[Music] okay it's uh 7:34 on uh Thursday July 11th um and this is thee preservation District commission meeting um we will be recording the meeting and then it will be posted on the uh lenberg Public Access Channel within 24 hours and uh we don't currently have any other members joining us via zoom and there's only the three Commissioners in the room um hopefully William Lloyd will be uh popping up on Zoom he had indicated earlier that he was not available to participate in person but he would join us via Zoom um the topics are listed on the agenda which was posted on Monday and if uh we have somebody from the public who joins us hopefully they can uh join a discussion with meaningful in the uh there is no public comment because there's no members of the public with us um I'm going to go ahead and ask for approval of the 13 has anybody looked at the 13 June 2024 meeting minutes I noticed one uh one small change uh that needs to be made he has arpa arpa which is the federal federal funding progr Associated COA he has that as Hara H RPA so um I will make sure that bill William knows that that change that change needs to be made is there any anything else there is in the uh my report for the historical commission okay um do you have those I can't get it on microphone um the meeting minutes yeah yeah hold on last section yeah there in just a second to share with Richard oh I hear Noe from when I de say it okay so be a mini minut [Music] is that here yeah uh so it's histor says historical preservation committee updates historical commission update okay it says 763 Main Street is under development delay um it's under demolition under the demolition delay by law okay um building inspector negotiated with owner to [Music] um uh separate the historic property from the the rest of the land um so that would be two different Parcels okay allowing for the the house to be preserved anything else um uh Dickerson's property is dickanson [Music] Dickenson cabin is undergoing demolition by neglect okay that's it all right um so this is what I propose with regards to meeting minutes um we'll have a chance to read your transcript that you just sent out Nathan and then I'm going to talk to William and have him make the proposed changes and then we will vote on those sets of meeting minutes at our meeting in September all right um there no meeting in August oh excuse me August I'm sorry and that's actually on post dat is on our schedule hold on I'm going to do something here because he may he may have because when I replied back to youan I think I just went [Music] back okay so I just sent a VI email back to way all right so the other item on the agenda correspondence um there was no written correspondence but I wanted to share with the Commissioners uh the conversation I had um at the select board meeting uh you know we had met um just after there was debate and some confusion about whether uh Richard was going to be appointed to the architecture preservation District commission so I uh I went to the following select board meeting the following week and basically said you know please um have William you know appointed which he was um but I also had a chance yeah Richard uh I also had a chance to um mention to the select board our concern about the Ritter building in town hall and um Everybody heard it there was no response other than uh you know Heather said something along the lines of you know we know what their concerns are uh you know we we know that we have to put the project out forbid but there was no specific deadline or date for when that's going to happen no Ro plan and uh select Boardman Tom Alonzo did follow up and say you know well do we have any ideas to when the work's going to start and no response came back from the time manager so I think that uh it's safe to say that you know there's a fair amount of confusion and turmoil right now in town hall because of the departure of the current time manager and I think that we're just is going to have to continue to watch it and make sure that more things uh don't get affected by the delay um the other thing that came up at that meeting uh was uh a suggestion by SLI Boardman uh Michael R Jeff that we meet with Caesar newel the new chair for the select board so I'm going to go ahead and uh set up a time to meet with them maybe for a cup of coffee um if you all have any concerns or any issues that you like me to bring forward you know let me know and uh I'll let you know what the day is and then you can have some time to think about what we want to discuss with him but he has no real understanding of I think of you know some of the controversy that the commission has been involved with you know our desire to make sure that people can get their work reviewed quickly and and so on and so forth so that's that'll be one of things that I try and get done before I don't know if I can get it done before the August meeting but clearly I'll get it done before the September meeting he's busy too right now because theyve got a lot of things on their PL it's a I would not want to be a member of the select board at this point in time between the task force the interim uh time manager selection and then the uh the permanent time manager selection they got a lot lot going on okay so um 1010 Massachusetts Avenue the CTA I distributed copies electronic copies of that and um I am a little concerned that we don't have the property owner here um I was assured by Logan that he was going to show up um and I also asked is Logan the property no Logan is the new staff person new Administrative Assistant for the land use department and I think he works for Brian genger under Brian's now like the he has additional responsibilities Beyond being just the uh Building Commissioner he's taking on some of the duties associated with land use and Logan Logan is working for him um the one thing that that U I'm I was concerned about and know what I was hoping you get from the property this evening or from Logan because I asked him to get the just what the materials are you know that they're going to use on the addition and because wait it's deck it's a deck yeah it's it's a deck with um you know steps Sandrail you know flooring a roof so on and so forth and I and I just you know wanted to for the record know what is it they're planning on using now you know in the world of historic