 Okay, Mr. Marshall. We're looking good. I have made you the co-hosts. The attendees are coming on over. We have quite a few at this point. I have 634. We have Amherst media in the house with us. I do believe you're ready to go. Okay. Thank you, Pam. Welcome to the Amherst planning board meeting of July 19th, 2023. My name is Doug Marshall. And as the chair of the Amherst planning board, I am calling this meeting to order at 634 p.m. This meeting is being recorded and is available live stream via Amherst media. Minutes are being taken pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 and extended by chapter two 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 posted on the town websites calendar listing for this meeting, or go to the planning board web page and click on the most recent agenda, which lists the zoom link 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 of Amherst website. Board members, I will take a roll call. When I call your name, unmute yourself, answer affirmatively, and return to mute. Let's see. Bruce called him. President. Fred Hartwell. President. Jesse Meagher. Do you say your name Magger or Meagher? Major. Major. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Hi, Doug Marshall and present Janet McGowan. Present. Johanna Newman. Present. And Karen Winter. Present. 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. For the general public, the general public comment item is reserved for public comment items regarding 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 nine 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 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 I'd like to start by welcoming the two new members to our to our board. Jesse Major and Fred Hartwell, welcome to both of you. I guess I wondered whether either of you wanted to say anything to introduce yourselves. Tell us anything about your history in town or what you do or anything at all. I'll just move on. Jesse, do you want to say anything. Sure, I've been in my center of town for 617 years since I moved here, I'm a professor at Mass. I'm pretty excited to be part of this group and looking forward to learning a lot and participate. Thanks. Thank you. And welcome again, Fred. My second time around on the planning board I was on the board I think it was 96 to 2002. I'm not 100% sure that that's very close. And I live in town since 1965. And I've owned the building that I now live in for 51 years. Yeah, and I have a considerable history with the with the planning board I chaired the zoning subcommittee. Just during the six plus years that I was on the board previously. I think I can be of some help. I certainly have considerable institutional knowledge of often in terms of how things got to be the way they are. Okay, thank you Fred, and welcome. All right at this point we will go ahead and start or open the general public comment item for the public. I see that we have 17 attendees. And I think at this time we actually know I'm out of order here, we're going to go ahead and do minutes, I'm sorry. We have one set of minutes. It's the May 17 minutes. And at this time, does anyone have any comments on the minutes as drafted and put into our packet from Chris. You got your hand up first. I think these minutes are excellent, and I move to approve. Okay, thank you. Janet, you have your hand up. Yes, I will second and then I have something to add to the minutes. Okay, which is, I left the meeting after the first agenda item and so I didn't, I didn't hear anything about the lighting thing so I think something has to say, Janet McGowan left the meeting. Okay, so, Johanna, are you okay with a motion to approve the minutes with that one edit. I am. And Janet I presume you're okay with your second in that. Yes. Okay, good. Are there any other comments from board members. Chris and Pam you're fine with making that edit to the minutes. Okay. All right, we'll go through and do a roll call for this starting with Bruce. I approve. Thank you, Fred. I will be abstaining because I was not a member of the board. Okay, that sounds good. Jesse also abstain. All right, very well. Janet. I was just going to abstain because I just didn't see the second and a half. I never watched the second half of the meeting. So, as long as you have the votes. All right. Well, we'll see how it goes. Johanna. Approve. Karen approves. And I'm going to prove as well as four in favor three abstentions. Can we squeak by with that Chris. Yep. Very good. Now we'll go to general public comment period. And I usually run down the participants that we can see at this point in the meeting. So the names that I see are Anthony with no last name. Bill Zito, Brian Rafe. Chris Larose. Some C Salem. D Jones. Dylan. Brad Burke. Probably Ray Jackson from ever source. Josh Lee Smith. Justin Pennington. Ken Colette of ever source. Kyle. Marie cause garden. Mora Keen. Mike Kane from ever source. And Steven Berger. All right. So at this time, are there any members of the public. That would like to make a comment about a topic. That is not later on tonight's agenda. Okay. I don't see any hands raised. So I guess we will go ahead and move on from, from here. So the time now is 644. And we'll go on to the next item. I guess this is item four on our agenda. This is a public hearing. For site plan review. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Chris, you said. You had given me some notice you were interested. Or that Kyle was interested in. Reversing the order of these hearings. Is that right? That's right. Kyle Wilson is a representative of archipelago investments. And he is on vacation with his family up in Canada. And he would like to, if, if the board agrees, have his portion of the agenda taken first so that he can spend the evening with his family. And Kyle is in the audience. And I have a statement that I'd like to read before Kyle. Makes his presentation. If Doug, if Mr. Marshall agrees that I can do that. Well, my one concern is that we advertise this item for, to start at seven o'clock. And we didn't advertise this item for any particular time. Okay. This is old business, Mr. Marshall. Okay. All right. Well then in that case. Fine. Let's go ahead to Kyle. So, all right, so my explanation is to bring people up to speed who weren't part of the first go round. And I don't think anybody here was on the board when this project was approved. The project at 26 spring spring street is a mixed use building. And it was approved by the planning board in 2018. It has experienced a number, a number of delays in getting built. And the primary delay was associated with the pandemic when construction was halted for an extended period of time. So now it's finally on its way to being completed. And archipelago investments has a goal to have the building occupied later this summer or early fall. This I plan review decision from 2018 had some conditions that need to be addressed before archipelago can obtain a temporary certificate of occupancy. And so the building commissioner brought this to my attention. Mr. Wilson is here in the audience and he will make his presentation as soon as I'm finished. There are four conditions that need to be dealt with. Condition 10 states that landscaping and site amenities shall be installed in accordance with the approved landscape plan prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, except for difficulties associated with the planting season. So that's a little bit of a hang up because right now the planting season isn't preventing Mr. Wilson from installing the landscaping and site amenities. It's really the delay in the construction of the project. And then condition 11 states that if a temporary certificate of occupancy is issued by the building commissioner prior to completion of landscaping, a surety and the amount equal to the remaining costs of the incomplete work plus 50% shall be first collected. So the first thing that the building commissioner had an issue with or concern about was first of all, he considers in condition 10 the term certificate of occupancy applies to any certificate of occupancy, including temporary certificate. So that condition is in conflict with a condition of a temporary certificate of occupancy. So that is in conflict with a condition that is later on. And we can talk about that. But the building commissioner essentially wanted to bring this to the planning board's attention and make sure that if the applicant or if Mr. Wilson agrees to his list, he's given you a list of issues that need to be addressed. So that's in the letter that he submitted that he would satisfy the requirements of condition 10 and 11. Building commissioner didn't want to make that on judgment himself. So the way it conflicts with condition 27 is that condition 27 states that the final certificate of occupancy shall not be issued for any building or unit until the final top code of paving for all driveways and access areas, drop off areas, sidewalks and berms has been completed. And landscaping as shown on the plan of record has been installed. So you can see that that condition 27 is more lenient than 10 and 11 put together. So the building commissioner just wants to get clarification from the planning board that the way he's proceeding is appropriate. Mr. Wilson gave us a letter which listed the things that still needed to be done. And I added them up and it came to about $420,000 by my addition. So he would be expected to provide a surety in the amount of 150% of $420,000 in order to complete the work. Okay, so that takes care of those conditions. Then condition 29 required the applicant to provide a written description of the guidance or recommendation that he would be providing to tenants on the topic of finding legal parking spaces in downtown Amherst. And the reason for that is that there's no parking provided on the site. Now, no parking is required because the building is in the municipal parking district, which doesn't require on-site parking, but there was a requirement of that site plan to review approval that he provide a written description. So he's provided that to you. And then condition 35 required the applicant to incorporate screening or window film or other appropriate type of glazing on the windows on the south side of the building to prevent glare from the sun shining into the town right of way and adjacent properties. So the applicant is seeking consideration from you and approval that he either will meet or has met those conditions. And now I think you can turn it over to the applicant and have him tell you how he has met those conditions or how he proposes to meet those conditions. All right. Thanks, Chris. Kyle Wilson. Welcome. Good evening. So talk to us about your project and what you're asking. So thank you for having us. As Chris mentioned, this project has a long history. We got approved in 2018. And then we resubmitted when we were applying for our building permit in August of 2019. So subsequent to when these conditions were written, there was a. Another planning board appearance couple. Where we described the drop off and all the site improvements, including. Our hope to be able to bury the power lines and get rid of the polls that remained on spring street after the town in Amherst college had started the burial of that work back in 06. So, so we started after we got approval from the planning board to get our building permit in 19 and we shut the project down on the day that Boston shut down all construction for COVID. We restarted the project in February of 22. The project has been able to proceed through some very difficult supply chain challenges. Most prominent is the electrical switch gear, which just showed up last month. Many, many, many months. Delayed. Western builders is doing a wonderful job. Trying to. Work within a tight site and work within the utilities and the new buried power lines. Out front. And have, have been able to negotiate that quite well. And I think keep the site under very good control. So. We are looking to move people into the building August 1st. We were originally looking to move people in July 1st. Before that it was June 1st. And with each switch gear delay, it kind of got pushed back. I think the, I think the low hanging fruit on some of the conditions Chris met Chris mentioned where the, the shading, which was a discussion with Lindsay. Back way back when, and was. We discussed using solar band, which we ended up. Installing, as we said, we would on the glazing. So I think we've. I think that condition should be all set. I think the parking email that Alex has used to anybody that's applied or signed a lease at spring street. Has been forwarded. And then I think the conditions 10 and 11 and 27 are. Are where we are my interpretation of 10 and 11. We're relative to a temporary certificate of occupancy, not a complete certificate of occupancy, which is why we're proceeding. The. The work that we've tried to put into deliver a very high quality building and a very tight site. And I think that's what we're trying to do. I'm on a site that previously wasn't paying any taxes has been very difficult. But we are very glad that we're almost to the end. We're very glad that we have tenants who very much appreciate the building and are looking to move in. And we are hopeful that the planning board can. See that we have done what we need to do. By providing a surety to be able to do that. So I look forward to talking with you. Thank you. All right. Thanks, Kyle. So am I right that we have basically. Three decisions to make one is, are we okay with the surety for the landscaping? Are we okay with the solar band for the window treatment? And the third one that. That's the parking email. Yeah, that the parking email is an acceptable satisfaction of the condition. Chris, do you agree? Those are the three that we need to be probably voting on. I think that's right. Yep. And it's landscaping and site amenities. So it's, you know, all the walkways and all the paving around the site. And that's contained in that one surety. I'm sorry, Chris, is there a, is there a vote required tonight on any of this? I think it would be a good idea to have a vote. Yep. Okay. All right. Board members, it's time for comments and questions. And I see two hands, Janet. So Chris meant to mention glare. And then I remember reading about that issue in. I think the record of the decision, but I don't really see a condition that says no glare. So I might have missed that. And so that's my first question is, is there a quick condition saying no glare? And then the second question I have is for Mr. Wilson, which is, does a solar band treatment plus the windows that you chose prevent glare? Okay. And the answer to the second one is yes, I think we're all good, but I just want, I didn't really see that condition. Okay. Chris. I don't know which item on the. Approval talked about the layer. There is one. And why can't I find it? I'll look too. It's, it's 35. Okay. Yeah, it was one of the ones that was mentioned. Yep. It even mentions the solar band, I think. In, in the meeting minutes. Further up. And that's what we've got and submitted on. So the solar band does prevent glare. I just didn't see it in the sheet that you gave me, but. What's that? I'm sorry. Prevent glare. I mean, or, you know, I mean that the purpose of the, of the solar band is to, is a window film that does a number of things that helps with insulation that helps with glare. It helps with ability to see through it. So that is not crystal clear. Okay. So that was something that they submitted along with other submittals at the time of their approval. Yeah. As a way to accommodate the discussion that had come up, there was about shading and us not wanting to integrate wood. Bree so lay on the exterior of the building. We said we would accommodate with a solar band. And we didn't think glazing was a concern. Every piece of glass has reflection to it. So I think. The solar band was what we discussed and what we provided. All right. Thank you, Kyle. Thanks so much, Mr. Chair. I think we should not be labored this too much. It sounds like there were a lot of conditions put on the building. Some of them are now kind of as the rubber hits the road a little bit contradictory. But I think we should not be labored this too much. I am totally satisfied with the parking communications. The solar band seems to address the clear problems. And setting aside more than 150%. Or setting aside 150% of what's projected to do the final. Sidewalks and landscaping seems prudent. So it seems like the building commissioner has put forward a recommendation. I don't think we should have any additional questions about that. And would be prepared to just move to approve it with, you know, approve the recommendations of the building commissioner. All right. Glad to hear you're prepared to move. It doesn't sound like that's a motion yet. So let's, let's get a few more comments out if people have them before we get to the motions. Bruce. Yes. I think I understand the solar band that the, the, when you put this film on it reduces the visible light transmission, which in certain instances would be perhaps problematic, maybe more in commercial than in, but with very small rooms and so forth, it seems to be a good use. So that's fine by me. The written description is fairly clear. I think the, I reviewed the, the cost of works that was provided by Western builders. The cost of work that was provided by Western builders. The cost of work that was provided by Western builders. The cost of work that was provided by Western builders here is really in a position, certainly not me to judge whether that's accurate, but it's got Western builders name on the letterhead. They have a contractor. They've been in the valley for years. I've been associated with them over the past. They're a good crowd. So I don't see why there would be any. Likelihood that their representation of the cost would be inaccurate. So I think all three of those things are, I don't think there was a conflict between condition 10 and condition. 