriate for planning board right now but um I was just really curious how that's going to be handled I could imagine needing nightly calls by I don't know if it's police or fire to help when someone's locked in there and not responsive or who knows what um is it looked like in one of the pictures there was a little call or a red alarm feature in there is that standard and that 911 box or something it's not tied into the 911 um but I can check with it to see how um what what could be brought back I don't you know typically fire department Master boxes are a kind of a standalone um emergency response system um but I can double check both with it as well as um the fire department to see what they might recommend um and really I was just curious about those those aspects because I think it'll be very heavily used if it's left open you know starting at 7 to 2 am there's hundreds of kids lined up at the spoke Frankly Speaking that would run across the street to use it and that's one of the trade-offs there you know given the the alternative are you would you you know is it better to have no facility available it's all right no I sorry I should start with I think it's a great idea uh I guess just the management of when it's open might be a larger conversation that's all all right uh I don't see any more hands at the moment so I'll ask at least a couple questions um it is this a uh the kind of toilet that makes makes a sort of whoosh when it operates yes but not to the extent I just got off of a cruise it's not to the extent if you if you're flushed on cruise ships for instance you know they're loud you know they'll wake everybody up in the middle of the night for instance it's it's but I don't believe it's much different it's a you know it's it's well i' love to say that I flushed one I have not flushed one so I don't have any firsthand experience um okay all right but I well I guess they create a noise but nothing like a very loud jet type flush that you see at some locations if I could interject it's it seems It's a gravity fed thing so really the wish would simply be the uh the flesh the flesh B but there's no uh there's no pressure or suction involved in this right just it's a gravity it's a gravity thing correct okay good well um I guess I'm wondering how critical is it to be so close to the sidewalk and you know having just come out of my uh planning board reappointment interview where I was asked about waivers and you know what my attitude is about waivers uh why do you actually need to be 10 feet rather than 15 feet away I don't complet I it's not obvious to me and I would think if there's any serious pedestrian tra traffic on this sidewalk you might want some separation from the sidewalk as well as from the playground it it certainly could be moved further away right now I believe we have about six feet of clearance off the face of the unit to the sidewalk itself it's a wide sidewalk the sidewalk itself is 8 ft wide so we'd be about 6 ft from the sidewalk and 14 ft from the opposite side of the sidewalk um we could certainly make the pad larger um it would just be more concrete more impervious area more um you know yeah yeah and not a significant expense it just didn't seem to be necessary quite honestly uhuh well I don't know how folks feel about this particular waiver but it I'm not I'm not clear on really what the purpose is other than to save a few cents on a concrete connection Nate maybe you know yeah I I was thinking it's it's two things one is you know visibility for police when they drive by so they can see into it and then the other one is um you know there was a bigger plan for Kendrick Park and so uh I'm just going to share my screen and so where this was located is right um people can see my cursor right here yeah um is right about here actually and so you know the idea was that if this could be more of an open Lawn Amphitheater whatever programming space I mean you don't want to push you know push the that structure too far into the green space and so I think there was some consideration about you know if you know Kendrick Park is you know continue to be built out in phases you know where is where is the least impact to Future design and so okay all right well that's that's helpful information I didn't wasn't aware of that um I guess uh we've talked a little bit about the color and I noticed uh Chris you included at least three different minutes from the uh design review board where they had had comments and color was part of their conversation um the last one suggests that they were going to continue talking about this in July I don't think they really will continue to talk about it um the only thing that they might talk about is in any kind of signs um but my impression was that they voted in fact I think the draft minutes of the last meeting um show that they voted to recommend the beige color even though they had talked about the green color okay we did provide photographs of those two colors that are currently being used used in Kendrick Park I don't know if Pam can bring that those photographs up or not um but both of those colors were acceptable to the drb but they favored the uh beige color but they didn't have the information about um the graffiti resistance so that was something that was just brought to my attention this week by Bob parent and I didn't know about that before h bear with me I'm not seeing any of my uh documents hold on CH you should keep talking because I have to try to reload the packet hold okay maybe Nate could bring it up Nate is a whz about bringing things up like by Magic well if I have a minute I can do it yeah yeah is that the you know are you trying to show the Doom War colors that match the benches Chris yeah well we had an image of the bench and and an image of the picnic table in the packet so if someone can get to the packet you could show it yeah sorry so um I'll just if if that's if my screen oh is my screen visible for everyone yes it is yeah so the um we use do more site furnishings and so in the park we have uh Sudan here um for the benches and the tables are a green and so at first you know the drb was recommending you know something green um but you know we're recommending more of this neutral tone here um and so I could I could jump to the packet but you know these are standard colors for site Furnishings we use black for for trash cans typically um so that's you know these are the the range right here so uh the gray that Chris was talking about that's uh the graffiti resistant color from the manufacturer is that does that correspond so that's different than Sudan and the green colors it is um and Nate you used the word recommended that you were recommending the Sudan is that uh Chris do you share that is that is that in fact a recommendation because that that's different than kind of I'd gotten the impression yeah I wasn't recommending that I think Chris had mentioned the drb you know thought about green but then they were saying oh maybe the the color of the Furnishings would be you know after their memo had been developed uhuh yeah it looks like Pam's going to be able to bring up those photographs of the actual colors of the items in the park oop so this one has if you scroll down this is the beige color it's kind of a dark beige and this is the color of the benches in Kendrick Park um at least around the playground and then um there's also a an image of the picnic table which is a round picnic table with chairs and it's a kind of a dark green I think it's called Forest screen is that right Nate yeah I mean I don't I don't know if we you know I like the idea of the graffiti resistant you know from the manufacturer I think that color will recede as opposed to having a brighter color or some other color and so you know you I will say that even the local historic district it doesn't regulate color necessarily so um I I I would try something that's probably you know better longterm for operation and maintenance and not you know and it's a color inside and outside right Bob I mean it's it's the whole thing so it's like you know to me there could be some cost savings to go with a standard one as well there would be from a cost and you're correct it is interior and exterior if you have any sort of custom paint uh typically the manufacturer has to buy that in certain lot sizes and many times they don't actually fully utilize the full lot so whereas the the the paints that they they they customarily use they can use them on another installation versus something that's customized just for the town so if you were asking me for my recommendation I think someone did ask me that I would prefer to go with the gray I think it will work just fine and it will recede into the landscape it's kind of a dark color and we all know that black tends to recede so um personally I think the gray will call less attention to itself and it is um graffiti resistant which I think has a lot of Merit okay thanks um Bob I was going to ask about the grading around the concrete pad is is the grade going to be flush with the concrete or is it possible that there'd be a little bit of a drop off there that somebody wheelchairs might fall off or something uh you know typically you try to set a concrete pad up you know minimally probably a half an inch or so you put some sort of a champer or bevel in the concrete if you don't you know you you have an issue potentially with uh soil migrating onto the concrete so you typically want to set it up just a little bit but it's you know we're well in excess of ADA you know sidewalk widths in terms of getting around the facilities yeah I just I just don't want to have somebody accidentally roll off the edge and not be able to get back on if you know if the if the drop was six Ines I'd be worried right no it wouldn't be it's the site is essentially flat we would fit it to to the existing grade as I said but probably have it up slightly higher than the than the surrounding ground okay all right um well why don't we see are there any public comments on this proposal we have we still have seven attendees do any of you want to make a public comment about this proposal all right not seeing any hands all right um so uh Bruce you've been pretty positive about the proposal and um I haven't heard much from Johanna or Karen or Fred um I know Fred you did ask a question or two um so I guess I'll I'll make one last call for for questions or comments from some of the rest of you but otherwise I see uh Bruce you've you've had your hand up I suspect to make a motion and that's correct yes maybe joh Johna you put your hand up are you here to second or are you here to ask a com question or make a comment well you're soliciting questions and comments I don't have a ton of questions but my comment is that this seems like a need and it seems like a pro product that is welld designed for the need and um yeah that's I guess my reaction okay all right great okay Bruce you still have your hand up you want to make a motion we've we've got uh both a special permit and a site plan review so we're going to need a couple of different motions I think oh you want to do two of them has her hand up Chris you've got your hand up what what am I missing here well we did prepare um findings and conditions do you want to look at those before Bruce um okay makes his motion good yes it's probably I I didn't see those and I was but it seemed to be so straightforward that an almost unconditional approval I mean except for the standard boiler plate conditions but uh let's have a look so Pam you want to bring those up so there are conditions that are um pretty much the standard boiler plate conditions um and the finding for the site plan review view would be that it meets the relevant criteria of section 11.24 but then for the special permit you have to find that it um you you have to make findings with regard to footnote a so um if you can scroll down the proposal this this would be a draft finding the proposal does not create disharmony with respect to the terrain and to the use scale and architecture of existing buildings in the vicinity which have a functional or visual relationship there too The Proposal for a 10-ft setback for the prefabricated public restroom structure rather than a 15t setback is in keeping with the landscape features in the surrounding neighborhood because it allows the proposed sidewalk along the street to also provide easy access to the public restroom structure the proposed sidewalk will then continue on to the north to connect to the existing Pathway to provide access to the playground so that was my best guess at what you might use for a finding well I think think it's worth mentioning in this that it's consistent with the long range plan for the for Kendrick park by uh keeping it out of a future area that's proposed to be open uh for public gathering it's consistent with maintaining uh a high degree of solar illumination and radiation for the PV and the natural lighting Dome and it's consistent with minimizing damage to existing mature trees Bob I believe reviewing the discussion of the site plan approval of Kendrick Park I believe there are significant comments about his desire to have a restroom facility um adjoining the park or available to the park as part of that approval so I would say it's also consistent with what the board had previously discussed in the context of that that site plan approval uh all of that would be uh fine with emotion that I might uh be about to make you might huh andless you cut me off if you well let's let's let's see if Chris got most of that I did yep p between Pam and me we' got it yep all right all right so in that case I guess not seeing any other hands Bruce why don't you continue into your motion well should I do it as two separates yeah I think we should do a plan review so move that the board approves site plan actually what were there any other parts of the conditions for the site plan review can you scroll up Pam yes so built substantially in accordance with the plans managed substantially in accordance with the plans then um changes would be brought back for the planning board to decide whether they need to file a new s plan review application um it expires within two years work should be completed within 24 months and all exterior lights should be downcast so those are pretty standard okay and and it complies with Section 11.24 as a as a finding yeah all right Bruce go ahead I try not to interrupt you no that's fine I'm I'm I love support move that the board approve uh spr 2410 uh the town of Amis Kenrick Park restroom uh with the draft possible with the conditions as drafted and the findings as drafted um and to um close the public hearing I guess all right Johanna I'll second that motion all right thank you all right uh any more comments from the board or public attendees I do not see any all right so we'll go ahead and do a roll call so starting with you Bruce I Fred I Jesse hi um Johanna hi uh do we still have Karen um Karen if you are there uh I I agree thank you I'm and I as well and Janet is not with us yet I believe okay um would anybody else like to make the second motion otherwise Bruce go right ahead uh move that the board approve special permit uh sp245 town of Amis public mry park public restroom uh with the findings as drafted and uh and discussed um and um that we close the public hearing all right and uh Chris do we need to state that there are no no conditions I that would be fine if you wanted to state that yep all I'm happy to include that in the motion okay Jesse second that motion great all right uh I guess unless I see any more hands we'll go right into that vote um starting with Karen I and Johanna I and Jesse hi Fred hi and Bruce hi and I am an i as well all right thank you thank you all thanks Bob for bringing the project to us and good luck very good thank you all right okay