preservation if you're going to put an additional on and and in particular with regards to our guidelines they're allowed additions are allowed um what you what you the history preservation technique is to make sure that you construct the addition in a way that it reflects that it's something new not something associated with the old structure that you're trying to preserve and it would be nice for us to know what those materials are so we can say that's the appropriate approach for that addition on on an existing older home like 1010 Massachusetts AV is um I'm not sure how it turned out that so many of the items or materials were not identified by the architect you know it was just about every every item that was listed as a finished material B owner owner to select and consult with general contractor for final uh final issue final decisions on materials um so personally I would prefer to have the materials identified but given the fact that there was um a problem with the building permit and the work started uh I would still like to have for the record what the materials are but to give uh I would like to recommended they approved the CTA with the provision that the property owner will identify what the materials are and let him proceed with his work given the fact that uh you know building perit was issued by Bri without him realizing that the house was in architect preservation district and and a candidate for review so thoughts observations comments um yeah I I think couple things one is um that's I mean you know that everybody makes mistakes or whatever but that that definitely is on on the town there you know what I mean like uh in terms of um I think you know my personal opinion on this is you know if it doesn't involve Demolition and he's just adding a deck um again you know when that ARB was crafted it really it's uh its specification of materiality was very limited um and materiality of a new deck you know it's it's hard to I I just don't think I think we want this to be an h a bylaw that achieves you know remains popular has a lot of town support does not frighten homeowners we have to keep things uh you know we can't get down to in the weeds with stuff like this that a normal homeowner going want to do that doesn't involve destroying the historic property um so yeah so I guess I I definitely agree with you about approving the CTA at this meeting 100% I don't even know that you know we need to I I mean you know I don't think we need to I would do it unconditional and then you know if you want to reach out to him asking what it is go for it but there we don't really have a record to speak of in terms of you know um except for the minute to these meetings as far as what you know that sort of thing so I guess I'm is someone who really you know we've seen the difference having this bylaw makes for [Music] protecting historic structures from Demolition and I just want to keep you know I think that doing additional things like in terms of um materiality and you know materiality or uh you know maximizing his the historic character appearance that are beyond the basics of the Pres preservation District bylaw I think we're going to have to wait until we have some of those carrots before we can really you know have much say on those otherwise I think you know the really valuable tool we have for protecting the the district is going to be at risk of just people getting fed up with it because of stuff like this and this kind of stuff where you know people go to the building inspector and they say go ahead and have to stop this is the kind of stuff that you know drives people nuts especially regular homeowners of limited time and limited well something all speak for the homeowner but a lot of us have pre- tight budgets and whatnot so I don't think we want to end up connected with those thoughts they have in those situations you know I want to be connected with the stop the developer from knocking down the the beautiful historic home not you know not the you know screwed up my home improvement project Rich thoughts um make sense what n said um on the um but I think it's still um just as a matter of being an overseeing body with um we have design um we have the ability to have an opinion on design according to the bylaw um um knowing what materials are I don't think it's Bome to the home homeowner to uh to have that information for us um just so we know what's going on in the district I think there's a uh from my years as chair from the uh founding of the uh rules and regulations um there's been a tendency for things to be LAX rather than more more LAX than than I'm not saying to be strict and we weren't strict just to to uh to be fair but to be there you know what I mean that that we do have a presence and we are allowed to have an opinion on on and an understanding of what materials and design uh I'm going to be U you know as an opinion rather not as a a regulation and I think we should exercise that part of the Bible you know um I'm I'm disappointed that like once again going back to how historic preservation is supposed to be done with regards to identifying what's old and what's new and this is a per I'm I'm going to like there's one detail here where on the new edition it's a sighting to match existing and that's not the way you do historic preservation the way you do historic preservation is that you say this addition is something different it's something new it's not what it's not what 1010 Massachusetts Avenue I I get it from an architectural approach but I think that's going that's adding a level of oversight and um to the to the bylaw that nobody anticipated especially with this is not like no it is in the bylaw no you you have a you're talking about a specific you know architectural design interpretation of historical preservation which I think is nobody has signed up for so it's great that you got the background in that it's a valid way of doing historical preservation it will completely piss off the people we need to support this bylaw well then we shouldn't we shouldn't have a bylaw well no we have a bylaw it's just not his um the bylaw it's not his textbook as what the bylaw reference the standards that under those standards would say the architect should not have there's nothing in the bylaw about distinguishing the addition to not you know that's if it's not you know