27. And I thought that might be the, the matter of them, which we are more concerned, but from my point of view, I, I would say that even if there was a conflict and it was within our capacity to resolve it by. By feet. I would say that we should this is. This project hit the, the prime time at exactly the wrong time from the point of view that's been in viscous circumstances associated with trying to move this forward. So I think that. That our, our, we should be sympathetic to the, to the circumstances. And recognize that getting everything done and under circumstances like these is really, really important. And secondly, I think that it's clear that this developer, both of them, particularly. Mr. Wilson is a. The stand out here before and presumably we'll do it again. He's not an old man. He's got family. His kids are in school. He lives in town. He's not going anywhere as far as I can tell. So often these conditions are. More appropriate for a more important for folks who are passing through developing companies and so forth. And I think that the, the most important thing that we're going to do is to make sure that the overall indications are that. That archipelago is not such an organization. So I think all things considered, I'm comfortable when supporting a motion that. Johanna may make. Okay. Thank you, Bruce. Chris, I saw your hand go up during that. So the only comment I wanted to make was that the building commissioner wanted the planning board to. Kind of override. The planning board wanted the planning board to be. The planning board wanted the planning board to be. You know, the phrase except for difficulties associated with the planting season. In other words, the planting season would be fine to install the plants now, but because the site isn't ready for the plants to be installed. He's willing to. Grant this. You know, to have the certificate of occupancy, the temporary certificate granted, but he wanted to make sure that the planning board didn't have a problem. And he acknowledged that it was a kind of. What should I say? The stigial phraseology. This was, you know, approved in 2018. And now we probably would have. You know, rectify the apparent conflict between. Condition 10 and condition 27. A little bit more. But we didn't back then. So. That's why he wanted us to bring this to you to make sure that the planning board was okay with going ahead with this. Okay. Fred. See your hand. Yeah, I just. I would suggest that the way to handle that. When whoever's going to make the motion. I would suggest that. The requirement and condition 10. Relative to the completion of. Landscaping to the contrary, not withstanding. And that will. Swearly address the. Building commissioners concern. All right. Thanks, Fred. So. Mr. Wilson. Yes. By allowing this. Allowing the, the C of O. Prior to the landscaping be being finished. Do you intend to install the landscaping this fall? Or could it be. Yes. Later than that. As soon as possible. The landscaping will go in. So it'll be after the TCO and before the. The CO. I mean, would you be amenable to our. Putting some sort of time limit on installation of the landscaping? Sure. Okay. Yeah, there's no problem with that. Okay. Well, I guess I was wondering whether we would want to try to get. To ask to put as a condition to, to. Have the landscaping installed by the end of this calendar year. Is that a proposal or not? Yeah, that's fine. From my side. Thank you. Okay. All right. So I see two hands, maybe a couple of board members want to comment on whether that seems like something worth doing or whether we should not bother. Bruce. I was going to make a motion. So Fred's got something to say. Unless it would be speaking to a motion. I will, I will yield to Fred. Oh, he's not there anymore. Yeah, Fred has dropped his hand. So you have. I guess. How to word this. Move that the board support the. Applicants. And I would like to make a request for a partial. A temporary certificate of occupancy. An outstanding. Condition 10 of the original decision asking that the. Landscape be put in. Except for difficulties arising in planting. Season that. The. Condition number 11 requiring surety be. Provided on the basis of the. The data submitted by Western builders. That the. Solar band. Product. As presented. Be applied to the fenestration. And that's. The. And that the written. The written description. Regarding guidance to tenants seeking parking is deemed acceptable. Further that the. Board. Asks that the. Maybe asks maybe requires. The, that the landscaping need be completed by the end of the calendar year. Well, they said that the board expects that the landscaping. Shall be completed by the end of the calendar year. I think that covers it. Pam, did you get that? Pam, you are muted. We. Saw you nod. I'm sorry. I have, I have an elder doc here with me. So I'm kind of muted. Am I still muted? No. No. Okay. I think I have it. Good. It's, I think it was fairly verbatim. So it's on the record at least. That's right. Thank you. All right. Does anybody want to second that motion? No, I will go ahead and second that. I'll second. All right. Or defer to your second Doug. Chris and Pam, you can, you can pick one of us. Okay. So we have a motion on the floor. Board members, any other. Discussion that people would like to make. I just want to say that I've been biking by this site every morning for the past two years, and it has been. Just wonderful. Like all every interaction I have with the builders is wonderful. They manage the site really well. It compliments the Lord, Jeff, the scaling, like, I just, I just want to say kudos to Kyle and his team. Cause I think it's a really. Really. Just a nice addition to our town downtown. I appreciate that very much. Thank you. All right. Thank you. All right. Anybody else have any. Comments. All right. I don't see any other hands. All right. So we will vote on Bruce's motion. A yes vote is endorsing the motion and a no vote is opposing it. Bruce we'll start with you. Yes. And Fred. Yes. Jesse. Yes. Janet. I. Yo, hi. Hi. Karen. Hi. And I'm an eye as well. That's unanimous seven votes in favor. I appreciate it very much. I appreciate you guys listen to us. Taking us first here as well. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you, Kyle. Good night. Good night. All right. So the time now is seven oh nine. And we will go back to the fourth item on our agenda. Which was the. Public hearing. The first is the first of our two public hearings. So pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021. And extended again by chapter two of the acts of 2023. This meeting is being conducted via remote means and is being held for the purpose of providing the opportunity. For interested citizens to be heard regarding. S. P. R. 2023 dash zero six. And star electric company DBA doing business as ever source energy at 246 college street. This concerns Amherst electric substation number 17 K. The applicant requests site plan review approval to install a new approximately. 1.8 KV metal clad switch gear enclosure. And associated foundation. Extend existing perimeter fence 65 feet toward college street. Resulting in a substation yard extension of approximately 7020 square feet. Extend existing chain link security fence with similar eight foot high fencing topped with an additional one foot high barbed wire. Including fence exceeding four feet in height along the frontage in accordance with section 6.29 of the zoning bylaw. Install six inch crushed stone. Install conduit and necessary trenching. This is an updated relocation of curb cut and improvements to sidewalk along frontage. This is in the commercial zoning district. The parcels on map 14 be a parcel number 173. All right, so we'll start are there any board member disclosures for this site plan review hearing. All right, I don't see any hands for that. And in that case, we will welcome ever source actually Chris I see your hand you want to make a introductory note. I just wondered if Mr Colette would like to have some other people brought into the meeting from the attendees list I think Josh Lee Smith might be one of them, but maybe Mr Colette can tell you who's who he wants to be brought in. Yes, thank you. You read my mind actually that was going to be my first request we do have Joshua Lee Smith, who is representing ever source in this matter to speak and then also Justin Pennington will will sort of review. Briefly some some slides with the board. So if those two could be added at this time I think that would be helpful. Right, and we'll leave my cane in the in the attendees is that right. I think Josh is going to introduce the project and then and then turn it over to Justin so if anybody else needs to add anything or if there's a question that comes up within someone's particular purview they could probably raise their hands to answer to it. Great. So welcome, all of you. Tell us what you're interested in doing. Good evening, Mr chair members of the board. First of all, if I can do a sound check. Can folks hear me okay. Excellent. Okay, just so for the record, my name is is Joshua Lee Smith. I am outside council for ever sourcing connection with this project. This having been the first time I've been before this board. It would be possible to, we have a brief slide deck and Justin Pennington, I believe has also been admitted as a witness here. Could he gets control with respect to sharing of the screen for that. Josh as a panelist, anyone as a panelist can can share their screen suggestion go ahead and give it a go when you're ready and there we go. Okay. So, as I mentioned, we have a very brief slide deck. I'm going to kick things off and I'm going to hand it over to Justin. Mr chair, you gave a very, very pretty thorough overview of the project itself. It's a relatively straightforward project. The site itself is a an unmanned substation electric substation. It has been in existence and in operation for decades, actually going back to as far back as 1917. So it's been there for quite some time. Justin, could you advance just to the next slide please. And here's a picture and aerial depiction of this site. So, this property is located in part in the commercial zoning district and in part within one of the town's residential. The vast majority of the site work, however, is going to be occurring within the commercial portion of the property, which is the proportional property that is closer or closer to College Street College Street being the street you can see on the bottom of the of the screen. And as you had mentioned this chair, this site which is it's about a five acre science. So it's fairly large in size. It involves the installation primarily of all the switch here enclosure. This is a, some might refer to this as utility building. That's what it would generally look like outside. In fact, in every source engineer, they may say that's more like a piece of equipment. So it is an integral part of the existing electric substation that is there now. And as you can imagine, and I know that there was a site to the site yesterday and I'm sure the members are probably familiar with the site before that. This is somewhat of a typical outdoor electric substation, mostly open air substation. So you've got transformers, circuit breakers, dead end structures, typical types of equipment, including the switch gear. So what primarily what's happening here is every source is looking to replace some of the more outdated equipment with new up to the state of the art equipment, including this closure, which is approximately 1500 square feet in size. In order to accommodate that, they need to expand slightly modestly the existing substation fence. So security fencing, which would be closest to the college street. There's going to be a slight expansion with respect to that. So with that, that's my brief overview. As I said, we've got a very brief slide deck to run through. We've been working very closely with Chris and Nathaniel and town staff, other colleagues in connection with this project. We had prefiling meetings talking about the need for this project, which is generally to improve the overall like reliability of electric service for the town. And we've provided a number of materials, had a bit of back and forth with respect to some of the landscaping, which hopefully the board is pleased with and will be satisfied with with respect to this project. So we're, we're looking forward to getting the project going. And we can talk a little bit more about time frames later on. But at this point, I'll pass it on to Justin. Hey, thanks for the introduction, Josh. So yeah, my name is Justin Pangton. I am the assistant project manager on this project working closely with our PM team of Caroline Salem and Brian rave. I'm going to be presenting or going through the slide deck for you today, going through some of the drawings we submitted as part of our application as well. And we do have other members of our team that I think are within the waiting lobby viewing lobby that will be available to answer any questions might have regarding engineering or environmental so things off with the PowerPoint presentation. So, as Josh mentioned, and her 17 case substation is an ever source substation located on 246 College Street within both the general and commercial zoning districts. So with this project, we're replacing the open airbreakers with a 13.8 KV metal clad switch gear enclosure. These substation upgrades are necessary to improve the reliability of electric power for the town, as well as eliminate obsolete equipment within the substation. As we see here, this is just a front view of the fence, looking into the station from College Street. The details regarding the enclosure and the fence. The picture you can see here on the left is a typical picture of what a switch gear enclosure would look like being installed in ever source substation. And on the right is a typical picture of what the fence will be replaced to this new fence is eight feet tall plus one foot of barbed wire, which coincides with ever sort standards for safety and security to accommodate adding the switch gear into the substation. We're expanding the fence approximately 65 feet towards College Street. This will allow room for us to add a switch gear enclosure south of the existing open airbreakers, as well as enclose part of a new transmission structure that was recently installed by another project. We're hoping that the expansion of the fence will facilitate space for both the new switch gear enclosure as well providing space for trucks or other ever source equipment to enter the station and overall improving station access for ever source workers. As of right now, pending approval from from from the planning board. We are targeting starting civil construction in fall of 2023 around September or October. Following