so the time now is 7:29 we can go to the next item on the agenda which is another site plan review in accordance with the provisions of Mass General Law chapter 4A this public hearing has been duly advertised and notice thereof has been posted it's being held for the purpose of providing the opportunity for interested citizens to be heard this public hearing is continued from June 5th 2024 this is site plan view 202 24-8 applicant is Cil realy of Massachusetts Inc address is 51 Hunters Hill Circle request site plan review approval under section 3.36 of the zoning bylaw philanthropic or charitable medical or residential facility for a change of use and site alterations including two Ada ramps rear deck impervious walkway approximately 150 ft of vinyl privacy fence and repaved driveway parcel 16 d-209 in the RN zoning District all right do we have any board member disclosures for this project I do not see any all right um looks like Melissa is it mwan or okay I I got that right you guessed right all right good uh that's an unusual spelling um so welcome back and um I guess you were not at the last meeting you were the one who was absent and knew the answers to some of our questions my apologies I was on vacation that's good that's a good thing okay so do you want want to introduce the or reintroduce the project and go through any sort of uh narrative uh maybe touching on some of the things we asked about sure I'd love to so we are proposing to um renovate the existing single family home at 51 Hunters Hill um from a three-bedroom house to a three-bedroom house we're essentially just adding in an accessible bathroom and an additional bedroom um and moving one bedroom as an office anyway um I believe the issues that came up at the last meeting as the site plan we're proposing to put in a about 150 ft of privacy fencing um repave the existing driveway with the existing footprint install a generator um and install Ada accessible egress uh front and back which means um accessible doors with thresholds to accessible Landings to a ramp to a hard surface which exits out to the front of the house um and included in that are downcast lights so that's that's pretty much the extent of um the site plan um I know that I think there were some questions that came up which I responded to um I don't know if those were circulated to you guys um kind of just answering some technical questions about the generator it's just a full Full House gener generator pretty standard um we showed the location on the plan um we don't have it in our budget um to put a turnaround um at the end of the driveway and I also um Jennifer and Tara are here they're as attendees and they are from the agency that is going to be um occupying the home and they can speak to specific questions about the program um the staff and the residents um I'm I'm not able to answer that with any uh well I shouldn't say accuracy but they're better suited to speak to that so okay I think that's where we're at so yeah we do have a letter from you for June 18th where you responded to many of our to most of our questions so um board members are there further questions or further conversation about some of the issues that we asked about last time or have the responses we've received here in writing are those adequate to the to the conversation and we can talk about whether we uh would approve this site plan don't all raise your hands at once Johna I will confess I have not had a chance to read the letter the two things that I remember so you can say don't waste our time Johanna but the two things that I remember really rising to the surface when we were discussing this was um how many cars were likely to be at the residence on any given day and does the current does the planned driveway [Music] um Arrangement allow for kind of safe entry turning Etc um so that was the first question and then the second question came from one of the abutters um who just really appreciates the natural feel of the backyard and the and is like grateful that the vegetation is still going to be there but was hoping oping that the fence itself wouldn't just be like a big white vinyl construction that would kind of take away the soft natural feel of that kind of shared backyard area so again feel free to direct me to the letter and I'll go track it down real quick um but if those two points could be addressed now i' appreciate can I do you want me to speak to those now yeah or should okay um so the first question about the fence the fence is probably it's within the setback so I think the setback is 15 ft um on that rear property line and so it's not our intent to clear out the vegetation at all it's just to put the fence you know 15 feet off the property line and maintain um as much you know we're not going to clear it out and mulch it but we're also not going to let it get completely overgrown either I think it's just kind of it is what it is as it is right now plus a white vinyl privacy fence which is sort of just a standard construction it's um you know it's not going to be ugly it's it's like I said pretty standard um and as far as parking we can't speak I can't speak to specifics of numbers of cars because as anybody would have at their house you know cars come and go um but staff may or may not have cars there may be two or three cars in the driveway at any one time um and street parking is permitted so you know that's always kind of the backup we obviously want to be good neighbor and we want to you know keep people on the driveway and and um kind of maintain the feel as as things are but there's there's adequate parking now for at least three vehicles um it's a very long driveway so I mean theoretically you could Pez dispenser a lot of cars in there but that it wouldn't be that way so and you also say that the residents won't have cars they will not no so it's it's really just just the staff correct yeah and thank you I just pulled up the letter and I appreciate your responses there I guess I'm gonna push you a little bit more about the fence [Music] um does it need to be a white solid vinyl fence or could it be a black chain link fence um it's a privacy fence so so you want a screen view correct into the yard correct and it's and it's for you know I mean it's anybody that would put a privacy fence up that is you know kind of maintaining the privacy of their property that's okay that's all it is simply just a Bruce um I just want to push a little bit uh to us as a as a board um it seems that we would uh Melissa I understand it's the staff parking only and they're coming and and you're going to expect that they can organize themselves at the head of the drive and they can back down and Shuffle and all of that sort of thing um and and you note that Rob Mora is uh comfortable with that from his point of view as a Building Commissioner I guess um it still seems a bit uh odd to me that we wouldn't ask for a turnaround to be installed uh for this sort of use that you're proposing uh coming and going place to you know put snow and so forth like that perhaps sort of but uh you say that the your budget is tight and that if we were obligating you to do that it would probably add I don't know five to or more thousand to the budget and I can I understand that that's a significant number I guess so um I'm on the fence about this it seems to me that we we should uh um as a board ask for this ask for a turnaround to be put at the head of this driveway but but the applicant and the Building Commissioner are are disinclined to think this is critical um what do you the what do the rest of us think I'm I'm ACDC on this it seems to me that it's a good idea to do it but I don't want to bre cost anybody's budget unnecessarily um but you know it's one of those things you may thank us for year two 3 four so I don't want to Cave automatically because personally I think we'd probably ultimately be doing you a favor but there wouldn't be a favor in your first year I'm sure sounds like asking I'm asking for us to consider this I don't want opinion how do people feel about uh insisting on a turnaround in this project um I guess I'm I'm not feeling as strongly about it as you are Chris or Bruce um Johanna you had your name your hand up I don't know yeah before before Bruce asked this question it's true um I had one thought about the fence and then but I'm happy to talk for a second I'm also not inclined to push that hard on the turnaround [Music] um it yeah it's a three-bedroom house and if none of the occupants are going to have cars it just doesn't seem like there's I don't know I we might be like in pursuit of a solution like what is it when a solution is in search of a problem I feel like it's a little bit that um and that feels unnecessary on the fence I wonder whether the applicant has considered a color other than white because even that could potentially make a difference for some of the abutters who are trying to preserve the natural feel I can say because of I had this very experience in Springfield um that other colors are available but at quite a premium so you know wood is always an option but it's not an option for us it requires more maintenance it's not you know a a white vinyl fence um is very clean it you power wash it every year or two um that's just that's what we like to see like I said it's it's really it's really standard it's really clean looking um you know and it's like I said a it's a privacy fence so it's it it is that it's serving its purpose so we have considered it but we don't have the money to put in anything super fancy okay uh Jesse we still have Bruce's question on the floor too I I just gonna concur with Johanna I don't think I don't feel I need to push on the turnaround I think it's fine without um and for the fence I think it's also probably fine with white okay all right uh looks like we've lost [Music] Karen and uh I was Chris UD said she may not even have wasn't even gonna come so okay all right um do we have any members of the public who want to comment on this project all right not seeing any hands raised all right draft some standard um conditions and also I think there was a very standard um finding if up okay they should be showing these conditions are the same as the for the other project the only thing is that we added um a condition about air conditioning units communication devices and other outside mechanical equipment to be screened from View and Noise muffled with fencing plantings or other suitable materials so they have a generator here and I didn't know if you wanted to um impose this kind of a condition or not is this a gasoline generator it is a propane generator propane and it's it's on the side of the house um that's kind of the furthest away from the neighbors that's on the right side of the house mhm uh um I don't know if that makes any difference it kind of comes like any gener generator comes enclosed in its own kind of sound box but they still make noise obviously when they're R assume you test it once a month or something weekly for five minutes weekly okay all right Bruce um Melissa's provided the decibel rating for this generator and and uh I could uh remind or inform the board that the the noise level of this generator is approximately equal or less than uh the noise generated by uh heat pump water heaters that people often heavy in their well they're heavy in their houses so this thing is quieter than the device that people are comfortable or or or at least accept installing in the inside their house so I I think we can be comfortable that this doesn't need any special um noise screening okay I think I would agree with that Mr um Mr Marshall does that mean there's just no noise screening or should there be visual screening or should you just not screen this um well I think between Bruce and I we were we were advocating for no noise screening I can say personally I'm not sure there needs to be any uh visual screening it is in its own little box uh do any board members disagree with that and would want to have some visual screening okay I don't see any uh there's Fred you're muted Mr Hartwell sorry about that yeah I don't feel strongly about this but um I would point out that uh on a uh site plan that we did couple streets over from the street I live on there was a I think it was an air conditioning unit and uh I thought it was excessive but I got out voted and the board insisted on screening and uh I think what's good for the goose is good for the gander here I I um why is this different okay um do other board members have an opinion about that so I'm just gonna jump in I'm just gonna um share my screen um because um here's the site plan that's yeah that's uh here's the generator uh and then here's um a Google you know satellite image so the generator is here and so you know given this location and all the vegetation that's already in front of it I mean I think here's um here's a street view so you know all this vegetation is in front of it already I feel like it's pretty well screened I I mean unless this is being removed but I don't know know you know there's no indication that it is um you know I think the difference being Fred when it was proposed the other project it was highly visible uh here it's set back quite a distance from the road I mean looks like you know 150 feet or something okay thanks Nate for that supplemental information um Chris so I'm hearing delete item eight delete condition eight that would be an emotion that I would make if I made it um well I don't know that we had talked about deleting your entire motion it was really just whether we should include the generator in that equipment isn't that right does anybody disagree with what I thought we were talking about Pam can you bring the um condition up yeah where' it go well Nate knocked it off there we go hey can you see it yes here it is number eight yep so I think we've decided not to apply it to the generator do you want to keep it for other when yeah when when you read it originally I don't think anybody objected to including it Fred your hand is still up is that a legacy uh no I just wanted to say that uh uh I think Nate made the relative the the the appropriate rebuttal to my comment and I'm perfectly comfortable uh withdrawing that objection okay and since since since you've you're have got the floor how do you feel about uh this condition eight in general do you think we should keep it or just strike the whole thing um I would consider strike stking it uh I'd like to hear from staff on this whether there's uh and I don't know what else is out there for that that number eight would apply to um I this having looked at uh the uh the view from the street that Nate provided um I question the relevance of eight in this case okay great Mar and I'm I'm not strongly in favor of keeping it but I'm not strongly in favor of deleting it either because I think basically uh that site uh I was uh I I I did I was on the site visit and uh it seems to me that things are pretty much screened no matter what because of the vegetation and so forth around it it's very dense so I don't think any I don't think condition I don't think a condition eight would uh likely require any additional planting for the applicant um but on the other hand um it was is a special permit and and putting this in would protect uh uh I mean if the trees came down or something like that it's still there and so then it's uh it's a requirement so I I I don't think there's a harm in keeping it in okay this is a a site plan review it's not a special permit oh I beg you pardon but still the the uh the the trees aren't permanent necessarily right I I agree I think eventually they could come down uh Jesse Yeah I was just going to say it seems to meet that condition as is so I don't think there's any harm in leaving it for future all right all right I'm I think we're getting kind of a critical mass of folks who are