historical to make it you know significantly different so you can tell the difference like no there's nothing in the BW like that there is Rich or there is na the the bylaw talks about the uh the standards National Park standards for historic preservation it's in the guidelines you know the guidelines aren't the bylaw yeah the B guidelines aren't the bylaw but the GU but the bylaw see that if it is in the guidelines they're inconsistent with the bylaw and shouldn't have been approved but they were and just revised the guidelines so all right so let's let's let's move on because I'm going I'm going to I'm going to make the motion because I want us to approve 1010 Massachusetts Avenue with the provision that we get details on the materials that are going to be used in the addition and um so I I will make that motion there a second second all right so discussion um yeah just make it clear that it's Point information it's not the the conditionality is on receiving the information there's no additional determination once you receive the information like like providing he could say he's going to make it out of Plato and you know I don't obviously that's not going to be the case it's that wouldn't pass the building inspection build the regular you know building permitting process but um yeah you know I I think all right so that's that's the motion that's been I need to understand that's your intent or my intent is that uh upon delivery of the information on the materials the then the CTA is approved if he doesn't deliver the material what materials they're going to use then the CTA is not approved okay regardless so if he delivers the materials regardless of what they are it's approved yeah okay that was my point just make sure that understands that yeah okay all in favor say all right so that's fast okay you know um I think one of the the key issues here is that we've got to get people engaged with us before they start this work because first of all it cost him an extra $65 and that he didn't need to pay for if he had read the uh the new design guidelines standards he would have realized that he could have come in with the determination of applicability and not have not had to have submitted a CTA you know the issues associated with the the addition I think are fairly clear in the guidelines you know he he can proceed with an addition and and we wouldn't necessarily move into binding review just because he wants to do an addition there's no grounds for that but we then but we then could have had a discussion with the property owner about how to make the the addition be more complimentary of attached being attached to a house that's very old and you know the intent here is to have you know the flavor and the feel of historic historically preserved houses you know that he evolved with some Modern modernity and that's not happening because we don't ask the homeowners to engage with us to tell them how to do that the guidelines describe those things the bylaw describes those things the guidelines go into more detail the other thing that I find rather frustrating is that I don't think the architect understands how to do historic preservation this this architect in particular because had he understood those things there would be certain techniques he would have used that would have said the house 110 Massachusetts Avenue is better preserved all right so let's go on to um old business uh preservation of the books house at the last meeting we had Nathan you had some ideas that you wanted us to use they to pursue for the Brooks house you done any additional work on that I have not done additional work I need to do that okay um Richard status 763 Mass Avenue have you got any response back from the current property no no there's they're in violation of the uh Del bylaw because they haven't filed a report on what they're doing to um preserve the house for sale sign is gone from in front of it I don't know what that [Music] means um I don't know if the person who was interested in purchasing and preserving the house has had contact with them I heard anything from him he did when's your next historic Bion uh we're in recess to September did and you haven't any inut back from by um I emailed him and he hasn't heard anything but all right so we're going to keep that a little later uh status of town hall R repair projects I've already given you that there's absolutely nothing happening keep an eye on that one um property notification here is uh what I think is probably close to being the final version of the letter now the attachment um I think we could probably discuss the attachment um but I would like to at least approve the letter there because I want to start the process of figuring out how do we mail this to every property owner at that in the architectural preservation District because I think that's ke essential making sure people understand what's required in the time staff doesn't understand what's required L than what the PO property owners are thinking about just by a law um this is pretty close to what I submitted for your review last week I made just a few grammatical changes style changes um I was going to give them the opportunity to contact us by email suggested that in the last paragraph I decided to take that out what I really want is I want individuals who are thinking about doing a project that Reach Out And Touch us before they contact an architect or contractor when you're ready to go on the attachment let me know okay when I looked at when I looked at doing the attachment that was actually in the draft that I shared with you last week or last month that we would have an attachment they kind of Identify some of the hot button issues I'm sorry this is what's the where what's the audience for this document everybody who a prop in the AP APD and you're going to like mail it to them or something you do good old fashion us now um because some of these people you know don't live in the district not even close to being residents but I almost chose not to have an attachment last month I said oh we'll do an attachment and then I kind of had second thoughts and I was like you know maybe what we ought to do is just say maybe emphasize more we want you to come contact us before you start talking to a contractor or an architect because I think that issue is where we can do more for historic preservation