this through Q 2024. We will begin pre outage and post outage construction, following delivery of the switch gear enclosure from our vendor. And the following drawings were some of the submittals that we sent with our application. This is just the general site plan. This includes the expansion of the fence, the switch gear enclosure, and some small other details regarding curb cut and the fence. Substation access addition plan. This includes how station access is going to be changed at the station in regards to the curb cut and plantings along College Street. This is an example of a blue point juniper of the planting that we propose to install in front of College Street. This was the training and Grange plan also submitted with our application. And that's all I have on my end. Thank you, Justin. So we, as I said, we've been in pretty consistent communications with Chris rest, rest, and then Malaya connection with our middle. We provided some responses to some of the initial staff questions that they had posed and provide some supplementary materials, including some more details with respect to the landscape plans that we've shared that that you can see tonight. We also are in receipt of the staff memo that Chris and Virginia prepared and we're in agreement with the conclusions that were set forth in the fight with that staff. So with that, we're happy to answer any questions that the board or the public may have. Thank you. Okay, thank you, Josh. Thank you, Justin. Board members. A number of us made a site visit last evening. Would any board member like to give us an overview of what we all saw when we were there on site with the ever source folks yesterday. Okay, nobody's volunteering. Oh, okay. I can try. I always feel a little intimidated doing this but so let's see we met in the parking lot just in front of where the current substation is. And there were I believe three people from ever source there who gave the basics of the project. One of them walked into the parking lot to show where the front fence line was going to be. We discussed the presence of the stream to the, I guess it's the east of the site, and how they will remove the vegetation that's currently there along the fence line. And we talked about how at least the frontage on college street will be an improvement, the curb cuts will be clearer. And, you know, and so instead of there kind of being a dirt parking lot and then the old building with kind of driveway in front of it there will be vegetative screening there and then the couple of curb cuts. And so we just walked the full perimeter of the site on the site visit. But I know I went this morning and just looked around the backside and Janet, I believe had walked the site as well. Doug, am I can I report on that now or should or is this just the site plan might as well mention it it was an observation of a site visit. Okay, so on the, if that's the east, that's the north side of the substation fenced in area. There's essentially a small dumping ground, it doesn't look like any waste that ever source generated to me it looks like waste that has been dumped into residential usage but there's a significant amount of debris. There are lots of kind of pieces of disposable plastic waste like bottles that I think put the watershed at risk and there's a lot just a lot of stuff there that I don't know, I seem, I think is inappropriate for like having right there in the wetland next to the stream. Those are my observations from the site visit happy to open it. See there were several others of us there last night does anybody want to add anything to that. Bruce. Yes, I think it. Everything that John said is salient and so forth but I think it would be worth reporting additionally that we noted that there is now a significant amount of parking across the front of the building and that will be pretty much all removed. I've just explained that the. This is a, an unmanned substation so the use itself to generate snow traffic will need that. The media is no longer in the building and that to the extent that there is parking or what have you the ever source has the land to the west, and there is access there and and so they have they have the means to accommodate vehicles, particularly service vehicles so it. I guess now I will add the opinion, at least for me it didn't seem as though that was going to be a complication but certainly the site visit revealed the extent to which the current parking will be removed. Thanks Bruce, your honor you had another thought. Yeah, one additional addendum thank you Doug. We talked about fire access and talked about the fact that the fire chief has reviewed these plans and didn't feel a need to comment on it. With regard to reconfiguring the front and access for vehicles. Yep. Okay. All right. Let's see. Questions from the board. Fred, I'm there. I'm just curious if you might comment a little bit I've been very interested to watch the apparent upgrade of the transmission facilities that come into and that involves this station and, apparently throughout Western Massachusetts and I'm just curious, if you could say a little bit about how this interfaces with that. And I just, I just, I'm not sure what the transmission voltage is but I'm curious, and it could have a few comments on that I'd be interested. Alright, Josh, Justin, anybody want to take that. I can try the best I can to answer this one so I believe the voltage rating on that transmission line is 115 KV. It was upgraded by a separate project, though unrelated to ours recently completed. It does tie into the station. And part of the structures are recently installed within the parcel of when the Amherst is on is within the substation as well, which will be encompassed by the fence. All right. Fred, is that sufficient for your curiosity. Fred you are muted. Yes, thank you sorry. Got a problem. Okay, next hand, Jesse. Thanks. I guess I'm curious about the choice of location for the new switch gear. So if I'm looking at the plan and assuming the red oval I think it was slide five you showed us Justin, the red oval, assuming that's to scale seems like it almost fit in the northwest of the current enclosure. And my concern is bringing the fence. So forward to the street. It really changes the appeal of that current building if anything's ever going to happen there, and just the curb appeal, it's moving the. And yes, I agree with Johanna that the planting will certainly mitigate some of that, but it's really moving the whole fence and I saw Ness of the substation forward toward the street. So we can comment if that's necessary to be in that location for some reason, or if it's possible to put it in that back area, which is already enclosed. Yeah, I can, I can think I can answer that so the reason why the switch gear is being chosen to be put in that particular location is because it's being tied into the existing open air breakers. Or not originally but what could have been considered was removing the open air breakers but it would take extensive amount of work in terms of outages, removing structural equipment, replacing foundations. So the best case scenario here was to tie into the existing equipment south of where the breakers are already existing. Replacing the breakers in place would have significantly delayed the project over a year or two years beyond the anticipated duration. Will you eventually be removing those breakers, the old ones. Yep, the breakers will be removed. I'm not sure what the plans are for the steel that holds those breakers but the electrical equipment itself will be removed as part of the removals of our project. Okay. Could we see the breakers on the map. I can share my screen if you'd like I haven't pulled up. Why don't you bring that up again I think when you showed us the site drawing. Yeah. So, so these are the existing breakers right here. As you can see through the winds down here it does tie into the existing breakers, which is why there's really no room up here, considering the transformer equipment that's already in place. The breakers are these squares. We'll keep it on this frame. So this was more practical from a sequencing point of view. And the downside is that the footprint of the enclosure needs to get large that accurate. Yep. Okay. Jesse is that. That's the answer we're getting. Yeah, I understand. Make sense. Okay, Janet, you've got your hand up. You are muted. Thank you. I first want to say that I was almost thrilled by your statement in support of the end star, your application because I think when I first come on the planning board I thought everybody would do that. I wanted to introduce their project, and then refer directly to the different parts of the bylaw so, you know, so it was really easy to read and really understand what our sections of the bylaw said and how your project fit so maybe it's a lawyer's thing but it was really clear and I was, you know, kind of personally thrilled and I hope I wish everybody would do that. I had some very, very specific questions I wondered how tall the shrubs are going to get. And then, are you using black fencing which I think the planning department had asked for. And then I just wondered about the, what the plan is for the brick building and the use of that, if you know I'm kind of looking ahead wondering if there's a need for parking or something like that. And then, I guess I'd love to see the debris pile to go. I think we all do. With respect to the plantings, the, in terms of maturity of those plantings, they're expected to be between 12 and 15 feet in height, which I think is consistent with, so there actually are a number of other tree lined or street lined plantings that exist on this side of the street on a portion of the property as well as the adjoining property. So by adding these is in particular these types of non-siduous evergreens along the street. We felt that it was pretty compatible with not only the rest of the property and existing plantings, but also the other plantings on the adjoining site. So to answer your question about 12 to 15 feet once they're mature. Okay. And then black, are you going to do black fencing in the front? Yeah, that was a comment that that was one of the early comments that we received from Chris and her team. So, as was mentioned, the entirety of the perimeter security fencing needs to be upgraded to ever sources standard substation height for these types of substations. This is paramount importance, and their standard, as Justin mentioned, is 8 feet plus one foot of barbed wire. So, what we've agreed to do is to provide a black, I think it's black powder, so just in case you're wrong. But essentially a black color fencing along the facade, along the front portion, along College Street, that expansion portion. The area that would would be visible. I suppose if you're either walking or driving past the site. I will say that, you know, if you're looking at the property on the on the left side, which I believe is the westerly side, you've got that building, which kind of blocks that side of that expansion. And on the other side there are also there's existing vegetation. So, and then there'll be that row of evergreen that will be newly installed. So, as I think it was mentioned before, when there was discussion with respect to the location of this new switch here and closure. We feel that aesthetically the curb appeal. Yes, the building will be will be closer to the street, but there'll be that vegetative screening. And I think part of the purpose from Chris's team to request that black long front was in part because it would be less reflective, a little more aesthetically pleasing ever sources is happy to do that. And I also believe I know that we had, we were looking into whether that the, that one foot of barbed wire, which is also necessary, whether that could also be matched in terms of the black color. And to the ever source team, I believe we did look into that that is possible as well. So it would be that eight foot plus one foot of barbed wire all in black along the front. And so, are there any plans for that the old brick building, or is that just kind of looking ahead to future uses of parking in that area. I think I can answer this one so there are long term plans with an ever source to possibly remove the building. There's, as far as we know, it's not habitable isn't the white word but it's not suitable for use. So eventually that plan would be for some ever source removals team to maybe remove it but that's not something within the purview of this project that we would be doing. All right. Thank you. We'll go on to Bruce. I have a question about lighting. I guess the way to phrase it would be, will there be any substantial change or any change at all to the exterior lighting level associated with the, the, the site there. You're right me from wrong but the lighting that is presently there today is being removed. The only new lighting, I believe that's associated with this project involves what's called task lighting. So the switch switch gear enclosure the building on each side. Essentially, equivalent to wall backlight. So there'll be lights that will be on each side. And I believe that they will be manually controlled. In other words, this is not going to be a lit up substation that will have lighting that's going to be on 24 seven or during nighttime hours. I believe it's only going to be on turned on manually when if a personnel needs to access the site. Okay, so you, you don't as part of an ever source standard you don't have a particular illumination level for a substation complex. Because you said you're removing the existing lighting so the only lighting that will be there will either come from these manual switches. And then someone needs task lighting, or from the ambient lighting from street lights or something like that or, you know, headlights on cars. Yeah, that's correct. The switch here actually contains automatic lighting. It's sensory trigger. It's a motion sensor. And then the size of the building are activated via manual lighting. So just wanted to throw that out there. All right, Bruce. You're right with the site getting darker. Yes. Okay. All right, are there any other questions from the board. And as I understand the conversation this evening we would like to have at least one condition that the debris on the north side of the enclosure be removed to the limit of the proper property. Maybe that's too expansive because you've got a whole swath that goes north, probably 20 miles. So maybe, you know, I don't I don't know how we would describe that between the fenced enclosure and the right. Would that be about right. So any objection to that condition, Josh. Well, I think it's pretty clear what debris what what debris the board is concerned with. And my understanding is that it's that is located in the rear of the property directly behind the rear portion of the security fence. I don't know how many feet, but, and it seems to be all collected sort of in one area. I don't know that it's spread out. But yes, the never sources. When we came to learn of this. And I think that the people on the call here were not aware of it, none of us were aware of it until the site. So we appreciate the folks who were in attendance there pointed this out. I know that there was immediate communications to the station supervisor, some ops folks internally, and every source is looking into it to see what if any history there might be with respect to this debris, where it may have come from. There are residences, somewhat far away, but there are also some commercial properties that are a little closer. Who knows what ever sort of certainly is looking into it. So in any event, the company is comfortable with having this debris area, we could say the debris area that was described and discussed during the planning board meeting I think that would be sufficient I believe everyone reasonably understands what we're talking about. What I do want to just give a little qualification on is just the time frame. Certainly this is the, this is a very important project is important. It's a public utility. It's for the public good. We want to make sure that it goes on to serve the residences, the institutions and all the businesses in the town that this project move forward. So I would be acceptable if the debris be removed. Prior to commencement of work, which would be, again, that would be sometime fall period. Yeah, I think that would be fine with me now speak for myself and suggest to the board that I think having it removed by, you know, I even the end of this calendar year would be fine. Even better. I mean, ever source certainly has has an interest in making sure that it's removed and they will do it and and I think they'll do it promptly. We're just sort of in that initial stage of looking into it and I don't know that we have all of the information yet as to what it is where it came from. And so how it's going to be removed. But certainly, well, we can work with the town to make sure that it does get removed and they're welcome to, you know, come to the site and take a look at it to make sure that they're satisfied. Okay, Bruce, I see your hand. And I was going to propose a motion to approve but do you want to invite public comment before or after that. Well, I wanted, I think I'd like to do public comment before. Okay, I'm good with that. We've heard from everybody before we put our motion together. Chris, I see your hand. I just wanted to remind the board that you might want to put a condition on that says that the fence along the front of the property would be in black. And also that the conservation commission is reviewing this project as part of a larger project. And they haven't gotten around to having their public hearing yet. But if the conservation commission were to require something to be moved and therefore it would be different from what is being shown to you tonight. That you could ask the applicant to come back to you at a public meeting, not to have a big public hearing, but just come at a public meeting and present the change. And then at that time you could either approve the change or you could say to them, oh, you really need a new site plan review application if the change is significant enough, but that would take care of the of the conservation portion of this. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Chris. All right, so at this point I will ask for any public comments that people want to make on this proposal. Are there any members of the public that would like to make a comment at this time. Okay, I don't see any hands. Bruce you want to take another try at your, your motion we now have at least three conditions I believe. Yeah, I got six already so I'll list them out. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Excuse me, if I may just with respect to the condition pertaining to the client column. And whatever the client column decides with respect to potential changes to the plans that that we've submitted to this board and the need potential need to come back to this board. In the event that there is a significant change I think with the term that Chris had used in her staff. Through the chair and this question is directed to Chris through the chair. Is your thought that if there's if the con con reviews the project and then propose it some type of a change with respect to that that modifies the plans that have been submitted to this board to the planning board. But that that that would trigger having to come back to this board to make a determination as to whether or not the changes are significant enough where we would have to file a new application. Would coming back to this to this board for that determination require re noticing and re advertising. No, it would just need a posted agenda item. And so it's really a more informal process. It's a sort of administrative approval. If the change is so large that the board says, oh, we can't do that as part of this, you know, public meeting process. We have to have a new application. You know, that's a possibility, but hopefully it will come to that. Hopefully the change will be small enough and the board can approve it at a public meeting without going through any kind of notification. Or legal or anything like that. Understood. Okay. I mean, I suppose the alternative is for us not to vote tonight for us to wait for the concom and then have a, you know, continue the public hearing until after that, which we often do with the concom. Chris, I think I would advise against that in this case because I understand that this group still hasn't submitted revised plans to the concom and the plans include a lot of offsite work. So the conservation commission has asked this group to submit pretty much everything that they're doing up and down college street associated with this project. And so that, you know, goes farther afield than this site. And it could take a while to get to the point of, of having that concom approval. So I think this mechanism is more efficient. All right. Bruce. Okay, I move the board approve the site plan reviewer applicant application for the project of 246 college street by ever source to upgrade the existing switching station in accordance with the documentation as presented with the following conditions. I think, well I had written down removal of trash and debris on the immediate north side of the compound. The closure prior to the end of 2023 calendar year. Number two that the new fencing and the black in color. Number three that the, we didn't discuss this but it was in one of the correspondences between ever source and the town and the ever sources indicated that they're willing to do this. Number three is that the, the existing sign reading Amos media be reviewed from the, the brick building. The new task lighting wall pack be manually controlled and downcast. And number fives that the conservation commission review, if it should trigger any significant change that the applicant return to the planning board for further consideration. Those are the fives that I have. And Bruce on the lighting by by downcast you mean dark sky compliant. Yes, I do I think yes that's what I mean. Okay, with respect to the task. I just want to make sure Justin is comfortable with that because Justin may have corrected me when I said that it was all manual. Justin you may have mentioned it may be partially automated as well. Yeah, the lighting at the two switch gear entrances will be automated. The two sides of the switch gear do have an overhead shielding and are pointed downward towards the ground, but our manual as well. So they're on a motion detector, the just the doorways for safety. Okay. I see your hand. Yeah, I'm wondering I think part of the motion should be a finding that under 6.29 that the board agrees that public safety concerns warrant the sense height. Because otherwise, it's going to be in conflict with the bylaw, unless we make that finding so that should be part of the motion. I think. Okay. The board's adding that is a is a is a is a is a power is a sentence. After the reference to in compliance with the submitted documentation and before with the following condition. That seems about the right place to put it and I agree that the same. A relevant thing to be saying here. Chris, you have your hand up. Yes, just one more thing. Normally you say that the project will be built according to the approved plans that were approved on such and such a date and managed in accordance with the approved management plans are you comfortable with those two conditions as well. Yes, yes. Okay. Okay, Chris and Pam, you think you have all that. Mr. Chair on the building, you built in accordance with the plans. Can we oftentimes fell out of municipalities that there's sort of a similar wording like that, but usually it indicates in substantial accordance. Oftentimes they're minor deviations that are really not material, but and that can be in the discretion of your staff. In the event that there's some slight changes, but if we could say substantial accordance. I can deal with that. Yes, I mean, it's this is a very technical project. So I think we would really have to do that. We wouldn't understand the difference anyway, probably. Yeah. And the other item is chair, I believe, as the proposed language with respect to that fencing and the black color. And as that was mentioned, I don't think that there was a qualification that what we're talking about is only the front portion that runs parallel to College Street. The front. I noticed myself that I said new fencing. So well, 65 feet on the sides to. I guess that's why I want to point that out, because what ever source had indicated in its response to. Chris's earlier comment on this that that ever source is manable to that front portion again that segment that runs parallel to College Street, not the size. The new fencing goes around the entire property. Yeah, so that that is definitely not something that ever source is looking to do to have the entirety of all the perimeter fencing that that's maintenance repair maintenance activity with respect to the other fencing around the substation. We want to keep that sort of its typical metallic color. But ever source is willing to have again that front portion, which would would be screened by the new vegetation, which is, you know, it's surrounded by commercial properties is a commercial district along this College Street. So I feel like it's reasonable that that portion be black, but the sides of the expansion portion of the yard that fencing, we have never discussed that that ever source was going to that that was also going to be black. Well, you know, notwithstanding your conversations with Chris. This is the first time we've talked about this with this group. So, Bruce, how do you feel about that? I don't agree. The correspondence. And if a sources response said, Chris's boards, the staff's request was new fencing, can it be black rather than stock aluminum, and the response black coding for the front section of the substation fence is acceptable. My understanding of front section is that it's the new fencing, and therefore the 60 feet on either side of the front is what we're talking about by the front section. It's the new fencing, I think the new fencing it's going in. I don't see why we should have two standards of fencing for stuff that's new. I'm going to be seeing this fence. I mean, this is a transparent fence you're standing in front of it you're going to see both sides the screening is only on one side, not on both sides so I don't see any logic to imagine that we would do some kind of facade treatment here because this is a totally transparent facade so no I think we should the motion, my motion stands. Okay, thanks Bruce. Chris. I think that I'm understanding what Bruce is going after. Bruce is talking about the fence that doesn't exist yet. And so he's calling that the new portion of the fence so that's the portion that's three pieces of fence that is projecting out towards the front of the property. There is also fence that's going to be replaced that already exists. And I think every source wants to keep the fence that already exists that's going to be replaced as the standard galvanized color, but ever source may agree, based on what you're saying now to having just that portion that is protruding towards the road as a black fence. I understand what you're what Bruce is saying now. Okay. Yeah, I actually understand. I mean I basically basically do agree that since we're mostly going to see this obliquely as we're driving along College Street that the sides are something we will see. Yeah, I'll adjust this one Josh. So you're just looking for the 65 feet extension of the fence to be black. Yeah, the project can kind of accommodate that. Okay, so we'd have to two sections that are 65 feet long that run north south. If you can I can share my screen to kind of visualize us this blue highlighted section here. Yes. We can certainly accommodate that as black coded. Great. Thank you very much just thank you. No problem. Okay. So, Chris, or Pam, would it make sense to read the motion back to us. We have a second. Not that I know of yet. Yes, Pam to read it back. Okay, so not me. Well, I mean, someone sure. Are we waiting for a second or you want me to give it a go. I would I would like to hear it read before we do the second. Okay, so this is going to be choppy because it's just my notes here. Mr. Colton moved to approve the site plan review application for ever source to upgrade their switch station. And then we are going to add and finding the board agrees that in conjunction with by law section 6.29 that this is a safety measure in the fence height, which remember guys this is choppy. And with the following conditions. So number one, to move, remove the trash and debris on the immediate north of the project by the end of the calendar year. All new fan saying the lack. Number three. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Did you say all the all okay all. Well, expand as Justin just described it. When you say no, you mean the way Justin just described it. Yeah, it's correct. Expansion area, not new. Okay, yes. Okay, wait a minute. I think we're changing the word new to expansion. I mean, the issue he has is that they're replacing all of the fencing all the way around the enclosure so all of it will be. However, some of it will be newly in place as opposed to existing. That's just being replaced. Okay. I think we understand that Pam and I. Yeah, we do. We do. It's just hard to put it into the correct words on the spot here. I think that the, the embers media sign be removed from the existing building. For that the wall lighting be dark, dark sky compliant and manual. Number five is return. It's the conservation commission prescribed changes return to the planning board at a public meeting to determine whether the new site plan review needs to occur. The project built in substantial accordance with approved site plan, and the project managed, which Chris, I don't know the very tail end of that, what we add managed in accordance with the management plan that's approved tonight. Okay. May I make a comment. Yes, I think that not all of the lighting is manual. I think some of it is automatic. I think that Justin said, so we're going to have to adjust that condition to accommodate the fact that the lighting at the entry ways is going to be automatic. Fred, I see your hand. I was just preparing to make a second when you call for that's only reason my hands up. Well, I think we've, we've gotten through a recap of the motion and so I just thought it was worth doing so everybody was pretty clear about what we were doing. If you're ready to make a motion or seconded by all means. I just add one more thing. Sorry to say. Okay, Chris, could you make a finding that it's in accordance with the relevant criteria of section 11.24. And to close the public hearing. Okay. Bruce, you fine with adding those two. Yes, I see your head shaking. Yep. Yes, that's fine. Mr. Mr chair. Yes, Josh. In the staff memo. There was also Chris had mentioned waivers certain waivers with respect to, for example, traffic and the need for a traffic impact study. And a few others. I, I don't know whether it is the typical protocol for this board to make a separate motion on waivers or waivers are even necessary. But I just want to point that out. That is, that is our typical practice. So those probably should be added to. I agree. I think they should be added. And I guess I will leave it to Chris and Pam, where in the motion they are inserted, but probably before the conditions I would think. So with all of that, Fred, do you want to make a motion or make a second. I do I second the motion as amended. Thank you. Your hand is up. I have a question about the, the condition about manual light switches. I'm just, and why, why do we care. Like, to me there's something like automatic switches and there's no risk in it being left on accidentally. So I'm just trying to understand the condition. It was simply because it was mentioned as being manual and I thought I would just fall that into the motion because it was only one word, but it's hardly important. I think the more important part is the is the downcast night sky compliance so we can admit the word manual I think Chris and Pam were already working on adjusting that to fold in the fact that some of the lighting wasn't manual. It was in fact automatic. So I think that word needs to be stricken and, and probably just leave it as that the lighting be down. The lighting be nice guy come dark sky compliant. All right. Yep, that sounds good like any exterior lighting will be dark sky compliant. We just leave it at that sounds great. Janet. So, to answer your honest question. The other part of the bylaw requires that after business hours letting be turned off, unless there's a reason for safety. And