saying let's just leave it as is Chris and make a statement that it doesn't apply to the generator or just leave it well sure leave the generator out of it because other mechanical equipment is there I don't think we have to particularly imply the generator right so just the way the way the normal um printing is done is what you want to keep and you want to eliminate the Bold italics correct okay thank you all right and then the last condition has to do with trash delivery and the maintenance and landcaping equipment and the hours in which that happens and days so that looks pretty standard too all right uh and then the findings that we are in compliance or the project is in compliance with Section 11.24 so again this is pretty pretty simple anybody want to change any of these draft conditions or findings any all right all right so uh maybe Bruce are you going to do another motion tonight I was but if anyone else wants to do it I'm I don't I just want to move things along that's yeah well why don't you do it okay move that uh the board approve uh uh SP 248 uh uh for the project at 51 Huns Hill with the uh the nine condition as uh drafted and with the finding uh as drafted and to close the public hearing all right thank you Jesse a second that thank you all right any further comments from board members or the public all right we'll go ahead with this roll call vote all right Bruce starting with you hi uh Fred I Jesse hi Johanna hi and we've lost Karen so I'm an i as well that is five in favor two absences thank you Melissa thank you guys I really appreciate it all right good luck have a good one thank you for your time all right time is 7:56 on my clock just in time for our 8 o'clock break we'll take five minutes and come back right after 8 o'clock please mute and turn off your phone now and then turn on your turn on your camera when you come back at least so we know you're back e e e e e e Jesse hello hi you guys on a break yes good timing well I kind of figured I figured that it would be so what did you guys cover so far uh both of the site plan no the special permit and then the site plan how did the Portland Lou go um fine no no real issues some discussion but got approved with the 10 foot distance from the sidewalk that was I was reading I was reading they were like the design review board was debating the color but I was hoping they would just paint over it like some kind of cool graffiti or something or paint over hello Janet I'm muted too you you got muted Janet for for all right looks like everybody except for Fred is back there's Fred all right great and Janet I see you've arrived so welcome let's see moving right along next uh item F so the time now is 8:03 and we'll continue with our meeting we're up to item five the open space and Recreation plan so I assume Town staff would like to introduce this yeah I just say few words of introduction we had thought that we were going to be submitting this plan by the end of June um and it became clear that we really would do a better job if we um spent a little more time on it and also there were no crucial um applications or Grant applications that we needed to file that this um osrp would have helped us with so we've decided to take a little bit easier time and we're going to be um working on over the summer Nate has been putting in a tremendous amount of time on this along with um Aon jock of the conservation um department and um others in the planning staff and um so Nate will present uh sort of an outline of what we're doing and give you some um a presentation on goals objectives and some action items all right thank you oh and I just wanted to say eventually we're going to need a letter of support from you so yeah hi everyone Nate Malloy yeah the town has an open space and Recreation plan that was a um from 2017 it expired this year in April uh the plans or requirement to apply for certain funding uh state and federal funding the uh it's an open space and Recreation plan so the focus is you know open space conservation and then you know active Recreation uh the state prescribes the the plan and so our current plan is pretty lengthy you know all the I I'll show the table of contents in a minute but you know essentially all the the the chapters the maps the subsections of the chapters that's all required so you know it's a pretty formulaic uh document it's similar to the housing production plan and that it has to need a state standard to be approved and then it's valid for a number of years five to seven years and it makes it Town eligible to apply for funding and so we're updating the plan we've been working on it uh for a number of months actually probably like eight months with staff turnover it's been um intermittent we have done a community survey that had about 150 responses we've done um Outreach uh you know in person uh at different Recreation and conservation areas that's g a number of maybe responses like 50 additional responses uh and then there's um you know there's been some other feedback so we have about you know 200 um public comments that help um kind of frame the plan um the the the plan structured it has you know like the first few sections are just general information about the town of amst you know what our departments look like uh the amount of open space we have the inventory of land and then sections six through nine are the parts of the plan that get into the goals objectives and then action steps and kind of you know what really what what are you doing with the you know the background information and so this is considered an update to the existing plan um and so the uh the existing plan you know most of it will remain and so uh here's the table of contents so you know an introduction a community setting that talks about you know the history of the town you know population employment growth pattern you know all that will just be updated and really the it's a pretty exhaustive plan right now I think actually the section three Community settings really well done but it's meant to be really what what is it what's the importance of say the settlement patterns in terms of it the open space and Recreation and you know what what's the importance of the employment in terms of you know same thing and so you know I think in this version we're trying to be a little bit more cognizant of you know the and we mentioned in the plan but you know that we have a daytime population we have you know University and colleges and so you know we plan for that in terms of even like our recreational facilities how are how is that impacted by the population that comes and goes and you know I think in this plan and the previous plan say from the early 2000s we would just we would list all the employment we'd have a big description about it but not really talk about why that's a factor in planning for open space and Recreation um you know section four is kind of outlining all the an inventory of the different types of environments and amers flood Hazard areas uh again all this is required by the state um section five is more about our inventory of lands and so you know we've worked with the assessor and the town's GIS Department to you know create new maps look at what we've conserved in the last seven years uh and then really the idea is section six is Community Vision seven is analysis of needs and so we take the you know your input to uh you'll this will come back to you as Chris mentioned um and then you know you could read the current plan and then the goals draft goals that were sent we hope to have a draft plan uh ready in the next two weeks and then you know goals and objectives and the seven-year action plan and so an action plan you know supposed to show shortterm long-term steps who's responsible and I think maybe funding uh and in this the state asks you know when we apply for funding where in the plan did we mention say we want to put a new playground at grath Park and it should be mentioned somewhere in the action plan it should also be referenced somewhere else in the plan and so if we can say that you know certain action items were referenced a few times in the plan it strengthens our applications and so we've we've taken the approach in the past that our goals are broad our objectives are Broad and our action steps are might name many things at once so it's not you know some communities might say you know their one goal is to get the community pool well we have a few pools and so you typically our goal you know an objective or an action step might say the pools and it might say a few of them and so we don't want to limit ourselves to possibilities um you know Recreation has taken a more active role in this on especially now we have a recreation department and so in terms of the inventory and needs you know they also did a survey on this winter um that had a number a few hundred responses as well in terms of what their program needs could be and so that helps with this plan and so you know all told we've had hundreds of responses that helped inform the draft goals and objectives that we can talk about tonight um and so we have six goals right now they could change each goal has an objective and then right now they're they have action items are listed underneath but essentially in in the plan it would be a goal an objective and under each objective we'd have to have a number of action items specific to that objective so we can't you know it wouldn't be in the format that it is tonight um so you know if you have six goals you have five goals or five objectives for reach goal and then you have five action items all of a sudden you're talking about 150 action items that are enumerated in the plan that all has to have you know pretty detailed explanation uh so it does grow exponentially you know depending on how much you have I'm not saying that to limit what we're doing but most plans have anywhere from like three to six goals you know three to six objectives per goal and then just you know a few action items um and so you know the first goal we have right now is strategic connections between open space Parks and Recreation areas as Village centers and Village centers and so you know what we've learned in the surveys and everything is we have a lot of protected open space and Parks but really you know Making Connections there whether it's off-road inroad bike routes um you know what can we do there you know and there's other barriers too it could be public transportation and so you know this is one goal uh there's a few objectives here and then action items and so you know through the public information gathering this was something that was really stressed it's something the towns try to work on um you know I know kastal trust and others have also done some things about getting you know Trail heads and locations where they can be near um population centers and so you know here that's one big goal if we want to go through the objectives we can I just want to hit the the bigger kind of draft goals and these don't these haven't changed too much from the current plan so I think the current plan is a good point of reference like I said it'll be you know you it's being used as the as kind of the backbone for the update um the second goal and they're not in priority order is uh protect and increase biodiversity Watershed lands and critical natural resources so again there was a lot of public feedback about you know Watershed lands and areas that are you know say unique to Amor in terms of natural resources and so um it could be you know building out uh acquiring strategic pieces around Lauren swamp in our Watershed lands in neighboring towns um and then you know also managing conservation areas or open space for for Habitat as well so you know that's a um you know one of the bigger goals and then like I said it you know objectives can be you know acquisition and man agement of watershed properties and then typically under that an action item in this plan would be you know could be like prioritizing unprotected Parcels uh you know mapping unique resources and so we'd have action items specific to that objective uh the third goal is is a big one um incorporate climate resiliency sustainability public awareness equity and inclusion and all Recreation and open space programs and so you know this is something that is um perhaps implicit in the current plan but we'd like to call it out a little bit more uh and you know and there's a number of things here some of it is just kind of the public Outreach and education uh to let people know what we have where they can go how they can use it uh you know we have a dog park now uh you know we have a bike share program and you know uh in some of the point in place surveys that staff had done people weren't aware of even some of the things we have and so you know how do we how do we highlight those and then how do we get more people using uh what we have and so uh you know for instance puffer Pond could be used as a cooling center it could be you know make sure that there's public transportation serves it year round and so uh you know things like that and and um you know like I said we try to write the goals so they are broad uh there's the last one is specific but I think you know these are you know meant to then be kind of refined with objectives and action items the last two the last goal goals four and five mirror each other one is maintain enhance and expand Parks and Recreation areas um I think the focus here is really on you know maintain and enhance and so uh you know make things more accessible improve facilities uh you know maybe add small like we said neighborhood parks here as an objective but really uh the focus isn't on necessarily you know creating and buying more land for Parks but managing what what the town has and then for open space and conservation it's the same thing maintain enhance and expand open space and conservation areas and so you know the town's becoming more strategic about its acquisition of open space uh you know we had for I think 42 or 45 years applied for a land grant every year to acquire land whether in fee for conservation restriction and that stopped a few years ago and we've been um you know we don't apply every year now uh if you know um if for instance you know we think that maybe the a project could could wait or we could try to have a combination of land conservation and housing and so you know we're having kind of broader discussions and being a bit more strategic about you know land you know we're still the town is still acquiring land but you know um you know if someone offers five acres and it's not connected to anything it's you know not near a wildlife Corridor it's already surrounded by development is that really a key you know property to acquire or are we looking at you know land adjacent to you know existing conservation areas or that are near you know the streams and rivers in town and so you know I think that um for this goal we have a few objectives and some action items it could be expanded Now goal six is something staff hasn't necessarily talked about but it's something that was mentioned a lot in the survey responses is um addressing offleash dogs and you know all over town you know you know so this was put in here my opinion this this could be an objective under a goal but you know maybe there was enough of a you know enough public opinion on this that it should be its own goal that's pretty specific and uh you know so so here it is um you know and there's a few objectives and action items under that uh you know I think that you know we looked at Deerfield has updated their plan recently IP switch I mean gler has one uh you know there's a few other communities we looked at examples you know Gloucester had some similar goals you know and one of theirs may have been specific about you know like uh increasing um access and you know maintenance