of houses in the ABD or structures in the ABD and anything else because once property owner reaches out to a contractor or to an architect depending on what level of experience they have with historic preservation we may be trying to push a rock up the hill whereas if we say contac us you know we can tell you about all the things that you know that could enhance the historic value of your house um that may be a better way of doing it ra rather than trying to give them some for examples yeah I I here's the thing that think so I don't I am I correct in assuming based on our conversation from May I think it was that we would like to expand the apdc yeah and the primary reason for that is to prevent the demolition of historic structures that's not the only reason in my mind but that was probably one of the primary reasons I would say yeah it's the primary reason because you can't anything with something that you know gone um if we want to do that I think we do need to get the reite of the APD bylaw and of course the make the guidelines that new bylaw we can't and I don't I don't think it's worth my opinion is we're going to ask the time to expand it we need to continue the streamlining we've been doing I think we need to Hue to the original intent of that bylaw and we need to make it really clear if we're going to things like what you're talking about with windows and doors and materials we need to do that with carrots not sticks and I think you know um sending some I don't think it makes sense given that we'd like to bring that to the November town meeting [Music] um and you know I'll I'll take I'll work on that for the August meeting I'll first draft of what I would propose and you know you guys you know I'll send it to you before that meeting and we can review it whatnot because we got to get movement on that if we're going to get in for November um I wouldn't send out anything getting people asking a lot of questions or getting worried about what changes they can make to their house all of these you know yes if you live in the district there are things you can and can't beat your house I think we need to clarify what they are and and what that process is but people really get their hackles up if it's to if they feel like they're going to be too constrained if you got Windows you know you've been needing to replace and Energy Efficiency is on your mind and you read this you're going oh no this is going to be even harder than just you know saving up the money and and whatever I don't think this is controversy at all it's just information it says that your old windows can be as good as new windows and according to most uh historic uh commission societies Mass historic the old windows are equal or even better because of what they're made of vyl Windows and replacement windows AR going to last that long they give um this is good information roofing materials if you have a stone roof it's it's often more economical to do some repairs on it have it last another 100 or 200 years than to get as all sh goes and be replaced I I do think there are some things here though like the use of the words approved Replacements which you guess approval process I'm just saying I think we want to take another look at our bylaw get on the same page with that especially again if you're going to want to extend things then I think you know there's we're going to have to let go of uh a certain amount of control unless we add carrots and then people might say hey I can get a zero% loan to have Finance this I just gotta you know work with the apdc on it or the historical Commission on great you know but you know okay one one step at a time do we want to send the letter out and if and if we do do we want to send the letter out with an attachment one step at a time I don't because I don't want people com in a November town meeting if we're going to have a bylaw there thinking about you know oh you know there's someone you know controlling the details of my home improvement happens every day when you apply for a building perm Nathan yeah I get it but beyond that I mean you know another level Beyond yeah I hear you okay so we're not H I'm going to but I would I would say though what I mean based in light of this recent experience with we've had we've had three since the guidelines have gone out they all three were done differently than what the guidelines say three what three what have got three requests for reviews the one at the one at UH 60 Main Street guy puts um you know he put a CTA together and then I said don't do that just actually he didn't the guy at 60 M Street he said I want to do this work Brian sent him to me and I said just submit the determination of applicability form the house on Massachusetts Avenue right down street from us here um north of Main Street he did submit a a CTA that was not required he could have done that with a determination of applicability because he said I'm going to replace it with light materials you know well I one thing we could do is just stop charging for the CTA I'm not going to do that because the bylaw the guidelines which we just approved say this is how much you need to submit and but God by the way according to Brian the amount that we estimated is incorrect because he says the town needs to do two Public Notices not one now I don't know how accurate that is because the person who's been submitting the requests for advertisements of a public notice told me $40 one notification Brian saying well minimum what we could say in these cases where the CTA really wasn't required we could refund the fee and say we have no authorization to refund the fee I asked I asked Ellen Griffin that question she never responded okay well that's an update we should make but um as far as this this so yeah I mean I think that's something we should take a look at cuz I think it's a a natural point of confusion um because they get these things going before they talk to the building inspector before they talk to anyone from the town basically um which is the reason why I think the notification letter is really critical well no one no one's been I'm assuming people are going to remember it and you know this this and that the the thing is so one thing though is what might be good is if um when when things do come across the building inspector's Des is that is there any um is that it is that