so, if they're only turning it on when they're there and they're turning off and it's there, not there so it's part of dark sky compliance is not just letting things burn all night so I think that may be why he said manual but I don't I don't want to go into probe into his mind but it is important that you know lights are in blazing like. All right, thanks Janet. Okay. Josh, are you okay with where we're at. I am although at one point I believe Chris had mentioned something about a management income yet it'll be managed in compliance with the management plan that was submitted as part of the application. Or was that a waiver that was requested. Would you request a waiver of the management plan. We would we would request a waiver of the management plan. Yes. Because there's nothing to manage. Correct. We would, in addition, any of the other waiver plans that you had suggested for us with it in your staff report. The other plans were the plans that you submitted. In accordance with the plans that you submitted. Chris I think he was saying that in your development application report. You listed other plans that were were not submitted. And there was a request to waive the required submission of those plans to I understand that but actually Josh did submit a management plan and he referred to for each item, please see statement in support. So the state. The whole project. So I think it's legitimate to say that the project will be managed in accordance with the management plan, which refers to the statement in support. So just so I'm clear, the management plan is in your mind. The statement in support that we submit as part of our application. That's how you characterize the management that it would be managed in accordance with the statement in support. Okay. I'm comfortable with that. Good week. Okay. All right. Are we ready to vote everyone. No, I'm not seeing any objections. So. All right, so. Janet. Are we going to, I just copy it like we're waiving the traffic study, the landscape plan and the fence site. Do we need to put that in now. Or can we do it next. Anybody. Well, I think we added as a condition that we were waiving submission of the plans that Chris identified. Yeah. I think that's where she sent us. Chris. Yeah, they're listed on page two of the development application report. A landscape plan, a lighting plan, a soil erosion plan, a sign plan and a traffic impact statement. Those were the waivers that were requested. Does that make sense. Yes, I kind of missed. Okay. Good. Sorry. Okay. Okay. And why don't we go ahead. Okay. So. Regular order. Bruce. Yes, I approve. Fred. Yes. Jesse. Yes, I approve. Janet. Yes. Johanna. I'm a yes. Aaron. And I'm a yes as well. Seven in favor, no opposed. Unless ever source you have any other comments. Thank you for coming. Thank you so much. Good luck. Conservation commission. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. That was surprisingly. Challenging. I thought it was a pretty simple request. Okay, so it's 11 minutes after eight. We usually take about a five minute break around eight o'clock. And so why don't we take a five minute break, mute yourselves and turn off your cameras until you come back. Around eight 16, eight 17. Thank you. Or two 15 in the morning in the current. Yeah. All right. I have eight 17 on my computer. As the time. It's like we're mostly back. It's like we need Fred. I wonder if you would bring in Mr. Barrow, Anthony Barrow. Hello, Anthony. Thank you for joining us. We're, we're not quite started yet with the hearing. So we'll need to do some introductory remarks and then. We will, we will call on you to make the presentation. I just heard my name. So I figure I. Jumping. Oh, Fred, are you there? All right. But now we've got, we've got everyone back. Okay. So the time now is eight 20. And we will resume this meeting. The next item on the agenda. Item five is another. Public hearing. Pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 and extended again by chapter two of the acts of 2023. This meeting is being conducted via remote means and is being held for the purpose of providing the opportunity for interested citizens to be heard regarding. SPR 2023 dash zero seven. Easy soul LLC. Care of auto zone at 373 Northampton road. Request site plan review approval to amend site plan review. Approval SPR 2025 dash 16. To install a roof mounted solar system on an existing building roof. And additionally install a low height ground mounted solar system within existing property lines. This is in the BL and RD zoning district. On map 13D parcel three. Board members. Are there any disclosures as we start this hearing? Okay. I don't see any hands with disclosures. All right. Mr. Barrow, you are now is the time for you to make your presentation. All right. Well, good evening. I trust that by now all board members have had a chance to review the plans and documents provided. Quick summary. All the roof mounted solar system. On an existing commercial retail building. Owned by auto zone. And in that we're proposing to install a low height. Small ground mount system. In an open field. Improximity to the building. Of the existing customer. All within the customers. A lot. Size. Well below the allowable. Use surface area. And some provisions for. A safeguarding. The ground mounted system. I had the pleasure to meet with some of the members yesterday during a site. Review. And. Entertain some of the questions and feedback and shared information with them. And then in addition to that. Very late last night. I follow up. With some additional information. That I was asked to see if I could help with. Providing. And I provided that last night. And happy to answer any questions. That. What may. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Barrow. So board members, I presume you have any questions. Are there any members who were at the site plan? Or the site visit yesterday that would like to. Give us a recap of that. I know you, Hannah, you picked up the earlier. The first visit we made. Well, okay. I was, I was a participant. Janet, you raising your hand. You want to do it. Sure. I was, I was a little pasty there. Cause I didn't realize you were going to jump in. So we, we visited the site. So all of the panels on the roof are going to be on the roof. And I think nobody can see them unless they're in a. Flying aircraft. And then the, the panels that are on the ground are right. We'll be adjoining the building on the west side. They're very low. They're, they're only about two feet high. And they're, they're just going to be placed on top. They're not going to be screwed in or any kind of mounting system. And then the, the, and it's, I mean, you can see where the, the, the, the fencing and where the array, the array will be. It doesn't fill up the entire grassy area. It doesn't fill up the entire grassy area. And then the project manager said, if we wanted it, we could have it move back further away from the street. There was some discussion about security and it was the fight of the fence. Adequate because the equipment in the array is valuable, like wiring and things like that. And I don't know if people steal panels. There's, there was no like buffer vegetation proposed. And it was easily seen from route nine. The building, this. The store, the place next door is a car wash. And I think a gas station. And then I can't, I can't quite remember where the placement of the bike. I think that the site plan doesn't accurately show that the bike rack is not inside with the array, but I may have that wrong. Doug, do you remember that part? Yeah. The plan that we were looking at did show the enclosure. Essentially bisecting the pad with the bicycle rack on it and the. So we did talk about pushing it back so that it's behind or to the north of the bicycle rack. And then also. The array. Provide would provide more electricity than is used by the. The store itself. And it's a pilot project because the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the store itself. And it's a pilot project because the company wants to sort of. Allocate the extra energy towards other stores that they had that just rent buildings and they can't put in solar. And I, I, I don't know if this is true, but it sounds like they're trying to get to sort of a net zero. In their operations, but I don't know if that's true. It just sounded like they, you know, it's, it's a pilot to see how this works. But yes, I watched all the news. But yeah, I saw this on buildings. And now they own. Yeah. I think, I think there were sort of two things going on. One was. The surplus power generated here would be able to be. Credited essentially to other. Stores in Massachusetts. But this was a pilot project for the national network of auto locations all around the country, and it sounded like this was the very first one and that maybe California and New York stores, if it's successful here, they might bring it out in those two states next. Anthony, is that an accurate statement. Yeah, that is correct. That is all an accurate statement of the proposed combined roof mounted in ground mounted system. It is designed to offset 100% of the electrical expenditure being used from the demand at this particular location. It is also offered to overproduce roughly about 50% additional power that then is going to be allocated to other rented properties from auto zone that are using electricity through the Massachusetts virtual net metering interconnection program. Based on the side visit that we had yesterday, I provided some marked up drawings of the survey plot. This is a prepared that actually shows the demarcation of the solar field completely outside of the bicycle rack with the revised dimension from the frontage to 80 feet versus 60 feet. I'm going to head back and an additional 10 or 15 feet from originally proposed so that way it's all clear from the bicycle rack. One consideration that we gave to the project from the beginning about locating the ground mounted towards the frontage of the building. I think the second advantage of a of a of a light fall that is adjacent to the corner of the ground mounted soil field. So that it provides some level of lighting in the evening near the frontage of the store, kind of out in the tear any kind of activity that particular area. Any recommendations with the with the placement of the ground mounted system but initially would like to propose with what we have. Okay, and thank you Pam for bringing up the site plan. And so Anthony this shows the revision with the green line that pushes the enclosure behind the bicycle pad, which is the black rectangle, just below the green line. Alright, that's correct. Board members we see. Now is the time for conversation. We did have a fair amount of discussion yesterday as to whether the array should stay where roughly where it's shown here, or whether it should slide farther back. I think there were some pros and cons for that. And we also, at least a couple of us thought that having the fencing being making that black fencing would be a desirable feature of the fencing. And we also had some conversation about the height of the fencing and whether four feet, whether we were comfortable with four feet. And I think that the farther up on the farther north on this site plan the propane tank is shown. And that tank appeared to have a six foot fence around it. So there might be some interest in raising the height from four feet to six feet. I'm substantially comfortable with pretty much everything as proposed and revised. The applicant has been very responsive in revising the material to show the compound in green adjusted to retain the bike to retain the bike rack outside the enclosure. I prefer the enclosure, the ground mounted array to be where it's shown toward the front. I think it's appropriately conspicuous. I'm comfortable with the four foot high enclosure and the I think the applicant's documentation now shows that it to be black so I'm not sure we have to condition that any longer. I'm comfortable with the how the, the production meter and and and disconnects and so forth are located on the backside of the building. I think the whole plan the whole objective is laudable. And, and it was very thoroughly explained. So, really, I'm just opening my mouth to say, I'm fully comfortable with the documentation and the proposal has presented. Okay. Any other members of the board have comments questions. Sounds like Bruce is one step short of ready, ready to make a motion to just accept it the way it's been revised today. Janet. So, I would, I've been sort of thinking about the, you know, in the solar bylaw working group we had long discussions about screening the arrays from public view. And I hadn't really thought about the safety issue in terms of the materials inside the fence. And, you know, part of me when I was looking at it didn't think about screening because, you know, you know, gas station next door or, you know, it wasn't nothing, you know, there's not that much attractive stuff on route nine and so it doesn't seem like it, you know, want to think oh I have to screen this but I do think there's a safety issue or like, in terms of making sure people don't hop the fence and steal things I that I just reflecting that I hadn't really thought that through. I noticed that the array on the ground was bigger to produce more energy and I don't think we can ask them to do that but that was a, if that went further back and produced more energy. My enthusiasm would go from high to extremely high because I just feel like, you know, I know it's a pilot project but why not produce as much as you can because we all need that. Okay, thank you Janet. Anthony. Maybe you could tell us why the ground mounted array is sized as it is and not larger. So, initially, we wanted to be conservative and not try to utilize too much open land of the property for for solar. So we thought it was a good compromise of maybe using half of the available land area for the technology and still allow the other half of the open area for any future opportunities or add on buildings or anything like that or keep it naturally to the environment. And very easily. We decide and make it, you know, to take advantage of the whole property but that was not our intention in this pilot project. Okay. Chris, I'm going to let you go and Fred I do see your hand. Our questions about lot coverage. So, the lot coverage has been calculated based on the array that's being shown here. And if the lot coverage gets bigger in other words if they if the array gets bigger that could throw off a lot coverage. I think Nate Malloy is here and he's more familiar with this site. I was more familiar with the ever source site so if you do pursue the idea of making the array bigger. You might want to ask Nate to evaluate that in terms of lot coverage. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Fred. Hi. In terms of the position of the ground array, it seems to me that there's, there's really no public issue one way or another wherever it goes and so I would prefer that we simply remain silent on the positioning here. I think it was the way Bruce presented the Vulcan, if it becomes a Vulcan. Okay, so just approve to approve it the way it's drawn. Johanna. Thanks. So first of all, I think when I, I think I jumped up and down in excitement at this project when we were at the site visit because I just think it's so exciting to see this amount of rooftop solar happen this amount of infill solar. I was telling my husband that night that I hope it's like dominoes all down the route nine corridor we're starting at auto zone all those businesses just start figuring out ways to put solar on their roofs. And then in terms of this exact site. I think this plan is good. I am not going to let perfect be the enemy of the good. A couple of things that I think about are. And now is also the opportunity to have this go from being lawn to more pollinator friendly habitat, but I can under, you know, I wouldn't actually qualify that as condition but it's something that I think about. And then my second thought is, I just want to make sure there's enough clearance about around the bike rack that somebody who's trying to access the front pannier or deal with a flat tire or deal with their lock on the front can create or between the fence and the front of the bicycle parking area. But I think I'm comfortable with the motion as is those are just two additional thoughts and kudos again on a really exciting project. All right, your honor. You are reminding me that we did hear from Anthony yesterday that the surface inside the enclosure would be covered with a fabric with a landscape fabric that would deter the growth of weeds and probably anything. So for low maintenance. So I don't think the pollinator garden is likely is really where they were headed with the, with the design. I was thinking more that like reclaiming some of the surrounding area from being just straight up lawn to a little bit more of a rain garden pollinator habitat rather than just mode grass but I see. Again, you're fine. I'm fine with it. Okay. Me, your hand is up. You are muted. Janet had her hand up unless it's she can wait. I was going to say that fire had two comments in their, in their letter and I spoke with Chris Bascom. And the two were typically want 10 feet clearance around an array even something with a low height. They're okay if the planning board finds that this is sufficient. You know it's about six feet from the building I guess I would question whether or not, assuming there's gates in the fence or if not fire would probably want at least one maybe two gates, a north and south end. The other one was a management plan if we're going to be grass in the fence and area. I was hoping to get a little bit more clarification on what it is. You know is it fabric and then gravel or what what exactly is the material in the fence scenario. All right, Anthony, can you talk a little more about the surface and would you be open to having a second gate I know you said there were, you were planning a gate at the north end. And maybe that's efficient. I don't know what fire we want. So, so what I described yesterday regarding the access to the array. We have to have access to the array for fire codes and things like that, you know regardless, and also for maintenance of the equipment so what we propose is to have the the actual gate in the in the rear of the office of the fence. So, so as not to invite anybody from the front to get into the area. Right now we are proposing to have one, one gate on the very north side of the fence. If the commission would require us to have two gates is not a problem we would accommodate that. But again, we like to limit the, the access to the to the north side so as to not to invite any, any intrusion into the area with regards to the grounds. So we're going to provide for for good maintenance and ground and ground skipping of the solar array where we actually proposing to do is to underlay a landscaping fabric that you can steal. Or, you know, you can, it can, it can allow water and air through it, but it would actually slow down or deter the growth of one one weeks and other and other grasses in the area underneath the solar module. We very easily cover the whole area up to the fence. So as to the walking space that we have allowed between the fence and the solar modules can be covered with this fabric as well. So we could very easily do that and not have to need to even have to trim or or or take care of the lawn or small portion of the land inside within the other fence. How do you, how do you feel about that description. Yeah, the fire department was just saying that they would typically want a professional management company to go in there and string trim or line trim if it was around the equipment. I guess I mean it sounds so it sounds like you're just gonna get like the three foot wide landscape fabric and just stake it down over the existing grass. It's not it's not like you're going to remove any top soil or anything it just it seems odd that you would just stake it right over existing. But is that really what's happening. That that is the, the original plan. You know, another consideration would be to to cover up the landscape area with the with the landscape cover with stone landscaping stone. We could do that as well. But you know, they are there are different layers of treatments to the, to the top surface so we, we, we proposed the at the first layer with just a landscaping fabric on top. Would that fabric, once applied will that kill the grass that's underneath it. Again, it is permeable. So to some extent it allows some some growth but it's not a, it's not anticipated to be a high growth or overgrown, you know, kind of a grassy area. Well it does seem a little bit odd if it would still allow the grass underneath it to grow and it wouldn't necessarily be a very solid surface. The landscape fabric would sort of be elevated by the grass underneath it. So, I don't know like, Nate I guess I, I agree with you that having some gravel or stone on top of the landscape fabric would be desirable. Janet. I was going to say but I hate landscape stones unless they're really pretty I hate those like whiting. Anyway, so I just, I just, I just think that's like a tacky look unless it's like natural river stones. But anyway, I, I'm getting back to Chris. Let's come. I, you know, if he, if he prefers that the, the array be 10 feet away, because there are times when there have been fires at arrays. I think we should add that as a condition and I'd be interested in hearing from Anthony if that would be a problem if we just moved it four feet to the west. Would you still be because I know normally you would put something as potentially flammable like away from a building by 10 feet. All right. Anthony, how would you feel about shifting it slightly to the west. Okay, it's not a problem at all we can easily accommodate that as long as we're not infringing into the, into the next door property. And I think we have enough area to make that application. All right. Um, Anthony says it's possible to move it. I was not. I was not so concerned about this because this is up against what is probably the two hour firewall. I mean effectively it's a solid masonry wall with no openings in it from all the way along and all the way up and so forth. It would seem to me that the 646 proximity is fine this is a, it's because of the non combustibility and need probably the fire. Effective fire raiderness of the wall so I, I, I, I wouldn't encourage changing the plan in that regard. But I guess I wouldn't object or if, if, if, if the board wants to do wants to ask that and, and the applicant is willing. I'm also thinking that that Anthony's introduction to us yesterday at the site was that this was intended as a as the first tab off the rank in the pilot in a pilot project for the company in those three states. California New York and Massachusetts and this is this is the first one so clearly the applicant wants this to be to look good and and function in all possible ways positively. I guess so my sense is how are we helping that happen. It may be that that by asking for some kind of different ground surface under the array. But it would seem that the applicant is is likely to be encouraged to maintain this ground cover however it is in a pretty good state of a good appearance, because of the intention of this project. Next we can be comfortable knowing what the intention is, as far as letting the applicant to manage the, the, the ground surface inside the ground, the enclosure, such that it works best for his, his promotional purposes. All right. Thank you Bruce need. I was going to say that, you know Chris Rowan said that the zoning regulations could take precedence over the fire ones right so it's not a hard and fast 10 feet it's a preference. And so, you know I think that it's a blanket 10 feet. It's irrespective of the height right so these are really low panel so I think if this were something where you know it's mounted on a three foot post and the top of the panel they might need more clearance but given that the top of the panels like 26 inches off the ground, you know five six might be can be sufficient so, given what Bruce said if, if the board finds that the, this is is good you know it's it's clearly still been giving enough buffer on the west that it's not encroaching anymore fire would be okay with that same thing with the management plan they're not requiring hardscape. They're just asking, you know what, what is the plan like you know if it's going to be grass underneath all of it. How do you line trim it or do you do go in once a summer and do it like how do you maintain that without hurting the equipment so they're not necessarily prescribing anything they were just bringing attention that they like to have a management plan for the ground cup, you know for whatever is on the ground. Okay, thanks. Thanks for that clarification, Nate, because certainly the way their letter reads. It seems that it's a an order. Yeah he, right so he followed up with an email to me and said that we can defer to both of you to both of these items, meaning the ground and management. And then it just said that you know a management plan or something is what we would like to have it doesn't have to be, you know, doesn't have to be hard and fast. All right. Well I mean I had the same thought that Bruce had which is that the wall, right, you know, next to this is is basically non combustible. You know, probably a two hour or more wall. I guess some of the paint might blister if this if there were a fire from this array, but that's about as much damage as I would foresee you know of course I'm not an expert on fires. And then, Anthony, I guess. Are you under contract to maintain this space to, or are you simply the installer. Yeah, no, so we have a week we provided a team year workmanship warranty for our installation. First of all, so we're going to be remaining with the relationship to make sure that the system that we install is operational operational, safe and without any issues. As far as the landscaping is concerned that it's under the current company facility management services, and they actually have a plan for managing the landscaping area, the property. So, you know, I think there's some concern about just putting this landscape fabric down and whether that's adequate. You know, I guess I'll throw out whether it would make sense for us to impose a condition that the vegetation inside this fence be kept at a maximum of say six inches of height. And whether the other board members would think that would be helpful. Because I do agree with Janet that just dumping a lot of stone in that area is probably less attractive than maintaining the lawn. Are there other comments from the board. All right, so at this time I'm going to ask if there are any comments from the public. Are there do we have any, we only have one attendee more keen do you want to make any public comment at this time. But I don't see her hand raised so we'll find from our public comment moment. Bruce. I was going to ask Chris, I think as I understand the development application there are some waivers, but it was all in hand, handwritten, so it wasn't as easy to read. But there are, there are some waivers that are being requested perhaps we should consider those. I think they're pretty straightforward erosion controls and things like that it doesn't seem as though this. I'll see if I can find where I had that open. Yeah. Nate probably included those in the development application report maybe he could bring that up. Yeah, I'll share my screen quickly. Yeah, there they are. Okay. Oh, I didn't see that. That was emailed to you. Plan, soil plan, sign plan, lighting plan, site management and traffic impact statement. Those were the waivers requested. And then issues to consider the height of the fence we've talked about. There's a crack conflict that's been resolved. Ask the applicant of any roof mounted panels will be visible from route nine and if there would be any glare. Anthony are the roof mounted panels just as only at a 10% slope, just like the ones on the ground. That's correct. And in addition to that, the the actual existing building group has a parapet height. Certainly around the frontage. Most of the areas that would prevent that any, any visit any visible. Details on the surface of the loop. Okay. Security lighting, or any lighting on that side of the building. There is a one existing. Hold with a with the light. That's the only light that I am aware. Proximity to the most solo field area. Okay. So we can consider whether we have any concerns about that. I know there's a fair amount of ambient light in the area. New safety labels and plaques. I assume those who are going to go on the shutoffs and the other equipment that's at the back of the building. That is correct. And that's all in accordance to fire code as well as electrical code and a national grid code. Okay. All right, so that's everything I see in the development application report. Looking at the captain Baskham's letter. We didn't get a chance to really look at it. I don't think I've seen these but on number five he says access pathways setbacks and spacing requirements shall be required to provide emergency access to the roof, provide pathways to specific areas of the roof. Provide for smoke ventilation opportunity areas and to provide emergency egress for the roof. The plans as submitted show minimum pathways setbacks and spacing requirements. And so I don't really know how to evaluate this like did. I kind of feel like we should find out from Baskham is like, did, are the plans submitted, not meeting this requirement and does, does he want to see a better plan or better pathways. We didn't really talk about much on the roof, probably because we didn't see it. And I don't really have a way of, you know, figuring out what the roof system is and whether it's adequate in terms of safety and pathways so I'm not really ready to go forward until I really understand what the, you know, captain Baskham was talking about and to see if those requirements for that as much as enthusiastic as I have about this project I don't know for quite ready there is he seems like fairly serious issues in terms of safety and fire. Nate, did you and captain Baskham have any email about this about an item five here. I think that it provides the minimum fired and to me if you know if they have to shift things on the roof. Is that really a change to the site right so I mean, right. It kind of seemed to me that we could approve make our site plan review approval, and then when they go for the building permit or the electrical permit. Some of this stuff could be ironed out in more detail. Right. I mean he did. I feel like if, if he had said that there's no pathways, then they're concerned right but he's saying there's minimum. Me it meets the standard it's just the minimum. Okay, well, I want to, I want to agree with that interpretation but you could certainly interpret it other ways. Right. We didn't correspond about that. Okay. In recent months I've come to understand the fire brigade's fire chiefs fire departments fire officials in the state have announced quite a amount of requirements regarding access pathways and setbacks and so forth for PV arrays on roofs. So, I, I agree I think that's what this is addressing and, and again I did, I wasn't aware that this was in our purview what happens up on the roof as part of the building I think so I would think that whatever happens up there and whatever is done to accommodate number five. I think is a matter for the building department and the building inspector and not for us. Yeah, I think we can go ahead with our site plan review and I think it's I mean I think the fire chief has put it all together it would have helped I think if the fire if the fire if the fire department had of organized their comments related to SPR on the one hand related to building approval on, you know into separate sections and it wouldn't we wouldn't have had to divine it quite so well but, but I think that, and maybe we should ask that of the fire the fire chief in future but I think that's we can reasonably assume that that's the case here. Chris. I just wanted to support that point of view by saying that if this project didn't have something on the ground, it wouldn't have come before the planning board. It only came before the planning board because of the array that's on the ground. In other cases where there's only a roof mounted solar array. It's just approved by the building commissioner. Okay, thank you Chris. Well, my hand up again. Chris. I was going to move acceptance or move. Move for site pan approval for the project at 373 North Hampton road the solar array with the waivers and close the hearing with the with