of beaches and public beaches that's you know that's important for their community and so uh you know maybe this dog off Le is is important for ammer um generally these goals are like I said you know kind of appropriate for the plan the idea is the objectives could be um refined and then action items uh added to so in the existing plan we have see if I can jump if this will still work you know that supposed to be an active uh sorry an active link to jump down to that so I'm just going to do a quick scroll um we have a an action plan map but this is what the action plan looks like so it's a multi-page chart with you know the goal up top and objective and action items with responsible entities funding and completion timeline and so you know what was shown to you is really you know a draft that will have to then be not necessarily put in this format but have all these um categories you know who's responsible for completing it possible funding and a timeline you know so if the plan is a five to seven-year plan is it you know one to two years two to four or longer and so um you know what we've done here in the current plan is you know we have a lot of action items and you know some of that like I said is we want to be able to prepare for possible funding opportunities and so we don't want to be so specific this plan that we don't mention something that could be a priority in two years or three years uh you know and so we're looking to the Conservation Commission is act actually discussing this too tonight Recreation Commission has talked about it they're going to do that again and also seek public comment at their meetings and you know really hope to have you know some more objectives under each of those categories on the plan in terms of what Recreation sees as needs and as Trends and goals for you know know moving forward objective so you know for a long time we had a skate park uh in the plan I'm not sure a skate park is you know maybe it's still a big one um uh maybe not you know we have outdoor pools do we really need another one or maybe it's about you know maintaining them and expanding programming uh you know uh getting public transportation to pools in the summer and so you know I think the overall goals are pretty similar to some of the ones we have in the existing plan and we've used for the last few plans but some of it is that the action items and objectives will change as you know needs and Trends change uh you know we're an aging population so some of it also is about you know accessibility different circuits or programs that could happen or um you know um exercises that could we could have at different Parks or areas and so you know all those things are will be action items in the plan that try to anticipate what we think you know could be done and it's not you know I don't want to say it's a wish list but you know we've probably implemented a number of things in the plan but you know like I said if you saw that there is you know hundreds of action items and so you know staff does use it to help apply for Grants or prioritize you know Capital needs and conservation and Recreation uh but you know it is a lot in there so Nate um what do you want from us tonight do you are you just doing this over overview and then it we some point in the future we'll see a more detailed plan do you want some comments on what you've shown us or yeah I think you know like I said in the next two weeks we'd like to have a draft plan that would be made public and you could the staff could read that and or share that with you I think for tonight or after tonight could just be you know looking at the goals and objectives you know are there uh you know and you can send comments to staff individually but you know are there any gaps or is there something that's like okay wow you know what your understanding or what you what you hear or what you know what you your impression is um you know you know like although we've had you know a few hundred responses here and you know recreation's had some you know there's you know we did have you know for instance it may have been you know a lot of respondents were the same kind of demographics and so you know did we miss some or do we not hear from certain demographics or anyway so that some of it would be you know as planning board members you know what what are you hearing in the community what do you see and as Chris mentioned uh the state has listed the planning board the regional planning agency and uh the town manager as three entities that have to I don't want to say I don't know if it's like approve the plan or support it and then write a letter when we submit it to the state saying that you know you've you know you support it it's General goals uh well we also have the Conservation Commission and Recreation Commission do the same and so but the require requirments are the regional planning agency planning board and town CEO okay so ultim I mean you'll probably get a couple comments now but um right we could send our comments to you or and Chris just over the next couple weeks yep yeah and when we have like I said that draft plan we'll send it out too okay Johanna great thanks Nate really appreciate looking at this um my question is when I think about goals goals are like getting a particular thing done on a specific timetable and when I read this there is there's a lot in here and there are parts of it that almost feel more like a vision than goals and so I guess my question is are there actual like is this is the idea these are the goals for The Next 5year Period or the next 10e period or is it more like wow this would be great if we could do all this do you understand my question yeah yeah I mean it's a it's a seven-year plan and so really the goals would be you know seven years I don't you know I think um and yeah I think some of it would be like I said we want to keep them a little broad just because you know the state wants this format where we have goals objectives and action items and so if a goal is so specific that then you can't have objectives or action items underneath it then it won't follow that format so you know currently we have six goals in the plan you know and the first one is increase recreational active and passive opportunities in near Village centers and other appropriate areas to serve a right of users and needs um the second goal is improve stewardship and management of conservation lands trails and Recreation areas and so you know what we've you know we've kind of reworked them uh we really actually staff tried not to look at the existing goals at all and objectives and writing the draft that you saw just to say okay well based on all the feedback what what would we say are kind of new goals um but then we know we're probably going to go back and kind of ground truth it a little bit with what we already have in our plan all right Chris so Nate had mentioned to me that he thought it would be a good idea if you all read the existing plan and I wanted know if he still thinks that's true and if so where where can the planning board find the existing plan well it was in the packet but I think you know for now if anything you know sections six through nine are really the part that the state uh wants updated and that section six is kind of the Community Vision and Outreach process and then it's Community needs the goals and objectives and the action plan and so if you were to focus on anything it's 6 through n and you know you could read what we have I'd read it kind of lightly um and then you know anticipate a a newer draft coming out so then you could see what what's changed but um you know the I think the existing plan has a really great you know Community setting section uh and you know great information about demographics and we're updating that I don't you know you can read it but I don't like I said to me the point of all those sections are really you know the settlement pattern of Amis has influence where open space is and say where we have certain Parks and Recreation I think sometimes we in our current plan we actually have more information that isn't gerine to the open space and Rec plan right like we list the top 10 employers down to the number of employees you know like 52 and a half FTE like what to me it's like what is the point of that if it's not related to kind of open space and Rec planning so in the new plan we're not going to have a table that you know lists those you know in that detail um you know we still list employers but by industry category using a State website not you know anyways so I would focus on 6 to9 if you're going to do anything okay um Pam I see your hand you are muted no I don't believe that was in the packet I I don't the current plan wasn't no no oh sorry I I downloaded I I I downloaded and had it in all my PDFs open for tonight I guess I must have just downloaded it from the website if if you went went to um the conservation department on the left hand side of the screen in the red banner there's it says open space and wck plan and then it has its own web page I think if you just keyword search the town's web page you could write you know 20 can we just send them a link yeah we can send the link all right um Bruce I thought Jesse was ahead of me oh he's not got his hand down yeah uh so I um I mean if I this is a process question Nate I think if I were thinking about this on a 7 year you know rotation I guess I would start by asking um how what's what what is the trajectory of change in the town over the past seven years and anticipated through the next and you know the student population's getting a little bigger perhaps uh the population is getting older so that dog leash thing makes sense to me because there's more older people in who are threat who I mean I feel that and I a lot of my friends so I understand why that's there and I can understand that that's change that's happening and so I suppose would it is it true to imagine that that's where you start with these things on the 7 to7 s year basis and you look and I uh identify the way in which or things that are changing in town um how the town is evolving from one thing to another I know for example when we did the the comp plan years ago we over a 200 year period we noted that the town used to be a agriculturally focused town and then 120 years ago it was an industrial uh focused town and in the last 50 or more years it's been an education focused town so this town has changed dramatically over 200 plus years and so if you collapse that down into a sevene by seven-year slice I guess I would want to know that this plan was that that the evolution of these plans would be starting with that kind of analysis that how was the town changing what are the significant differences between the town now and seven years ago and seven years hence is that is is is that the methodology fundamental to the way which you're thinking or the town is or the the the drafts are thinking about this plan yeah like I think you know the goal say for open space is you know not so much acquisition so a previous plan was more about acquire land uh you know that was really stressed and so you know the current plan and then the new plan is more about stewardship and maintenance of existing land you know less about say just acquire acquire acquire and so you know some of that you know is is there you know I think with the recent drought and you know what's happening with the weather and kind of the disruption to you know weather patterns you know there's a you know a lot of comments about you know water supply protection and um you know making sure that that's you know that that's adequately um you know preserved and so you know that's something that's coming out I think yeah so I think to me that the goals may may um outline you know I think goal four or five whatever it was or three in terms of climate resiliency and um inclusion is important I think more some of the objectives will get at that right so to me it's kind of like our housing production plan we're updating that right now too we we need housing like we needed housing in 2013 like we needed it in 1990 so you know but really it's maybe now more about right like what types of housing maybe it's you know housing that people can age and place in or maybe there's more senior housing and so when we looked at the goals for open space and Planet some of it is that and we're hoping that the rec Recreation Department um for the needs and Trends we base it on we have to use the Statewide um open space and wck plan and the National Park Service standards and so uh we we look at what they say our needs and Trends and then what we hear locally and so that influences where we are in terms of our our objectives and our action items okay okay uh Janet um does Chris want to go first I don't know Chris you have your hand up I just wondered if um what BR Bruce was suggesting was some sort of narrative about how the town has changed over the last seven years and kind of a general um you know broad sweeping narrative about that and and maybe that would be a good idea to see if we could incorporate that into one of the um earlier chapters and um you know we could just sort of talk about it in house and and come up with some some broad sweeping statements about that I think that's not a bad idea yeah we we do it in parts so we um in growth and development patterns and then in community setting in the beginning we have um we talk about what you know what's happened in the last seven years and kind of where we are but I think I think we could reexamine that just to make sure it covers everything you know to Bruce's points it's it's I was thinking more of a statement of methodology but also as a kind of a preamble and it would it could be an introductory uh preamble to every plan which says here's here's what's different here's how we think you thought and you you identified a few uh things and so it seems real that you know the climate is forcing things a little differently age is forcing things the university population is growing we've got a new school it's just about to come online I mean you probably add few things that would explain why the drivers for how this plan is changed from the last plan and I think it that would be a good Preamble that would help uh agencies and so forth that are looking at the new plan and they would understand that you weren't just rather you weren't just cranking out something that was the same as last time with a few so I wouldn't bury it in in uh item by item burying it in the plan I would put it all out and put it at the front so people are impressed by what you're do yeah section section one I mean the very first beginning does that it um you know it'll it'll get there okay uh Janet so I I you know thinking I'm thinking about this I think that um the town has done a lot of great work on improving Recreation like we have that dog park um the Kendrick park playground is beautiful um grath Park got renovated and the spray Park which is in heavy use um you know from what I can see and then Hickory Ridge we're building new Trails um that are accessible and then the Fort River Fields are taking getting a huge upgrade and so I think you know I don't know if you're going to mention that but it seems like to me a lot of the things that were in the plan and some things that weren't in the plan you know have really there's been a lot of progress and improvements um so I just think we should take a second and recognize that um I had some just very specific things I haven't I haven't read the open space plan for like seven years or something but um one of them is I think I think objective three was like increasing the budget for maintenance and I think that's a huge need and I think you know I talked to the DPW guys and you know there's just not enough people maintaining Trails or the parks or different you know other