public information like could we get could we get copied on like the list of building permits he gets in a a day to at least you know so you know we'd be able to see okay that's in the architectural preservation District or whatever because and that's his job to know what the architectural preservation district is and to give us the appropriate running permits so that we don't have to go through a list of them okay well yeah okay that's just like okay so the question is like how do uh you know I okay so so I mean that didn't work on this this this last this last go in my experience I've been on the commission since 2016 and we've constantly had confusion about what's to be done what's to be done cta's coming in like um Tony's describing where people don't know what they have to do they don't know that in the district or um right or or they're figing confusion I've had that experience also sure that's why I think ultimately the building inspector needs to be the point of enforcement for this is it is it soon enough I he's the point of enforcement but this this clarifies in a simple way what people need to know that oh we are in the district that um I mean this just describe that they're in they're in the district and uh and what they need to be aware of so that it can be easy I should cont I mean without the without the attachment I think it's it's okay all right um I'm not crazy about the attachment I guess the other thing is I just think yeah there has been confusion if we're going to change it in November though let's I'd be open to just it's November's unfortunately very close it's like four months from now i' say let's wait and do it after we make the modification I'm not do after notify folks about the new new bylaw as opposed to like you know get people asking questions right before we're going to make a significant revision well what what questions are they going to ask if they read this letter well if they read the bylaw they might ask a lot if they read this letter and read the bylaw they might have a lot of questions which would be good then they don't get we stuck in a quag M we don't end up with a lot of confusion and ctas that we have to return um information that we're lacking because they say oh this we need I need of them so that I know what I need to know what I need to do to make this a simple thing which could be as simple as contacting us we'll say oh you're you're changing like for like you don't even need to uh fill out anything you don't need to talk to us yeah I guess I would just say if you want to pass the thing in November the expansion of this let's hold this off how many ctas are we going to get between now and November based on historical averages is Nathan I am a firm believer in clear communication I'm also a foreign believer that people who live in the T of lunberg live here because they enjoy the historic character and I think that what the architecture preservation District commission is about is trying to help the residents who want to do things with their house to do it in a way that it enhances the historic value the home that they have historic preservation can create value not just cause costs and I think that the sooner we start communicating with the residents and the building ofers about you know we're here there's a bylaw there's a reason why the bylaw was passed it wasn't just to avoid demolition it was mostly yeah it was mostly that it was it was also about as I understand the history it was also about the village district and making sure that as businesses were promoted within the village that it would not lose the historic character that's currently present in the in the village District yeah the historic character right in a in a the historic character within some pretty some meaningful but not overly restrictive guidelines that's right the other thing is we you know we we we aren't really solving the demolition by neglect problem I mean the tons two bellings are are undergoing demolition by neglect well you know so like having the B law or not having the B law hasn't had any impact oh that's  I'm sorry that's not true um we do have power as we know from our conversations there's ways we can improve it uh but it's not nothing all right to say it's nothing so here what we're going to do we're going to I'm going to entertain a motion to accept sending out the letter as soon as possible possible with the attachment I'll look for a motion like fur the discussion first all right so what you're saying to us about this and and the um what are we doing at for the up we're going to have a warrant for the next town meeting yeah I'm I'm not convinced that we we could but I think that given the amount of time and and the current amount of confusion that exists with I mean I'm not sure when they going to ask for to warrants you know given the fluidity in the to manager position is that going to happen sooner is that going to happen later I don't know but you know it would be relatively easy based on the current bylaw to make the town the historic district because it says in the current Cent language of the bylaw that this bylaw can apply to any District uh identified by the time so all the bylaw would have to do all we have only change we'd have to make with the bylaw is to say the time is not a district yeah however if if people feel that the way this bylaw is currently being enforced is problematic for homeowners you're going to have trouble passing that expansion even if it is legally easy to do politically will be very difficult to do I mean the the the way this commission was approaching you know with all the best intentions enforcing this bylaw with the town itself nearly got a movement to throw out this bylaw and I don't want to make that mistake again actually aan you know the what happened was that the time the people that showed up for the public meeting in November 2022 voted for the architecture preservation District commission not against us just as I had suggested to the time manager not to have a vote taken you know the select board basically called the question on how we approached the Ritter building and the end result was the town's people voted in favor of us saying hey let's continue to look at these windows not just to do what the town wanted I yeah and the other the other thing that's happen is that I think that you know the