the six waivers as listed in the development reports with the single condition that the ground cover within the enclosure be maintained in a, I had sort of need orderly condition but maintained in, in such as the, the vegetation does not rise above six inches in heights, and that we lose the public hearing. And are there any findings that we're obliged to include include. Chris I see your hand, sort of gesturing up a little bit. So you could say that this project meets the findings of 11.24 the relevant criteria in section 11.24 the zoning bylaw. That's what you often do for smaller projects. Yep. I think that that to be in addition to a friendly amendment or a friendly addition. Yes. So that's before the, I guess before the waivers, the findings before the conditions the findings. Yep. All right. So, Nate, you are next. I'm sharing my screen showing that the plans show you know a four foot wide fire access so it is called out on the roof that there is access around the perimeter and within the array so I'm assuming that it's been designed to meet the access requirements is just the minimum that's, you know, required so I didn't. I wanted to present that just so we're not too concerned. Yeah. Minimum required access because they want the maximum available solo. Right. Okay, thank you, Nate. Hannah. I second the motion. Thank you. Did we include close the public hearing. Did I just miss that. Yes, we did. We finally managed to do that. And I missed it. All right. All right, any further discussion about this motion. All right, we'll go ahead and vote on this SBIR. Start with you, Bruce. To approve. All right. Fred. Approve. Jesse. Approve. I'm going to approve and put a request in that we have some more clarity from the fire department about whether they're telling us things need to be done or I find this, I just, I'm finding it hard to understand. With this letter. So. Yeah. And I think it raises questions about their, their authority and the jurisdiction. No, I'm kind of happy to incorporate all these conditions. I'm not sure what this letter means. I knew that's, that's what it was. So I'm kind of, I'm very, I'm, I'm a tentative approval. I'm not really quite sure what this letter means. So. Thank you, Janet. Johanna. Approve. Karen. Approve. I'm going to approve as well. Seven in favor. No objections or extensions. Thank you, Anthony. No, thank you all for the very thorough review. And appreciate the opportunity to present the project. Thank you. We can't wait to see it out there. So for my understanding. For us, what is our next steps to, to expect. We have to wait to get some formal notification before we reapply for the building and electrical permit or. Well, I, I can't give you the. Advice about the electrical permit. Chris, do you want to say anything or shall he just. Well, it's going to take us a couple of weeks probably to write up this. Decision and then you have to take the decision to the registry and record it. And then you can get your permits from the electrical inspector and the building commissioner. Okay. Yeah, that's appreciate the, the, the guidance there. So roughly about two weeks or so before we can process permits. Thank you. Okay. Have a good evening. Thank you. All right. So the next item on our agenda, we've already done, which is the first item of old business. The time now is nine oh seven. So the second item of old business was. Topics not reasonably anticipated 48 hours in advance. Chris or Pam, do we have any of those? No. All right. So then the next item, item seven is new business. And the first topic is. Board members suggestions for. 2023 2024 planning board initiatives. And I wanted to have this on here. I know in the last month or two, we've had a couple of current members. Who are continuing from last. Session. Who had suggested some things that we could. Think about this coming year. But I wanted to give Fred and Jesse a chance to add their ideas as well. So. The ideas that I've. I've seen. Janet, you had sent an email saying you were suggesting that we think about. The East Amherst village center, which I know the board has talked about. And whether we should rezone that area for greater density. That we. Engage with the process of getting some design standards. And I know Nate. And Chris have been working on an RFP for design standards. So maybe. At some meeting soon, we might. Hear from you about where that's at. Then Amherst center, there was talk about planning. That for it for possible changes in the zoning there. Bank center parking garage and whether the study to determine whether additional levels of parking could be put on that existing garage. Might have some findings sometime in the next year. And finally, Janet, your last item was the solar bylaw, which obviously you're on the working group for that. And I guess you have some expectation that the group will have something for us to look at in the next year. So that's what I heard from, from Janet and then from Karen. Karen has had a long or a repeated expression of interest. And I think that someone from some, some, some folks on the planning board. Have more engagement directly with the university. Of Massachusetts. And how it plans housing. So. And for that item. I know we also. Chris, you had emailed Paul Backelman. The town manager about whether he could come and. The town communicates with you mass and what's, what's the appropriate role for the planning board. And I know he had responded to you with. Some of the dates that he was available. Do you have anything. Do you want to share some of that with, with the board? I don't have that email right in front of me, but he did suggest some dates that he was available. And I was going to write to Doug and ask Doug what he thought about those dates. So, but again, I haven't. I have it. I have it in front of me. You have it in front of you. Then maybe you should bring it up and then we can talk about those dates. All right. You should see an email. Is that coming up? There it is. Yep. All right. So here are the dates, August 30th. August 30th. September 20th, October 4th and October 18th. August 30th. That is the. The first of the dates that we talked about. Having an in-person meeting at town hall, I believe. That's correct. And you were going to devote that to talking about housing. Right. You were going to approach housing. So that's a possibility. Do you want me to invite him for August 30th? I'm going to stop sharing and I think the board. You know, I think Karen. Karen. You know, you seem. You know, you want to have this conversation. So let's, let's go to it. And I, I will probably not participate in the conversation just because of my position at UMass. Bruce, do you want to comment on this? Yes. I want to support the August 30th date because the other two dates in September and October are the, where Karen is. And I don't want to be doing what she's doing. I won't, I will not commit to this heroic business of mid. Three AM participation. Even if I did, I wouldn't be able to do what I would like to be able to do and think clearly enough, I think. So I'm very supportive of the August 30th date. Okay. Karen, will you be back from Germany at that point? Okay. All right. So why don't we get back to Paul and see if he could just join us in the town room at August 30th. So now we'll circle back to the larger question that was before us. You know, I've read the suggestions from two board members about things they would like us to think about in the next year. And so we'll try to do that. But this is a, this is a time where those members or other members could suggest other things. And we will see what we can do. So, Janet, you're muted. So when I sent that email to Chris, I guess, like, I don't know if it was like six weeks ago. I was sort of thinking like we've been working and talking about these things and like, let's just look ahead and try to figure out how to sort this out. Knowing full well, some huge project could come in or a zoning amendment from, you know, anywhere, right? And so my idea wasn't like saying, let's, let's, this is the agenda of the planning board. These are my ideas with the planning board should focus on, you know, the bank center garage study has been done and the consulting report is in and there was some work. I just kind of wanted an update on that. I know that the RFP for the design standards has been, you know, it's been over a year, maybe a year and a half. So I was kind of like, what's going on with that? Because that will need to downtown planning, I believe. And then the board has been talking about East Amherst Village Center where I missed the last meeting. But I think Karen's idea is more of like, let's focus on this. And I think it ties in really well with all the housing discussions that we're going to have. And the work that Bruce is doing. So I wonder if Karen could get a moment just to present what she's thinking about as a fresh idea, because I was just sort of summarizing what we had been kind of working and heading towards. And, you know, part of me likes to be organized even though I know life takes over. Okay. Thanks, Janet. Karen, do you want to. Yeah, thank you. Collaborate on what you were proposing. Right. Thank you, Janet. I think that the planning board is our obligation and our responsibility. To plan. And again, and again, we're seeing that this housing crisis. Rotates about the real difficulty of. Everything being determined by the huge influx of students that are going to snap up housing. That we want to have. For staff or for affordable housing to have diversity in the town. So I see it as a real priority to address this crisis. And I think. Having direct communication between the planning board. And whoever is responsible and when the first task would be to find out exactly. Who we would be talking to. To have this communication makes sense. That that's something that we should. That we should definitely pursue. I think. Going through an indirect path. Having. Our comments related. By Chris to Paul. Backelman. Is not satisfactory because he has so many. Other responsibilities. He's he addresses so many things. And this really is such a vital. Important issue. That I, I just think it would be nice to make a motion. To have. At least two members. I don't know. What would be most effective, but to have some members that have this as. Their special project that they're going to continue to communicate. And that means just what I'm saying. Communicate brainstorm. Have this ongoing. Discussion with you, Matt. So yeah, I'd like us to move a little bit. I think we're going to have to move a little bit faster. Than we are in this direction because again and again. When we open our meeting to public discussions. We're getting all these, these. These. Comments of people that are saying. You know, we're under threat here. And this is a serious problem. I know that. Again, again, there are. I think we're going to have to move a little bit faster. I think we're going to have to move a little bit faster. Or are we going to have to leave town because. One house after another. Around us is getting snapped up. And so. Yeah. Thank you. That's, that's why I propose this. I think it's not. That radical. I think we are the planning. Board. And we should move in this direction of having. Direct. Conversation communication. And regularly. All right. Thank you. Bruce, I'm going to let Chris go before you. I just wanted to say that I would recommend that you. Wait. Until you meet with Paul Backelman, because he can share with you how he communicates with you mass. And apparently he meets with them every week. And they are going through a transition right now from one. Chancellor to another. So I'm sure everything is. Settled. There's not a settled situation there at UMass. And so it may be. Not necessarily the best time to approach them. So I would wait to hear from Paul Backelman. And then you can ask him, how do, how does the town communicate? We also have a new strategic agreement with UMass. And so he may be able to tell you something about what that encompasses. I'm just. I'll stop there. Thank you. Okay, Chris. First Bruce and then Jesse. Doug, I was just going to say apropos of. Initiatives in the coming year of the planning board. It might be good to mention to Jesse and Fred that the last time we met. We actually as a board committed to meeting three times. In the next six months, essentially. So to, to. To follow up on a. A commitment related. To. Achieving the goal of some kind of goals of a portable and workforce housing. The goals being the goals of the planning. The planning board has been. Proposed zoning amendments that we had been discussing for up to six months and then had voted not to recommend. And the, one of the parting board members. Was only prepared to support that. Non recommendation. If we. If we respected the initiative and effort that the two. Proposers had put in. With all of the time and effort that they did. that their solution concepts were consistent with the goals stated, but we thought the goals stated were laudable and we committed to pursuing those goals as basically a condition of voting not to recommend that the epithetique of the solution concepts to those goals should be pursued. So we have made a commitment as a board in the coming six months to three meetings where we, at least three meetings where we pursue those things. So that's one of the other things that Separa's Jesse and credit concerned that we have committed to. Thank you, Bruce. Yeah, that I think Chris, didn't you send an email to all of the board with those three dates? They were the fifth, the fifth Wednesdays of August. It was August, August 30th, October 25th, and September 27th, I think. I'm kind of mixing them up, but October 30th, September 27th, and August. Yeah, three months in a row. Three months in a row. The last Wednesday of the month. Okay. All right, Jesse. So I guess it's more of a question than a comment on this topic that we kind of raised. Obviously, it's important to communicate with UMass about these issues, but I feel like there's this third piece, which is the current rental landlords. What I don't know is how the town interfaces or communicates or who's the body that tries to make sure the current rules around renting are maintained. And if we as a planning board have, how do we influence that piece of this puzzle too? Right? Because it's the current status plus the way it's moving forward because it's the current status that rolls it forward, but they just keep happening, right? And so it's really an ingress that I have. I'm wondering if any of you can comment on that. And if that, how does that become part of the discussion also, meaning what other rules around renting and who determines that and how is that enforced, if at all? Okay. I'll let Chris respond to that. I could offer something, but she'll know better. The CRC, the Community Resources Committee has been working on a revision of the rental registration bylaw for about a year now. And they have pretty strong ideas about how rentals can be controlled better. They're hoping to institute more frequent inspections. I think they have a definition of a student house that they're working on. And they're hoping to support the inspection services department by having increased fees for people who own property and rent it so that we can hire some inspectors to actually carry out these inspections. So it's budget and rental registration kind of working together. And if you're really interested in what they're doing, you could go on the website and read some of the things that they've posted for their past meetings, the Community Resources Committee, and they perhaps even attend one of their meetings, you know, a virtual attendance. Yeah, they're a subset of town council. That's right. And these, the bylaw that they are drafting would be a general bylaw, not a zoning bylaw. So the planning board really is, deals with what gets built, not who owns it or how, you know, other than the management plan that's part of a site plan review or a special permit. We don't get into the rental registration world at all. Okay, thanks, Jesse. Karen, you're still with us. Yes. Since we're going to have this meeting with Paul Bachmann on August 30th and Chris thinks we should really wait with the decision of this kind to hear what he has to say and to understand it better, I concur that that's what we should do. But I, you