public spaces and I know that um the conservation department is doing Trail maintenance and you know in my area we can expect one moow of a trail a year which isn't enough and so um I also know people in my neighborhood you know are really interested in doing kind of um plans for conservation land or Recreation land and they would help plan the plans and maybe imple you know be a citizen group of of um maintaining stuff and I don't know if that's so I think maintenance has to be really highlighted as a huge need and a focus in the town and that means money and I you know it's it's just it has to be money so I wouldn't really have deleted it as objective three or a goal you know I would think that's a big goal um I think a a very achievable thing we could do is to create maps of trails in the Parks because I someone showed me one about all the different trails in amoris and I think it we used to distribute that and I know that you know we built like the um is it the Sweet Alice Trail we did that you know whole trail head entry um I think we could really increase the use of the trails and bring people more and more people to town and I'm always saying you can just walk around ammer for like eight hours you know there we have miles and miles of trails and so I think that would be a great way of making the trail system more known and accessible with a good map and um and also the parks because they all sort of link up um I wondered about the bicycle Lanes like there was no discussion of onroad bicycle Lanes so there was I think there was talking about bicycle access like on Trails but I think that we have to sort of tie this into the need for you know protected bicycle Lanes so people can get from East Hadley Road to grath park you know we've done that right but that has to happen all over the town of how can people get from Village centers or from their apartment or things to a recreational area and so I would not just limit it I would say onroad bicycle Lanes um and then another idea I had I mean I just have to say we have to put our dogs on leashes because my dog has been attacked several times in the last weeks by offleash dog so I think that's super important um and then what was the other one I I didn't really understand why we were trying to like increase um The Watershed areas and not the biodiverse areas like it seems to me that areas of high biodiversity need more of a buffer and more protection and then I began to wonder is are they just overlapping um so that was kind of kind of a question I think that's my Hit List um I think that's it but I I wondered if biodiverse areas just overlap with Watershed areas I mean yes and no I think they do but you know there's also areas that can be you know outside Watershed lands that you know are also like biomap and critical natural resources and so um you know but they can they can overlap and so you know right now the town just acquire uh you know was just it was um was like 11 acres or something you know um in shots Berry so you know it's not you know most of our Watershed land is pretty protected pretty well protected but the our Watershed lands in say pel and shuberry uh you know up there there's no public water or sewer and so depending on what well and septic happens you know we really have to make sure the Watershed lands are protected it's not at the expense or you know precluding any you know acquisition of lands that are you know um have a lot of biodiversity or you know map the state has a number of mapping tools so some of it is just you know looking at all of that and coming up with the plan I will say that you know this is one plan in town the historic preservation plan was just updated by the commission we have a bike ped plan that pvpc had done a few years ago you know we have um you know a transportation plan that's now um you know almost 10 years old or maybe it is 10 years old actually uh and so there is probably redundancy in a lot of these plans the idea is that this would be incorporated into the master plan uh and then the master plan is going to get updated in the next you know five to six years we'll say but yeah I mean I think that you know say in terms of like you know inroad or you know um bike bike connections yeah I I I think we'd have to make sure we're not you know saying only off-road right it's also any kind of bike you know bike transportation I think the mapping thing is really interesting we've I've talked about this with it that we have so much information online with GIS but sometimes it's nice to have almost like a simple map like a PDF map it's not interactive of just you know say right Trails schools and Recreation areas and Trail heads is really important because we've done some work on the parking areas and so when we did the Bike Share program we really like the maps that that's at those stations uh kind of the format and so we've talked about could we kind of adapt that to have you know even if it's like one or two maps but have those available in a lot of places and online and so people can see them and use them you know they become you know put on kiosks and it's just you know you can see it and understand it because yeah yeah it's sad when people say oh I didn't realize you know right we have over 80 miles of trails and they're not even sure how to get to to one yeah so I would I would I guess my specific recommendation is to 1B add the bio map areas and core habitat for expansion or prote protection so those might be acquisition areas um because of their ecological importance so I wouldn't I wouldn't just limit it to the Wetland not the wetlands the um Water Resources so I know they're often op laughing but if there's not that should be a real Focus for acquisition or protection so but I think those Maps would be just people would just love them you know they would just love them all right and I guess we can send you other comments in the last in the next couple weeks when and we'll wait to see the new draft of the plan yeah and if you right if you know in the next two weeks if you read the current plan or the draft goals that were sent and you have ideas you can send them along okay Bruce just a question Nate uh is it appropriate I mean I read through this these action items and so forth and of course I guess I hadn't studied the plan very carefully before and I thought of two or three action items that I thought could be on there but I certainly didn't think it was appropriate to stop telling publicly saying all of my own action vs that things like might be good in north amist and so forth but would it be appropriate or inappropriate would it be is it okay for me for example to send you some suggestions of things that look like they might be important or could be important for your consideration in other words it's virtually a public comment on the plan it's not really something related specifically to us as a board but since I'm looking at it can I do that or is that yeah not fair no I think that's fair so you know for instance you know a lot of the public comments may have focused on a few things and when staff has met we've said you know they the public may not know what what else there is right and so you know like if if no one's mentioning green infrastructure downtown right how can we try to manage storm water on site more in urban areas and you know it's difficult to do but maybe that becomes something we put in the plan we've been talking about say certain things like that and even if it's not mentioned a lot in the surveys or in the public feedback we're getting it's something important that you know as part of new storm water regulations that are coming out it's something that you staff's been you know going to trainings on okay how do we put that in the plan and so you know what we what we have here in the draft is like I said trying to Ste information from the surveys and what staff has said but we're you know open to getting more you know ideas for objectives or action items so yeah well for example North am Community Fund Incorporated and Z Zac have been talking about creating a trail through the middle of North Amis from the conservation area at Pine Street all the way up to uh Eastman Lane and it has to do with getting permissions or there's a certain process for uh liability eliminations for private property owners who who would you know through through through whom this would transect so it's a a rather nice idea but I don't I don't see it as an action item specifically and I I think maybe that would be a good one there's a couple other things like that that I've been involved in that appear not to be there but maybe they are that's what I would be sending you that's fine yeah I you know what you're talking about I think is in the current plan I know for a while I had actually like 10 years ago um I you know I we had looked at that because I think um you know uh cyclist also wanted an off-road connection so we talked about going you know through right Eastman all the way up to Pine Street uh you know between you know between the two you know East Pleasant and North Pleasant but I yeah that's fine if if other members have comments like that that's fine um and it and it can become an action item right maybe maybe it it becomes less specific about that area or maybe it is and but then we realize we can extrapolate it and say okay we need more offload connections between you know in North Amis as well as South Amor here and so you know maybe we we add to it as part of an action item I think that's that's acceptable well some of these are quite specific I mean building a bridge across the Hickory you know building across Bridge across a creek so they a particular Creek in a particular place so they very specific so I thought well goodness yeah they are the name of the game here yeah some are sometimes I'd like to say that one for Hickory is also like again could we what we've done typically in the past when we get the to the final plan we'll say you know improve you know Bridge you know Bridges and then we might say Hickory and you know like mil River kushman or whatever and just throw a few extras in there because if we apply for funding and we literally do not have that mentioned the state you know will miss out on a point or two on an application so you know we like I said we might add a few more things to each of those action items to make sure it's has enough but okay all right I don't see any more hands uh thanks Nate and we'll look for the next draft all right uh the next topic on our agenda time is 8:45 topic number F six is University Drive potential housing overlay Zone continue discussion all right uh Nate maybe you're the one to introduce the materials that were in our packet sure yeah we uh uh I will say that the housing uh subcommittee the planning board met I guess it was just this week it seems like it was longer ago and talked about it and so you know Jesse could summarize that discussion a bit uh in the packet there's two versions so after the last meeting uh of the planning board staff staff discussed you know what you know what what's the an option to take and you know I think there is you know so what we have is two one is a mixed use Focus we'll say and one is housing focused I I'd say you know 90% of the bylaw is the same in both uh the you know there's a few key differences so in the mixed use one the only thing that's allowed in the overlay is a mixed use building uh you know it and then you know there's no distance from the corner or anything and then we've defined mixed use differently in that it's 75% of the street facing facade to to a depth of 24 ft uh so essentially it's saying that you know every building has to have a mixed use component for most of its you know ground floor or you know Street facing facade um we did put an extra six-story in there and only added a few feet to height so you know we we've in all of our versions We have a pretty generous Florida Florida ceiling ratio so even 65 ft for six floors you know is is you know the Building Commissioner feel like that's you know adequate to have six floors uh there is no waiver for that uh you know in the current bylaw the way we Define height um you know mechanical equipment you know is not included or a parapet wall isn't so uh you know there could be things higher than that we do have Provisions for things to be stepped back from the uh buildings to you know to be screened or not visible so you know I think that's a change in both is this extra story uh something to discuss uh this mixed use component and then um which is different than 30% growth flare area and so in the mixed use one you know we said if the idea really is to have a vibrant streetscape let's just say it right we want everything up along the street uh and it may actually end up being more than 30% it could be less but really what we're trying to do is get all the you know all the most of the street facing um ground floor to be activated uh and then we you know rework kind of the open space piece with that pedestrian path on the West Side uh so really call that out in both versions the other version is you know I'll say it's a housing um you know can prioritize housing in that it still allows apartments and social dormitories you know beyond 500 feet uh of the intersections of AMD you know with um and uh route n and Northampton road so uh you know that's something that had been in there we eliminated the you know at one point we said oh maybe there'd be a lower mixed use percentage if it was beyond 500 feet but you know basically we're saying that within you know 500t of the intersection you still are required to do mixed use but on the interior so for about a thousand feet along University Drive uh you know you could do apartments or social dormitories again adding a six floor um and you know I think you know you know staffs you know we're not I think there's uh benefits to both I think you know at the discussion last time with the planning board and the housing subcommittee you know some of it is um you know let's try to get what we would want and then I think also you know I I think this actually would be a good test right so we have a council form of government and we say we can act quicker on zoning amendments or changes but for instance if we did adopt something and move this forward and it was adopted and you know after a year it's not used we could figure out why or if we have a project that we don't like then I would say well let's change the the overlay right right and so that's something that has been said and I'd like to say that we we could actually follow through with that and so um you know with that you know I'm saying well you know I my preference would be for the if the planning board were to adopt something tonight or to vote to move recommend something to council I'd want it to just be one you know there was some discussion about would the planning board recommend two but I I would I'd only I would say recommend one version and maybe it's the mix use version and let's just say it's the mix use version uh you know we could talk about um you know the sixth floor or parking or whatever else uh and then we you know we could talk about that I will say at the housing subcommittee under parking I would add a few more bullets you know I'd require the sub midle uh for every project of a utilization study and a parking management plan and so I think there had been a bullet in there in a previous version it was lost in the current one it would be brought back and that way the the planning board board you know these are all site plan review uses would actually understand what is the parking and so then the developer would still have to you know describe what what their need is and what they would want and so you know for instance if they don't think they need parking for residential units they would show it and then