the sooner we have debate about what value historic preservation has for this thing known as the architectural preservation District or a broader District the greater chance of success you'll have in embracing historic preservation I think that I think that for us to say let's kind of keep it you know under under the radar till we get to bylaw pass to allow if you send this out and people have questions we're going to have to answer them and we're going to have to answer them based on the current bylaw we can be talking about the other ones I just think it's easier given the the benefit of sending this out maybe we'll get two CPAs maybe between now and November the cost benefit here you're you're looking at it from a from a perspective what I want to do is perspective of of just how many ctas will we have between now and November what I'm trying to do is to embrace the citizens who voted for this bylaw to embrace the citizens to say we're here to help you if you want to do something to preserve the historic value of your home and I think that that you know the sooner we have that dialogue there's been no dialogue how we going interpret it what first yeah I don't let's not even go the people who voted on this are you know voted for this are a few hundred people in town meeting I think this really seriously I live in this District um so I I care I don't want to lose this bylaw for for for any reason and I so you're saying people that are in the district would vote against it I don't know what people in the district would do I just don't want to R you know I don't think it makes sense to um engage in a big discussion worst case scenario get people concerned about it right now and in my opinion based on some of the wording here and some of the way this board has acted they would have legitimate concerns as a owner I I've given given all the opportunity to rewrite I have no pride of authorship so Nathan if you want to rewrite this letter and rewrite the attach I don't want to send after I want to I want to spend the time writing updating the uh bylaw in the belong the directions we've discussed I'm not saying we'll agree on all of them but we we've agreed on some principles we can get into the detail I think that would include the expansion because to expand it we're going have to make case at town meeting that it's going it's going to not be honorous for homeowners the only you know that's it which was the same thing we how would you first of all I don't think it is honorous I mean I think if you look at the work has been approved that's come before the commission it's all been I think pretty easy tell the guy the guy's deck wasn't done tell the guy's deck isn't done right well that's because he was misguided by St staff Nathan not because of something that we did or something that's into bylaw and had and had the staff understood I mean they were they were ready to start publishing public hearings because they because they haven't read the guy want mean that's that's I think the fundamental problem that we' had here is that there hasn't been enough communication about what does spw mean so I think we need to you know get that streamlined a bit try to get get like the CTA process all that rerunning the byog gives us the opportunity to straighten stuff like that out to or try to and uh I would just propose what part of the BW are you going to straighten up I I have to look at it in more more detail Anthony but in terms of like uh understanding you know when a CP when when a public hearing gets scheduled and what not like it's already pretty detailed and the guidelines basically reiterate how that works and I think we've actually improved that yeah I think you're right I think you're right that we've approved it but no one knows that yeah well I don't I'd say let's we know you know I'm not I'm not afraid of putting up a bylaw for historic preservation that's that has been well managed by this Commission and I think that the commission has made significant progress in making it easier for people you know to get work done what I don't want to do is I don't want to miss an opportunity to help a homer do a better job of historic preservation on our house because they don't understand re mean I think that I think you're you're fearful that the bylaw is going to go out the window because we want people to have you know most of the folks that are willing to own a historic house most of the people that have bought that historic house bought it for a reason not because you know it's it's a great value or I mean they bought it because of what it represents I mean no one no one goes into you know a house that's 150 years old with their eyes closed no I mean people buy houses for different reasons and most of them most of the people who tend to live in them I agree with you now the folks who bought the the home that's not in a district their uh the funeral home you know they they bought it for other reasons not the district I just I know it's not so their their objective is all about making money right and we actually we actually want that we actually want to embrace them is by extending the district which I don't I'm not sure I don't like spot zoning I don't like I mean I would rather us say Hey you know let's change the bylaw apply to all all of the tberg because we have a lot of older historic HS that are that are going to go by the way what I would say is what I've seen from the apdc board and again I appreciate everybody's service and I think it's great has cons and the reaction that has provoked at times has concerned me in terms of the danger it is posed to public opinion turn against by law because I was there and I knew how we had to draft it and position it to pass I think that the way the guidelines have been written around historical value are at odds with the bylaw itself uh I think there's you know I I think there's the actual wording of the bylaw may be ambigous enough that I can understand how people landed there but until we get that stuff straightened out if if people think they're going to have to go through certain things again the town is never they they like the historical value but there's different levels of it and there's you know there's a cost and benefit and I think we need to make sure we don't get past the Public's pain point or we're gonna again lose something that I