know, I really do think that we have a role in planning to communicate directly on an issue that's so important in planning and understanding what's happening that I still am very strongly in favor of moving to having a subset of the planning committee communicate directly with whoever it is. And yes, we have a new chancellor, things are moving, but when things are moving and you have a new chancellor, that's also a great opportunity to come in strong and say, we'd like to have really direct communication on this. We have some ideas. We'd like to hear your ideas. This is a problem that, you know, is, is we have to work together to, to solve in the best interest of both the university and the town. Okay. Janet. So one thing that Bruce didn't say is that he's been collecting information from a college towns, like, I think it's like six or seven college towns, kind of roughly similar to us in the sense of, you know, we're kind of a unique town, being a small town with a large university. And he's been sending out a questionnaire to planning directors and then following up and putting together charts. And the question is, like, what do you guys do with your students, like what are the problems you have and how you tried to fix them. And then there's also this international college or university student you know, town association, we all list, many of us listened into. And they had several American university or college towns. And there's solutions to these problems that we all face in our neighborhoods, or their suggested solutions. And it was kind of, you know, to me, it's like, you might suggest a solution, you might implement it, but then the question is, did it work? And that's kind of what Bruce is trying to dig at. And I, you know, I think, you know, the housing trust is very hot on this issue because, you know, it's, you know, you know, it's, I mean, the rents that are being charged for, you know, I just want a little thing, like the rents for a studio apartment and many of these new buildings is about $2,000 a month for like 350, maybe 400 square feet. And, you know, families can't compete with that regular folk can't poor folk can't compete with that. And this probably is not going to go away. And the university is the driver of the economy in our entire region. And it's also the driver of the housing crisis. It's not, you know, it's not the only one, but it's a primary by adding so many students and so little housing. But I think that, you know, we can talk to, you know, Paul Backelman and get his ideas. But I think this idea of like, trickle up kind of ideas kind of going back and forth. I just, it hasn't worked. And, you know, he is too busy to focus on it. It seems like a really good time. But I think, you know, I think we should wait till the 30th. But I would ask Karen to sort of think about like a charge for this little subcommittee, like, what would be the specific tasks, you know, you know, collecting information on, you know, like, I think that, you know, how many students do we have in our, in our town? Like literally, I've never seen a fixed number for year round residents versus students. And maybe that's talking to the housing off campus housing office. You know, you know, a list of the legislative, you know, hurdles, like how does you mask it, it's money. The new housing project they just built is a public private thing. How did that come about? How is that working? But so I wonder if Karen could sort of refine, like, charge of specific tasks that the subcommittee could do. And that would be, you know, because there's so many things to do. But Bruce is doing a piece of it already, and maybe get a better sense of how we could go forward. All right. Thanks, Janet. All right. So I don't see any more hands. So those are some things that will either be coming at us, or we can try to raise it, raise up and think about and maybe advance on our own. Fred, I don't know if this is be helpful or not. I heard about the parking garage. What you all might not know is that my name is on that garage as a member of the building committee for that garage. So I happen to know a great deal about that parking garage and I can share that and so forth. The other thing I wanted to just throw out as something to think about is the general business zoning district. And we all know that in that district parking is a town responsibility, and it doesn't have to be provided. And we have height limits that are higher and so forth. And I'm wondering if we're at a point in the development of downtown that maybe we've gotten to a point that the way that bylaw was framed, I have a sense that the citizens of the town are beginning to ask, is it wise that we just keep building out like this? And so we over the next year or so may want to be just in the back of our minds thinking about whether that should be adjusted or not. I think that is an issue that I think a lot of citizens in town are asking themselves. So I'll just throw that out there. All right. Thanks Fred. Johanna. Thanks. I think this is a good list that would keep us busy. I was thinking that one thing that was helpful for me early on in my first term on the planning board was the run through that Chris did of the master plan and the different sub points and are like status in terms of reaching those objectives. Oh, you mean when I Chris and I Chris for like eight hours, we went through the hundreds of points in the master plan with where they're at. Yeah, that. Wow. I don't know. We need to update that pull out that spreadsheet from five years ago. I defer to Chris and Doug as to whether or not you think that rises to kind of a priority for the planning board. But I've given that the master plan is our guidance document. I think it's helpful to see our work as rooted in that. And so getting a status report of where we are now and what are the pieces that are moving and I found that helpful. Okay. Well, Chris, you and I will have to see if we can get together. All right, anything else? I see it's just about after 930. So maybe it's maybe it's time to slide through the last items on the agenda. Okay, so we can certainly continue this in later meetings if, you know, this is not the only time for new for ideas about things we should be thinking of. And I should probably get a new computer in the next year so that this fuzziness I keep getting doesn't keep happening. Okay. Second item we had on new business was the dates for the in person housing workshops. And I think that we've already talked about that and those dates are listed here. Third item Chris, you had circulated the assessment letter from PVPC with our assessment of dues as being a member. So as far as I know, there wasn't anything that we needed to act on that that was more for information. Is that true? That's correct. It's just interesting for you to see what the town of Amherst contributes to the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission and then we do get, you know, benefits in return. So just wanted you to see that. It was directed to Kim Robinson and also to the Planning Board Chair. Okay. All right. Any topics not reasonably anticipated? No topics. Okay. Moving along it's 934 and item eight is our Form A, A and R subdivision applications. Do we have anything to... No, not tonight. Upcoming ZBA applications. Anything you might want to repeat that we've heard about then it might be coming like the solar project I think that ZBA is going to have on their plate? The solar project is coming to the ZBA on the 24th of August and we had tentatively made arrangements to have the applicants present to the Planning Board on the 16th of August. So if you're still interested in that, we'll make that arrangement. I think it would be a good idea for you to see the project and make recommendations to the Zoning Board of Appeals if you so choose. Okay. Sounds good. Nate? Yeah, Valley CDC provided the Housing Trust an update last week and said that their Comprehensive Permit Project on Ball Lane, it's 30 home ownership units, is moving forward and they'd probably like to submit their Comprehensive Permit application in August. So, you know, the Planning Board would have a chance to review that as well probably in early September if you'd like. Great. Yeah. Yeah, especially, is that the one start just off of Belcher Town Road or is that? No, Valley's Project, that's up on the corner of Pulpit Hill and Montague Road. So it's at the Matusko site. Okay. Great. Yeah, I don't know where Ball Lane is. 163. Okay. All right. Upcoming SPP, SPR, SUV applications. Nate knows more about the than I do. He keeps his ear to the ground more than I do. So, Nate? There's, you know, there's a few, they're kind of similar to tonight. I think they're straightforward. One's a homeowner doing an addition to a two-family property in town. There's one dealing with law coverage issues that may, you know, we've been working with the owner that may come back, you know, and so that's kind of what's in the pipeline. So nothing specific for us to put on an agenda yet? Well, I mean, it would be in, you know, we're looking at like mid-August that there was something. Okay. Planning board, committee, and liaison reports. And so for Jesse and Fred, usually in September, when we elect our new officers, we also choose our liaisons to some of these committees that are listed. So, you know, you see names after a couple of these now, and those don't have to continue. If that's something you're especially interested in, there's an opportunity to shift the responsibilities around. So with that, Bruce, it took you at least six months to get on to PVPC. What have you heard this month? Only what has been presented earlier. The rates and so forth. It's interesting how precise and all of this, but no, there's been no meeting. They meet quarterly, and I guess this is not a busy time. Okay. CPAC, Andrew has left the board. So Chris, is there anything, any action with that? That usually doesn't get going until the fall, right? That's right. Yep. Okay. Nate is more aware of that than I am. I don't know if he has any report to make. All right. Nate, anything to say? No, I mean, they were hoping, you know, last year they had proposals for applications out in September, and I think they're hoping to have the same schedule, maybe even a little earlier this year. So, you know, they kind of moved their schedule up last year and they want to continue that. So, you know, proposals will be due pretty early and they start the review process in October. So, you know, I'm not sure if the planning board would want to weigh in on that, but that's the schedule. Okay. All right. And then the design review board, obviously we don't have any representation. Chris or Nate, anything you want to share about that? The design review board is currently down to three members. I understand one of them has been reappointed and the other two have been on for a very long time. They can continue to serve while they're waiting to be replaced, but the design review board is looking for another member and the planning board has an opportunity to nominate a member for the town manager to appoint. So, new members and old members, you should consider whether you want to be the design review board representative from the planning board. All right. Yeah, so quickly they have, you know, the white lion brewery going into what was High Horse, you know, they submitted an application to the design review board that they'll review. It's also a site plan review application that will be coming up at an upcoming meeting for their outdoor dining. So, that was a special permit use. The ZBA is now a site plan review use and outdoor dining is something that the board would be looking at at an upcoming meeting. And that's what the design review board would be looking at as well. Any, you know, signs, lighting or anything that's public facing for that establishment. Okay. Janet, solar bylaw working group. You're muted. The solar bylaw working group is grappling with the issues of farms and forest land and weather and how to regulate solar arrays on that, which is probably the reason we were called into being in a way because, you know, from when the genesis of the disputes over putting solar arrays in on forest land. And so we were supposed to meet this Friday, but I just found out during this meeting that we're, there was a problem with posting the agenda. So we're not going to meet and discuss that, but that's going to be on the next agenda for August 4. Plus, we're also having the town attorney come in an hour early to talk about legal issues about, you know, what you can regulate and what you can't vis a vis solar arrays with the Dover event amendment. I actually Chris, I wonder if we should send I don't know if I think this might have dropped, but did this has has the board seen the solar survey, the results of the solar survey. So I wonder if we could put that on our next agenda, because, you know, it was a pretty, you know, it was a pretty clear preference in terms of where the town people who answered the survey wanted to see solar preferably cited. So I think that'd be good to put on our agenda, look at that. And then there's a bunch of state and our town plan that also has preferences or strong statements about that. So I think it's, I think it's a topic that we should talk about, but at the very least look at the solar survey results. So do you think we could do something on that Chris at our next meeting. I was thinking that this might be a good time to send the planning board or to present to the planning board, the draft solar bylaw that we have, not for them to hold a public hearing or anything on it, but just to become familiar with what it what it can currently contains and have a chance to discuss it. And that might happen on August 2. I think the only other thing we have on August 2. So far is the white lion brewery that Nate was telling you about they're doing outdoor dining. So those two things might, you know, kind of go well together. I'm not going to be here August 2. And I'm not I'm going to be on vacation. I'm not sure I can attend this meeting. I'm not sure where I'll be on August 2. My family are going to Costa Rica. So it's very possible that I could come in through a telephone, but I'd rather have, you know, I don't know. I'd like to be at that meeting more conclusively. I don't know. Well, but we can also just send the survey out because it's it's it's it's not that hard to read the results of the I found some of the graphics challenging. We are if you don't mind my responding, Mr. Chair, but we are under a deadline to have a draft to the town manager by September 1. So I feel some pressure to at least introduce the planning board to this topic. And if the planning board receives the solar bylaw in its current state on August 2, and then has a chance to at least become familiar with it, then Janet can watch the tape or whatever we call it recording of that meeting and become up to speed. It's not going to be a definitive discussion. It's just going to be an introduction. But I do feel like, you know, we're really kind of under the gun to move this thing along. So my recommendation would be to have it on August 2. So maybe maybe we can just send the survey out because it's it's it's like a hundred and two pages long, but it's really only like two pages of conclusions. Just it's a lot of like, you know, this person's kind of but it's that would just be, you know, at least catching up a little bit better. Okay. Chris, your hand is up to you. Is there anything else? Okay. Well, you are next in that we have the CRC liaison is you. Yep. So this the CRC I haven't been attending their meetings. I do know that they're continuing to work on the rental registration bylaw. But that's all I can report. Okay. All right. Now it's reported the chair. I don't really have anything to say this month. Chris, report of staff. I'm so glad to have the new members Fred and Jesse and welcome and I look forward to working with you. Great. And thank you, Karen, for coming all that way to this planning board meeting. Yeah. Time and space. Right. Okay. Time is 945 and I think we can adjourn. We can adjourn. Thank you all and we'll see you August 2nd, I guess. Good night and get sleep. And have fun in Costa Rica, Janet. Thank you. Thank you. Can I ask you one question for you unrelated? Who did you want to speak to? No, thank you. We're adjourned, right? We are adjourned.