maybe a condition would be that the lease agreements have to say there's no parking spaces available and it's different than the current bylaw where the planning board has to agree with the developers um utilization otherwise they still have to provide parking right you could deny waivers and so really what we're saying is there's no parking requirements here but they still have to show something to get at you know what they're thinking is the right level of you know right number of parking spaces and I think it's a balance uh uh Barry's project on 422 Amity is applied for site plan review and I think during that discussion you know the amount of mixed use and units and beds and everything it all works together in terms of parking and so you know the housing subcommittee talked about you know what is the Right Mix I think given the location of University Drive and you know that there's no on street parking uh you know it's not as if it's in the Downtown parking area Municipal parking District I think each project will talk to its neighbors but you know really parking has to be located close to the project or they could come up with some other ideas but it's really then incumbent on the developer if they think they have a successful project to determine what is the right parking and so we're not you know this approach may not be used elsewhere I might argue that this could be used everywhere in town uh because really the benefit would be um private parking you know shared parking so we eliminate the shared parking provision and it's been in there because the the best thing would be for private property owners to get into their own agreements to manage it and they you know they have a management plan that is on record with the town but you know we don't need to go in and negotiate and monitor parking and so we've talked about that downtown where you know we'd facilitate private to private agreements but we'd be the enforcement agent which becomes you know really cumbersome with you know many different parties it actually would be more efficient if you know say you know one developer and one you know two private properties discuss how they can share parking between themselves which actually has happened on University Drive now and it seems to work pretty well so yeah I mean that's that's where we are I could share my screen I could share my screen eventually but you know really it's these two versions I think we could maybe dug quickly just say if there's if people are leaning to one version or the other we could just then focus on that uh or if we want to just kind of open it up in terms of like you know what we think is beneficial but I you know the Hope was to get to the planning board to vote tonight on you know one one version yeah Chris I see your hand yeah I wanted to um just explain what the meaning of that is um if the planning board voted to recommend one of these is it okay to talk yeah the the meaning of what um the meaning of what Nate just said if the planning board voted to recommend one of these two um documents um what would happen is it would go to Town Council and we would make a presentation or you would make a presentation before Town Council and say that you think this is a really good idea and that you want it to be a um a zoning Amendment a proposed zoning Amendment and then if Town Council thought it was a good idea um if a majority of them did then they would um take it upon themselves to refer it to the planning board and to the CRC for public hearing so that would start a process so I just wanted to let you know that that's kind of what what we're imagining for this and that's you know it would get the ball rolling and so that's similar to what sort of started with the solar B I guess that didn't originate with us that originated with the working group so that's this is not the same as the solar bylaw proposal okay um well I'm yeah I guess I was hoping we could vote on this sometime soon we've been talking about it all spring um I do have a few questions myself so I'm hoping we can have some conversation Jesse why don't you go ahead sure I was just going to add that I think the only thing the subcommittee was in complete agreement on was trying to move it forward hopefully tonight so did did the subcommittee see both of these or is this the first you've seen them we we saw both and we discussed and we went back and forth a little um there was one suggestion of putting both forward there was more discussion I don't think we really landed on all agreeing on just one um maybe we can get there tonight okay great I think two of the main pieces of disagreement were around the parking requirement and um any requirement for different types of housing within the units which I think is not currently in either one okay um Nate um I guess can if I can ask you at least a couple of questions um the mixed use only proposal you said earlier that you were redefining mixed use um it doesn't look that way it looks like you have two additional bullets that add to the what I guess is the standard definition of mixed use in the rest of the bylaw it says with the following additional requirements and I'm not seeing where mixed use is said to be redefined oh well we wouldn't use the 30% it would only be that 75% of the facade so you don't say anywhere that the 30% of the standard bylaw is not applicable right right I mean I guess we could the idea is that the all right yeah I mean the Building Commissioner you know assuming to understand that that's you know that's uh previously we had said that the um overlay will have its own um you know definitions and standards and so that's you know his you know the I guess you know maybe we're just into it too much to see that yeah I just think with the following additional requirements suggests that it's in addition to whatever else there is out there and right that that's misleading me okay um and then the other proposal the housing focused one does utilize the existing mixed use definition including the 30% right right y okay okay uh those were that was my immediate questions Janet um I'm actually confused I thought that under the mixed use proposal it would be 30% in the first floor but requiring that this the 75% of the street facing facade be on you know be you know whatever the the front is 75% would be you know commercial or retail space so I didn't realize that we were deleting the 30% um at all so I'm not sure that that the I'm I'm not on the housing subcommittee but I'm not sure if everybody understood that I think we also did talk a lot about that sixth floor um some people were against it and some people thought that if it is added there be some kind of give back like more inclusionary zoning or something or be step back um so okay are there other comments I I think what I'm I'm wondering is whether we should at some point before the evening is over just have a straight up or down vote on both of these to see you know do these have legs and um maybe it's a not non-binding vote if if we still want to tweak it but you know can we focus where we're where we're thinking uh and uh okay so Jesse I was also going to add that we also discussed or recognized that this is the beginning of the process that Chris just laid out for us and so that maybe we don't need to be too prescriptive right now because there will be a lot of public comment before it comes back to us again really whatever we put forward okay that's that's was the General sense also on the subcommittee I think all right Bruce Bruce you are muted apologies with that in mind I I was uh going to propose or move that we favor the mixed use uh and I won't even qualify it about whether is inclusing resoning or not and it does have six floors so it's that it it has a parking uh as there's no there's no prescriptive parking I think I would like the during the subcommittee N you said that you would make clear the the bullets and so forth there's a couple more bullets so but you can put that in if you choose but uh uh and uh I'm with Janet I might think that having the 30% GFA because I think I asked you because you've got one of them with the with the 30% ground ground floor area which is an area def um Criterion and then in the other you've got a a linear Criterion which was 70% 75% of the the frontage um but for the moment I I'm going to just propose that we favor the mixed use and see where it hands up so that's a mo that's a motion I don't understand yeah I move I move that the uh the board uh um recommend to Town Council that uh this change in the bylaw take place on the basis of the draft the mix use draft is is that we send we send that draft as the basis of the recommendation to council okay uh Jesse your hand went up next sure I would second that all right we have a motion in a second uh discussion Janet so one one of the things we talked about at the housing um subcommittee was um I feel that the parking article seven our parking regulation is very flexible and so any developer can come in and say I don't need two parking spaces per unit or you know I have a um quick stop and people are just going to pull in and pull out of you know the dry cleaner so I don't need you know x amount of spaces for my square footage and so they can come in and make that showing and the planning Bo can say we agree um or a developer could come and say you know I don't want to do any parking I just you know there's you know nobody in my building's going to need a car and the planning board can come back and say well that's really hard to understand and um you know we you you know it's you know you have 300 units you know or 200 units or you have you know commercial and retail space it doesn't seem plausible to us everyone's going to show up by a bus and so article 7 gives us the authority to say yes or no or modify whatever the parking propos proposal is if we have no parking requirement I personally don't see anything in article 11 site plan review where we could say okay your parking management plan is a building full of leases that say you can't have parking we just don't think this is going to work you know this is not a realistic plan maybe you get one parking space per unit that could be four bedrooms or you can get a half parking space per unit that could be you know two four bedrooms um I I don't see any legal ability that we can have and saywell that's an interesting parking management plan put some parking in and so we you know we were allowed to put conditions on you know projects but we have to have some legal Authority in the bylaw and article seven the parking and access regulations bylaw gives us the ability to say yes no or maybe or we're just going to change this a little bit so I think if we lose any parking requirement we have no ability to say wow that's a bad plan that's a bad parking management plan um and so I don't want to give that up and it's not just for residential it's like religious and educational uses retail offices and similar uses you know it's but it's a very flexible requirement and at the end of article seven we have an ability to just again modify just saying give us a good management plan maybe some special shuttle bus or something so I think it's too I think we have a very flexible parking requirement if we say there's none we have no ability to to impose or change anybody's plan so I wouldn't do it okay so you don't like the way it's drafted yes that's my that's one of my criticisms yes I will say that you know to um to that point I think I had said it but that we would add the bullets that an applicant is required to submit a parking utilization study and a parking management plan and now would be used as the decision for the board and so those are two bullets that after the housing subcommittee discussion that those would be wrapped into those parking requirements and so I think as we said I said Jen at the housing subcommittee the difference is the board could say no and still require parking and so there's really not that much flexibility the flexibility is that here the developers actually you know figuring out what they can what they need to make a project successful and so you know if if if the board doesn't think that a waiver is grantable or it's not for Aesthetics or site design or something they could say no to any of those and so I don't think having a very prescriptive parking requirement given this the location of University Drive and what's around it is necessary like I said it may be different other parts of town uh and so um you know I I don't you know what but requiring that they provide a utilization study and a parking management plan as the basis for a decision of the planning board is asking them to do something and provide information so it's not you know they're just coming in and saying nothing they have to provide something I think I'm saying is that we couldn't do that like in our current bylaw we do require a parking management plan and a parking utilization study but I'm saying is if there's no requirement for parking we can't say we looked at your study we think you're wrong put in 20 spaces I don't see the legal Authority we have if there's a No Parking requirement well it says there's no minimum spaces as required in those sections of the bylaw it's not saying that there's no parking required so the Building Commissioner doesn't have a problem with you know enforcing parking spaces here based on the language we you know we would insert so I don't I don't so you don't think you don't think Janet's concern is really real yeah I mean I think that if um you know if we need to uh change the language I mean we could say that uh you know if she's worried about the no minimum we could say there you know like we just said that there um with the following exceptions you know the parking you know the parking requirements of 700 to 7005 don't apply I mean we could change that language uh and maybe that happens over the course of say the amendment the zoning amendment process but you know the time staff I've met the Building Commissioner hasn't had a concern with you know the ability to require parking okay all right um R uh yeah my my hand went up first to suggest that uh Nate's bullet points get incorporated into the motion as a friendly Amendment uh and I still suggest that but I want to respond to the larger public policy issue that uh Janet has raised and uh and that is uh you know we live in a market economy and uh anybody uh spending the millions of dollars that's required to construct something that's going to go into this overlay uh is certain to have made a careful study of what the market requires and I don't think we have to get into this at this point uh I like this just the way uh uh Nate is suggesting it by making sure that the uh it appears in the leases and everything so that uh the uh uh the people who are going to be creating this understand they're going to have to be forthcoming about exactly what they've designed in terms of the market and then I can't think of another place in town where uh I'm comparatively less concerned about a a uh prescriptive requirement on parking than here where there is abundant uh bus traffic and so forth uh let's uh let's leave this to the market I don't have a problem with that and I I thoroughly in support of sending this forward okay thanks thanks Fred Jesse yeah I don't entirely disagree with Janet's point but I guess I'm feeling like I would like to move it forward as is knowing it's going to get scrutinized by many other people and come back I would almost guarantee with that as something to that needs to be changed I feel like there's no way it's going to go through Council and CRC without this parking issue being addressed without the 30% being being brought up somehow and then we're going to be dealing with it on that other end and so to me this is like okay let's make sure everyone's on