think is very important I'm I that part I don't disagree with but I what I think is is that we have to embrace we have to engage them you know we have to engage the public and I think that you know notifying them I'm fighting with engaging them so let's be clear about this I'm just suggesting that we engage them okay after November all right all right so I'm gonna is there a motion to send a letter now you know with the attachment without the attachment what is what is your complaint about sending it now as opposed to after November I think the sooner we engage them the better chance we'll have by the way the modified if we do get this you know we probably going to have to want want to if we even or have to I don't if we're going to get something on the warrant it'll be good to do some public hearings around that so I'd like to engage them around that rather than yesterday's news I don't want to educate them about something we're proposing to change I want to you know kind of keep it clean if we if we are looking to make change I think that the more information you can give a citizen the better support you'll get from them and I think that in then not being aware of the fact that we've made changes to the design guidelines like for example the select board Vice chair when I went to talk about Richard's appointment he wasn't even aware of the fact that we had changed the guidelines to make it easier for the residents in spite of the fact that he was given a copy of that who was this the vice chair of the select board Michael Ray Jeff I and you know we we we engage people by sending them information and I think that the sooner that you do that well I think the better chance you'll have of getting you know if we make the bylaw change and people go I don't want to do that because I heard those people are really hard to do business with how do we how do you negate that negative publicity whereas if we lean forward and say Hey you know we've made changes you know we're more likely to support your efforts to preserve your historic your your his story home and and we've made it easier for you to do that then I think that that gives us a better chance to make a bylaw change rather than going into the town meeting and saying we're going to change the bylaw and they're going to go I heard all about I've heard all these bad things about you I have no problem sending them notifications about the public hearing a public hearing for the warrant we had a public hearing for the design guidelines we notified everybody at that no one came in and said I don't want you guys doing that remember we had a requirement to do a public hearing for the design guidel at anyway I I think you know I don't I don't agree with sending this out if if we have a hope let me just go over this this is just general information I don't see anything controversy about this General the architectural preservation District guidelines list a number of General exclusions so you don't have to uh there's things you don't have to do if you own a house regarding windows and doors roofing materials street view siding that's just basic information I don't see I mean I don't see somebody being stupid and saying oh my God look at all this here I don't understand it this is going to make things difficult for me and it explains what the commission is if you own a building that's 75 years old and you're contemplating a repair maybe you want to talk to the apdc and find out how easy it can be to go through the process rather than making mistakes and I don't see this interfering in in town meeting there's nothing controversial about this I think it takes a first step to say we can we're easy to work with you know whereas making a bylaw change without having that dialogue with them I don't know where you would get to support for doing a bylaw we had a reputation as being confrontational radical me being a radical for six years five years during the thing I went before to select board at least I kept getting this information I went before to select boy a dozen times and spoke saying we're here to facilitate the bylaw we're working with the homeowners to do that that there's nothing radical that we are doing I never had a complaint from a home owner or anybody that applied for a CTA and the entire time I was chair it just didn't happen but the information I kept getting this uh feedback that we were Radical and uh in interfering and making things difficult that may have three of the people that wrote the guidelines I facilitated the writing of the guidelines I was chair three people that wrote the guidelines lived in the district they weren't interested in making things hard for themselves by writing those guidelines y I think the letter basically says we want you to know about the bylaw and we're here to make sure that you can proceed with your I don't see anything controversial about that I think not saying that and then trying to make a change in the bylaw I think that's the wrong way to proceed and I think we need to be we need to step forward and say we want this to work you know and we and and we're here to help you you know these are things that you know you can you can look at you like Nathan I bet you most people don't realize if they went out and bought a vinyl window with double pain glass is not much the art value to that window is not much different than a single pane window that has a nice new storm window on it and I think that a lot of people would be shocked by that detail I think that that's the kind of information that we can bring to a homeowner that's contemplating changes to a historic house now you got to remember there's a whole bunch of houses that then in a town of lunberg including mine that aren't 75 years old you know so that so this bylaw doesn't affect any of those people it only affects people no the bylaw would remain the same like Time Marches On and homes age houses that are 74 years old today become 75 tomorrow that's another thing that by law we might want to look at changing yeah I agree with that I I agree with that I think that I think that is something that you you know we may we may end up but by the same token it doesn't mean that if a Hass turns from 74 to 75 you know and and say in August now we would expect a CTA what we would say is your house is now eligible for review tell us what you want to do and in most EX in most cases they're going to say I'm putting this on I'm doing this I'm doing that and we're going to go okay which is true for even the really old houses like the one we just looked at tonight 110 Massachusetts Avenue that house is very old and we're saying to them it would have been nice to have a completed application with with all the materials and we might have been able to help you make that addition look better against your old historic home right I so I think that part is fine as like a I think we need to figure out how to incentivize people to get in that that process of you know teach me about our values and when but it's it's not a process you you know I don't think it's going to be constructive if the way they enter that is because I mean there's a few issues right like there's what we talk about which is like right now they they they do their design and they go to the building inspector so how do you get to people before the design before they start with their design you got to tell them I got to do that well so you either have to have a punitive approach or you have to incentivize them that like oh if I do this then I'm eligible for you know XY or z uh or you know you just need a really like you said If people really want to know this stuff they just don't maybe there's things we have to do we need a program educational program but to try to do it is part of the restrictive stuff I think it's going to get us into trouble education starts with that yeah I I think this I agree about educating the public informing the public it's just like I just have concerns about doing it with the state of our state of I would I would actually like to have a few more instances where people come to us with a determination of applicability for doing work on houses then we can say see this process isn't as honorous as some of you might think and if we're thinking about extending a time why that's the kind of information they're going to need to have to vote for this is they're going to have to understand that the process isn't that owner but they're not going to know I think it is it's not Nathan it's not only only in certain select people's mind is it honorous uh yeah what have we done in a year you've been on I don't know I get nervous when you're talking about a guy is putting on a deck on a you know modest historical home we approved that yeah we approved we approved that we we did but your preference would have been to have a conversation with them about because we could create more historic value for his house and he so so my Approach here is if he wants to we should be able to advertise to these people the district inform them that they want to you know to create more historic value or whatever we're here to help them that's great but having that be in the midst of his de once again all having that be part of the more of a speed bump for him in terms of doing his deck that's if he if he had had that letter two months ago I don't know when he applied for his building permit but let's say was within the last month he if he had that letter two months ago he would have saved $65 and he would have realized how easy this process would be that's I mean I I don't see why saying to people we're in business here to help you is a bad thing okay I I don't think we need to argue about this further like I you you know it's fine I I I I think we agree that under the right circumstances it would be it's good to in general principle it's good to communicate with folks I think what you're communicating to them is important and the timing of that communication can be important and in this case I just happen to disagree with you about this I'm not going to die on this hill it's not the end of the world it's just my it's just you know my preference is someone you know who's looking at possibly spending some time or getting that thing ready for town meeting if I spend the time doing that I I want it to pass all right I'll tell you what I'll make a de on you I make a like the TV guy says um you bring your draft change sub of to the B to the August meeting and if it's a compelling reason if the proposed changes are compelling then we won't send until after the whatever yeah yeah I mean the other thing is I think let's say we did change it whatever I think the way we would communicate your intent I think it's good having conversations to those who want to about opportunities to enhance historic value and you know make a better change to their homes like I think there's ways we can communicate that that would be a little bit different you know it just be like here's here here's the guidelines you got to know about these because this is where like if you knock down that your house you know or whatever this is where we're going to come after you here's the we don't care about and here is the things that you know here's just free services we're here to help you on right like there's a kind of like the three buckets and I think we can get that in order and communicate with them I think it's subtle but I think it makes a difference okay we spend way too much time on the item all right so you're going to bring you're going to bring uh re good this is good you're you're nailing me down to do it and I think that's a good thing and I I need to do it so um and I'll try to send it out early so I guess we can't get feedback outside of public meeting but at least we could we can look at it you can look at it yeah all right um the vure I think is still something we need to do but once again I was trying to keep this simple by sending out an approval a letter saying hey here's what we want to here's what we want you to be work all right uh any any update on 50 M Street I noticed I've reached out to the one of the owners and um he hasn't responded yet yeah but I will I know did a little Landscaping in front so that's obiously yeah it's looking good overall but that but yeah so we'll I'll keep I'll keep on that keep that on the agenda for OB please the the Landscaping is irrelevant the the ste's been under demolition by Donald for 20 years and has lost most of its major components yeah in architectural details okay um next meeting will be the 8th of August the second Thursday of the month anything else no sounds good okay sounds good all right so the meeting is there a motion to adjourn I make a motion to okay we