board with the idea and then we can hash out these details that that's that's the position I've sort of come to okay thanks Jesse Bruce uh I absolutely agree with you Jesse I I think that it'll be interesting to see how this discussion happens through the other committees that are going to be doing this and so I'm art from agreeing with you fored I'm also agreeing with Jesse in the sense that I don't think this is a der or anything close to Der elction I think it's a a constructive and healthy way to proceed that's comment number one uh if I can make comment number two yes it's uh it's really uh to adress uh something that we saw in a letter from Jan Keller which was circulated and so forth and we've said this before but it seems to need to be repeated because the the concern is consistent being addressed and that is I think it's also not derel of us to uh uh to to leave any uh attempted uh language related to Wetlands and so forth in this bylaw because we've got a very active very competent uh Conservation Commission and a very robust State Wetland protection act so I don't think we have to in this bylaw or in this this amendment to the bylaw address uh concerns that will obviously be addressed by others uh in parallel uh with any development here so I think that we're we're comfortable we've read jenet letter we thought about it I have and I think we don't need to uh uh include anything relative to that area of concern in this uh Bible okay um so I'm gonna I wanted to ask a question of I guess it's a you Bruce because you made the motion um you know I was interested to know which of these two people prefer so to so that I could find out which one had more support I am feeling a little bit boxed into a corner if I have to vote on one or the other be first uh and and therefore you know if the first one passes we'll never talk about the second one yes I'm I'm not happy with your motion uh Bruce and happy to table rather do a poll of which one do you prefer and and tally that up so that we you know I think one of these is going to move forward in some reasonably form close to what we've got here and I don't know which one I want to have move forward tonight um based on which which one has more support uh um I apologize I five of us uh one of whom is not here were discussed this for an hour and a half on Monday but you and Johan you and Johanna were not included in that and so I'm my motion was sensing the mood of the Monday meeting but uh I apologize because you two were not in that and so you're right I think I've probably been a little preemptive so what is the appropriate that I withdraw the motion or did I table the motion yeah I guess um I I wonder how others feel about what I've said and whether they are willing to go that direction at least first um and um in that if that's so then I guess we could just withdraw the motion and we could do a sort of a ask for a vote or an indication from each member present of which one they actually like better that being the case could I make a pitch for next use uh not being having having withdrawn the motion okay and my my pitch for miuse is uh because I did actually in that housing commit in the housing subcommittee meeting right I think the first at the very beginning I suggested that the Preamble uh particularly of the misuse uh um uh draft include U a goal statement or there is there is a goal statement uh and uh that we should add a sentence uh at the end which is almost a second short paragraph which says that it is a it is the intention or the goal of this B that street life commercial retail street life on University Drive be enhanced uh or some version of that basically something that states that we we value highly um the stimulation of commercial and uh uh retail activity along that street and uh and so because of that I uh think that the mixed use uh aversion is by far the more likely uh to to achieve that and well let's just say it's more likely to achieve that and that's why I uh personally would favor that particular version okay all right so yeah so Sor just quickly if if that were the case right I think in the purpose section there'd be an additional statement right that would read you know could read you know was also intended that the University Drive overlay District expand retail and Commercial Vitality for year- round use with street level Services pedestrian activity and vibrant amenities so you know it would just reinforce the the mixed use purpose uh uh now would be added okay so uh Nate is it you're feeling that the uh housing focused version is likely would permit and potentially result in more housing than the mixed use yeah I mean it would right because on the interior of the corridor you'd have um you know I think the given the market the housing market you'd probably have apartment buildings or social dormitories constructed uh you know the um uh Karin emailed me uh this evening and said that you know speaking with an architect and the planner where she is they she no longer feels too worried about six stories um she was at the housing subcommittee um and she said that you know they were saying you know think about mixed use in terms of the area or you know the neighborhood as opposed to building by building think about like okay what you know what what do you want in the area um it doesn't really answer the question but you know I I think that um yeah I mean I think the idea would be though if if we had the housing focused one uh you know you might not have the critical density right away and if people jump to the middle you know you might all of a sudden then say okay someone might say well geez where do we have the space to put other amenities and maybe then that would happen we'd actually have double you know two floors of non-residential and different buildings but um you know I think it's also important to have space for you know retail commercial office or whatever and so I think that if you know the six floor is included I think that the number of units or beds I think about it as beds number of individuals that could be there is still you know much greater than is there now right so if originally the goal was let's say you know I said 2,000 Beds which you know is a lot but say it's 1,200 it's still going to be impactful enough I think uh to hopefully you know the housing subcommittee is talking about other um ways that could you know zoning amendments or measures in other neighborhoods so to me it'd be like okay well you know this along with you know if we continue to talk to the university about say another P3 or something and then hadly I you know my idea is like okay well and you know all of a sudden we could have you know 2,000 more beds uh for students if we wanted to say that or just 2,000 more beds in the market and that's going to help a lot right and so that's kind of what we need um so I'm not you know I the more I think about it it's like you know what like you know I I think even if mix use is built and it's vacant for a bit maybe then it gets occupied because the next project put brings in the density that you need to have you know that certain type of retailer commercial you can support both of these right okay all right um so I I am cognizant that it's 20 after 9 and um I don't know how long you guys want to stay up but uh so I see Janet and then Johanna and then Jesse so uh we've heard from Bruce he prefers the mixed use I guess everybody who talks could you please indicate your preference somewhere in your comments Janet um I prefer the mixed use version um I would just you know support the motion you know my fear is like you know we're still up in the air about things and you know if we send this to anybody it's oh the planning board agreed and thought this was best and we're kind of saying these are our Concepts and we're kind of Shifty a little you know not sure of them but anyway pushing that aside I would support the motion which I may or may not be alive right now is if we added 30% of the first floor in the be be commercial or retail and then adding a sentence to the parking that says you know the planning board can require the parking the number of parking spaces to meet can the planning board can require parking spaces to meet the needs of the users of the building like I need something that will let the planning board add spaces and I think that sentence will be like because I think the way the saying we're not gonna there's no minimum requirement is saying there's no requirement of any parking and I think I want to some line that says that we have the legal authority to require parking spaces to meet the needs of users of the building and we'll base that on the study and the management plan and what we you know what what the building is doing so I think I would support this with the 30% adding 30% of the first floor and a sentence that gives us the authority to put parking spaces into the project otherwise I still think we had the lever lever all right thank you um Johanna you're the next hand so if you could say whether you which of the two you prefer as written and whether you are supporting either of Janet's proposals um I appreciate the work that the housing group did um and I appreciated the kind of summaries I feel like there are still more like pros and cons that I'm interested in so like one gets more housing what about the revenue numbers like which one is likely to get us more Revenue as a town and it seems to me like both of them could lead to a like walkable bikable vibrant streetcape um so I think um you know I've always been the advocate of like mixed use and part of it and allow for apartments in other parts of it I still think that flexibility is helpful but if I need to choose I think I would support mixed use um over how the housing oriented one although it's a thin margin for me um I am comfortable with the broader parking language that Nate suggested so I don't I I don't feel need to tighten that part at this time and then what was the second thing whether to add the 30% first floor or just leave it with the 75% of the linear Frontage I'm okay with the 75% linear Frontage okay all right so that's a preference for mixed use and pretty much as drafted rather than with the Amendments that Janet proposed okay yeah although they wouldn't be a deal breaker for me either okay Jesse thanks um I favor the mix use version uh my main rationale for that is I feel like if we don't do that now or don't try and accomplish that it will never happen there it will be all just noncommercial entities that happen except at the corner spots if that's what gets required so I I very much favor all mix use I'm okay with the 75% I also though agree with Janet that we need I like your proposal so I would totally support that I do think the planning board should have some teeth and some ability to say no we don't think you put enough working and have it be with each proposal that comes in and that ability so I would support that completely all right uh Fred okay um yeah I I support mixed you because of the revenue picture and uh I want to be very sure that we don't end up with something that uh you know if we if we build it they don't come and I would prefer to leave that to the market I don't think it's necessary for us to uh have that specific review okay all right thank you uh I guess um I really could go either way on these two uh but I'm perfectly happy to go along with the mixed use um I don't I I I I would rather see the 75% of the linear Frontage rather than going to the 35 30% first floor I think that will um be more palatable for folks for the developers or whoever's building trying to build a building building um and um I don't want to have to have each developer necessarily need to provide all the parking for their residents um it'd be fine with me if somewhere along the stretch behind a building there was a parking garage and that everybody got to use it or whatever um or there you know I I don't I'd rather just let the market figure that out um as as Fred said especially in this location where um there's good public transit it's a level topography up to UMass and there are reasonably abundant Services right in that vinity with the post office and the grocery store and the health care across the street so um I if there's anywhere in town you don't need a car it's probably this area so all right so um with with that oh okay Nate go ahead yeah I I think um for the parking piece I would uh add a bullet that an applicant shall be required to submit uh one a parking utilization study and two a parking management plan in order for the permit granting authority to determine that an adequate number of off street parking spaces are provided um I have that typed out and then I would in the bullet is there something that like we have to accept it well so you know what we're asking that what that bullet is saying is that you know a developer would have to they're probably going to do it anyways a utilization study and a management plan and then they're GNA talk about that with the with the planning board during permitting and so what what what they could say is that well in our management plan yeah we're going to say in our leases we don't have parking or that we have a shared agreement with the other property owner or that you know we're going to have bike storage and you know so to me that becomes part of the discussion during permitting but we're we're requiring that they submit those two documents for that discussion so the board understands you know here's what they're saying okay we have you know 3,000 square feet of commercial space Here's what we're thinking okay here's what we think the right amount of parking is given that you know we're going to have three different spaces we need you know 75 parking spaces there they're going to be you know shared at Night by the residents but that's the kind of information that the applicant would be required to provide it's not saying what the right number is they're they're going to you know say it um and then I think in the current Amendment we say there shall be no minimum requirements I think we say that the parking standards in article seven shall apply with the following exceptions the first bullet could just say um you know sections you know um omitting section 7 through 7.05 and then shared parking so we we remove the language for minimums so that it's not confusing and then we have that second bullet about or the Bullet about you know they're provided to um required to provide those two documents and so that gives the board the ability to understand what they think is the parking uh you know needs and demand for the project okay thank you Nate Bruce um dou I was going to make a motion yeah we got through my request for preferences and I think that was pretty conclusive um but the question is do you want to take public comment before I make a motion or after um I don't have a preference but I'm happy to do that right now if you want to wait yes why don't you do that we've got two uh we only have three members of the public um so uh those of you who who are still with us uh do would you like would any of you like to make a public comment before we uh have a motion to move forward with one of these proposals uh I see a hand from Janet Keller ham could we bring Janet over hello hello Janet if you could uh give us your name and your street address sure janer um 120 Pulpit Hill Road um there were two things I forgot to say in my email um today and I want to say them now and the first is I appreciate the thought and hard work that the staff and the board members have devoted to this work um the second um is that um I support resoning University Drive to increase housing and raise revenue um so and I still think it's important to provide clear reg uh regulation so I'm um happy that um you uh are discussing and I don't pretend to know the full implications of them um but uh uh a little bit more specificity for the parking requirements um I I um I still think it's a um I hear you thinking that it will be mainly students and that they won't need it but I think it's important to um retain the ability for other people to live there as well and they're going to need parking um and and people who are shopping going to need par parking thanks okay thank you uh second hand from Jennifer to uh hello can you hear me yes we can Jennifer oh I'm on okay I'm Jennifer Tabb I live on Lincoln Avenue and I am completely speaking as a resident um and I echoed Janet that um I appreciate all the hard work and um support this overlay for University Drive I just wanted to offer the comment as a resident who lives about three blocks from campus where there's a lot of um student housing that's occupied by students and even though we are very close to campus in my neighborhood I see one Stu one car per student in every you know single family home or eight cars if it's a duplex and that students don't have car bring cars to amers so much to get to class because they can certainly walk to class from um my neighborhood but that's how they get from their hometowns to amorist so I um you know appreciate apprciate I guess Nate's suggestion that and what Janet has been saying that there be some um language or mechanism in the bylaw that doesn't read as though parking is not required because as easy access as there is by public transportation or foot from University Avenue to campus non students will very likely have cars and students will probably have cars because that's how they get back and forth from their Hometown here so that's my only comment thank you okay thank you Janet all right I do not see that the third person wants to raise their hand and make a public comment so um I guess we'll move back Bruce to you uh you said you were ready to make a motion I do see that Janet has her hand up following you um well the motion will be that uh the uh board uh proposed to Town Council an a mixed use overlay District as drafted um with uh and I would like to with the addition with the addition of the following one um the the EXT the extension to the goal statement uh Nate as you stated it your statement was better than mine I mean better than what I wrote you in email I think number two is that uh there be additional two bullets in related to parking again uh you read you you read them out uh and I would add those too and and at the moment I Janet I won't add uh your statement I I don't disagree with it but I I I think it it uh doesn't seem to be the body of the mind of the the majority here so I will uh that will be the motion mixed use overlay goal statement two bullets on parking and the two bullets are requirement of the utilization study and a parking management plan I believe so yes okay all right so that's the motion okay um Janet do you want to second that uh you are muted actually you're the next hand I see um I'm a little confused about the the add-ons so here's the am I if my screen's visible or the screen's visible I don't if it's legible but under the purpose section we'd have a statement uh that reads it is also intended that the University Drive overlay District expand retail and Commercial Vitality for year round use with street level Services pedestrian activity and vibrant amenities okay and then the the follow the two changes on the parking are we Chang the change the first parking bullet instead of saying the no minimum requirements we'd say section 7.00 through 7.05 shall not apply and then the second change would be a new bullet an applicant shall be required to submit a parking utilization study and a parking management plan in order for the permit granting authority to determine that an adequate number of off street parking spaces are provided okay Bruce is that consistent with your motion it is okay then I'll just go ahead and second that at this point um and then at that point we can Janet you have your hand up did you want to speak at this point okay all right so we have a motion we have a second the time is 9:37 and uh nobody else has their hand up are we are we done talking about this for right now all right I'm seeing some yeses and some thumbs up um okay well um in that case without further Ado um we can go through this uh starting Bruce with you how do you vote on your motion I all right Fred I Jesse hi um Janet about I with reservations I don't think it will show anywhere but okay and I'm an i as well so we have five votes in favor two two M you need Johanna did I skip you m Johanna you did and that's okay we can do me now I'm an I I checked you off I don't know how I did that okay so I thank you all right so five five in favor two two against or two absent and so that passes so Chris um um first of all Nate thanks for all your work on this it's been a long process um Chris uh does this board need to do anything further or do you take care of transmitting this to Town Council we'll take care of transmitting it to Town Council all right all right great great so the time now is 9:39 I guess we can move on um item seven on the agenda was old business not anticipated do we have any Chris or Pam I don't believe so no likewise for new business don't we do no no okay oh except to say that um we're we do have the five uh people that we asked for for the July 24th meeting so I'm thinking that we will hold the July 24th meeting with regard to the Jones Library so that's new business I guess okay all right um form a anr subdivision applications there is one great and I will do my best to bring it up this is the one that was in the packet right yes good it's very straightforward I think consolidation of lots yes okay sorry bear with me I can bring up the gis map first I don't know if I have much voice left um but so this is that 374 flat Hills Road one owner owns these three Parcels right here one two and three and they would like to combine these three Parcels into one that straight forward here's the plan all right so you would be agreeing that this does not rise to the level of um having to go through the subdivision [Music] process and that you would authorize Mr Marshall to sign the document okay um I had one question as to whether that narrow strip parcel in the center uh contains an easement to access the Coal's property that's to the to the top of the page and would this affect the Coal's easement if it exists at all no it doesn't affect the easement okay so there there is an easement if there were an easement it wouldn't affect ement okay all right fine Janet I had a question about that strip too like how did just how did it come to be like I mean may maybe you don't know that but it just seems so odd I assume it was held you know created by the by Kohl's or whoever owned that upper parcel as a way to get just as a to preserve an access but that's total conure Paul Paul Jones used to do that he did that with us bit okay yeah I mean the current owners have owned it since the early 80s all three properties and so I think it was probably the other year they came into town hall and they were asking questions I mean that's not even a legal lot anymore but I think it's a you know it's like a vestigal lot um probably right probably wasn't access at one point but you like I said they've owned it for 40 years and so the recommendation is to consolidate it because um you know it it their interests are probably merged anyways for some purposes but from the you know the legal standpoint it's still three lots but it'll be cleaner if it's one all right so I Chris am I right you usually just ask does anybody object to us having me sign this we don't we don't typically do a formal vote all right so does anybody object I don't see anybody objecting okay all right Chris I guess we'll make an appointment to meet in the back lot hopefully on the day when it's not raining right okay upcoming zba applications oh gosh um do I would just mentioned two things and that would be the fact we've talked about the comprehensive B project that you um had the presentation for if you remember it was at 31 Southeast Street and 70 belter toown road um and that project did receive their project eligibility approval and I believe there was a pre permitting up um meeting today is that right colleagues yes yes so that's all I had to say about that and then I also would have to refer to my colleagues I know this spoke is coming forward um to zba but I don't have any details to what that is so other than that I don't have anything to mention the spoke has two venues currently they have one on East Pleasant Street and they have one on prey street so the application is for the um venue that's on East Pleasant Street and they're hoping to enhance the front patio area they're going to add two forms of egress and put a um an awning over over it it's not really an awning it's more like a roof structure um so they're just going to enhance that area and they're going to the zoning board of appeals to get permission to do that okay did we previously talk about Lane Quarry Pam I thought we did last time which is why I didn't bring it up y okay excellent and black walnut too black walnut yep okay yep all right any spr and Su [Music] applications oh we have the Jones Library coming in on July 24th to talk to you about their changes to um to meet their budget they're going to be eliminating some things and changing some things so they need to come back to you and then um Barry Robert's project um currently we have it slated for coming to you on August 7th um and we understand that Mr Marshall won't be here that night and so um so Johanna can preside Johanna can preside all right is that all for th that category I think so all right uh time is 9:46 um planning board Committee in liaison reports Bruce anything for pvpc yes the one of the quarterly meetings happened uh a week or two ago and uh there was a a comprehensive presentation by Guy Nam Ken Kier from the Commonwealth he was presenting on energy infrastructure sighting and permitting and he was basically briefing uh uh the various towns and so forth or the representatives of the various towns on that um this is something that Janet knows a lot about and and and because of that we've been introduced occasionally from her updates and so forth but uh there was some uh um presentation materials that were uh submitted uh and I could pass them uh Nate uh Chris if you like so that they could be distributed just so that you could have access uh uh in in your files to current thinking about this and where the state are headed it's it's basically the the state aheading to enact uh um some kind of consolidation U and they've learned a fa bit over the recent years and so there there some of that learning is being uh folded into State legislation and that was what this was all about um I think um that's mostly what was there there was some presentations about what the PVC what the pvpc has accomplished and so forth in recent uh in in the first part of the year in the past year but I will uh send Chris the uh the three documents that I grabbed uh from that presentation okay thanks Bruce um I for CPAC uh CPAC was reconvened sometime in the last month um we were asked to release some limitations on funding for the high school track and field uh reconstruction uh the the two requirements that we did release were for artificial turf and that the track and field be reoriented in a north south Direction so we no longer have those uh at least we didn't we were asked to recommend to council that those be Rel be uh removed as as limitations on the funding so we did that um Karen is not here for drb uh Chris anything on CRC yes um we're continuing to talk to CRC about the solar B but we haven't done it in a while because the CRC has been engaged in another business um and they did interview um potential members of the planning board and um they did recommend Mr Marshall and um Miss feris for to the Town Council to be um planning board members um and then the other thing is that um sometime in July Nate and I will be meeting with the CRC to present um what we're doing with um the downtown design guide guidelines and what's the other project name my my brain is escaping me it was the overlay but maybe that'll get to them anyways oh the overlay that's right yeah so we we've been asked to explain those two um those two projects to the CRC and I think that's it okay uh well since it's report of chair I will say I will add to what you said Chris um CRC has voted to extend the current appointments of Janet and me beyond June 30th to I believe Chris isn't it like ju July 15th when they have their meeting where they are going to vote on uh appointing new members essentially to replace our two positions that's correct and those those recommendations are the two people you mentioned um so uh I guess do we have a meeting in we do do we when's our next meeting well I think our next meeting is July 17th but I'm not sure that we have any business um okay for the agenda but we so this maybe Janet's last meeting and we would like to thank her for all her hard work and participating these many years in the planning has it been two full terms six years Janet it's been it's been five years I think I was two years and then three years but it's it's aged me but it's really I I'm H happy to do it I hope I helped a bit and didn't irritate people too much but I I appreciate all the crazy hard work we do you know and nobody gets paid really none of us except for Pam and and Chris and Nate which I get the feeling these hours that these late hours aren't really paid so I appreciate everybody else's work too so thank you Janet you're welcome I will we see you on another committee soon you know I don't know if I have any committees I might just retire to the Eric Carl art room wow I I do twice a month so all right well I know there's some committee vacancies elsewhere in the town oh that's true okay so may I just um talk about upcoming meetings I mean well maybe it's report of chair time and then I'll make the report of St well I made my report uh I just wanted to mention that we were extended but it turns out we're it's an extension without any practical benefit because we don't have a meeting in the first half of June or July July yeah so the July 3rd meeting is cancelled I'm thinking of asking you if we should cancel the July 17th meeting unless we slot something in there I think we could barely get our we could barely get Barry Roberts project in if we put out a um a legal ad on Friday so maybe I should talk to Pam about that and that would allow us to have Mr Marshall on that um case so I I will be out of the office for the rest 17th uh no when your legal ad is due that's right yeah so I could I could submit the legal ad but um and you're out of the office tomorrow too maybe I'll talk to Rob about whether we should have the public hearing on the 17th instead of the what would it be would have been on August 7th so I'll do that tomorrow so is everybody um available on the 17th as far as as far as I know okay good might do that but that would mean two meetings in a row it would mean meeting on the 17th about Barry Roberts project and then meeting on the 24th about the um Jones SL CH this is Johanna I have a conflict on the 17th okay I will say that the very Roberts project has not submitted to the Conservation Commission important review on that property so I might you know so there's no real rush on it right yeah okay we'll talk about that internally tomorrow okay all right great well is that it for your report Chris I think so okay so thank you all especially Janet I'm sure you're gonna miss us on Wednesday nights I might I might do some public commenting all right stay away have a good Fourth of July and we'll see you sometime in July 55 okay goodbye everyone bye everyone thank you yeah