 All right, good evening. Call to order the Monday, March 30th meeting of the Arlington Redevelopment Board being recorded by ACMI. First on our agenda this evening is a review of the draft report to town meeting and special town meeting, a combined report you shall have in your packets. I turn it over to Jenny to explain. Thank you, Andrew. So before you is the draft report to annual town meeting and special town meeting. The difference between this week's report and last week's report that you were looking at is we made the edits that we discussed to the annual town meeting articles, including the votes and some of the language in the discussion, which needed to be edited. And then we added the special town meeting votes, which had not been here because you took them last week and the discussion. And I think that was it in terms of what was cleaned up. All the changes are in order. No, the changes that are in red are the changes to the bylaw. So those would be additions to the bylaw. So you won't see the changes, actually. What's that? You won't see the changes from last week. They're not. No, it's not like a markup version. Well, this is the same, right? It's the same. If any time there's a change to the zoning bylaw, we either do a strikeout in red or in addition in red. I think I have a couple of things. So in Article 8 in the last paragraph of the discussion on page 6, right above the ARB vote, I think we're not talking about a reduction in the contiguous open space. It's more flexibility in the configuration of the contiguous open space, I think. Yes. So it is, yeah, you're right. It is a reduction, but it's there to not reflect it. Well, it's a reduction in one dimension, but it's not actually a reduction of contiguous open space, is it? Right. So I think we want to be more clear that it. So I was thinking reworded as a second incentive that allows more flexibility in the configuration of the contiguous open space on a lot. More flexibility. In the configuration of the contiguous open space. OK, here's an option. Is it right to say the second incentive that allows a reduction in the minimum dimension for a continuous open space? You could say that. I think I'd like to, I think I'd like David's language. I think I'd like to keep the word reduction out of there, because that opens up questions about what else is being reduced and what else is being traded off. If we present this as an issue of flexibility, it's more easily explained as to what we're doing and how the pieces shift around the plot. There'll be diagrams for this. Read it again, David. Yeah. Second incentive that allows more flexibility in the configuration of the contiguous open space. That's fine with me. And then would you see, you would see the dimension somewhere in the actual warrant? It's right up here, yeah. Yeah, the dimension's in there, and there should be pictures. There will be pictures. But not in the report. Well, for the presentation. But in the presentation, yeah. Possibly, but yeah. And then it'll be a picture. Where does it mention that the reduction to 20 feet? I think it's actually in the, so this is actually Article 8. This is like, Laura, we're talking about open space. But it's really Article 1. Oh, I get it. Yeah, it's like a case. Oh, that makes even more of a case, too, yeah. So then we get to Article 1. Related to this in Special Town Meeting Article 1 at the bottom of page 8, in the middle of the paragraph, it says, this amendment will allow a smaller contiguous area. Wait, can I ask you something about going back to 6? Yes. Since that is a little confusing, should we move this part that says the warrant for Special Town Meeting Article 1 to the beginning of the paragraph? I think actually we should call attention to that. Because it's like out of it, it's just a reverse. Oh, I understand what you're saying. It's really meant to be like, and by the way, this is coming up. Yes, yes. But it's out of order, so we'll just read it. OK. So the sentence, it's a similar wording issue. It says, this amendment will allow a smaller contiguous area, which is not quite right. Right. No, we should use either the same language that we just did or. It's a smaller minimum dimension, is that correct? Yeah. I mean, I don't know if I want to say that, but isn't that correct? I mean, it is. One, two, three, four. I don't think we want to talk about the contiguous area. Actually, we said that in the sentence before anyway. Contiguous green space. I mean, maybe we just say this amendment will not reduce the overall, just take that part out. Because we already said what it was. This amendment will not reduce the overall requirement for open space in a lot of dimensional setbacks. I mean, what David said is this amendment will allow a more flexible, continuous area with that reducing the overall requirement. If we want to say the same language that we used previously. Isn't it 20 feet? Yeah. OK. So you're not saying that anywhere? Yeah, just. Well, it's in there. In a warrant, right? It's in a warrant. Yeah, OK. So as long as it's there, then that's fine, right? If you can just flex it in the first time, let's use it again. Yeah. Yeah. OK. So it's in the language. It's changed, and then red line paragraph on page nine. I mean, we might want to be very clear here, though, and say it will allow a smaller minimum dimension to allow for more flexibility in the configuration without reducing the total amount of open space. Because that, I think, is completely clear about this article, isn't it? I think that kind of helps. We're not trying to dance around that. Can you repeat that? Will allow a smaller dimension? A smaller minimum dimension. Without? To allow more flexibility in the configuration of the open space without reducing the overall requirement or however that sentence works. And then the rest of the sentence. I like that. OK. Got it. Good point. OK. No gene? No gene? No gene. Oh, yeah. She's right. No. She's right. OK. Did you just do a fucking check? Just check it. Doesn't mean we all have to, though. That's the key. That's the time to do this. Any other changes, edits, comments? Not for me. Kim, Andy? No. I'm good. Did you receive any changes from Gene? No. I didn't actually. I didn't have anything for her. It's a good call. When does this have to go out? So we are going to mail it with the master plan implementation committee report, I think, sometime next week after we get the labels, right? Yes. You said sometime later this week, you think they'll have it. She said that she would have it ready by the end of this week, and I've asked her to email me her list. So I'll go up and help her out there with that. OK. I was wondering if there were any last-minute changes after the meeting tonight, but we could vote to amend them. Yeah. Or vote to approve as amended with all final comments to be in by noon on Thursday. You could do that. Yeah, I think I can. You tell me. I mean, I won't be here Thursday at noon, but I can make changes on Thursday night, and then we still need time to print it, and the mailing won't happen until early next week anyway. Well, that's what I was thinking. But how will everyone approve of the changes? It can go around in an email, except by Jenny. If there are changes. Like last minute. Last minute, like if you go through, and there's a typo or a major error in there. There's a line on it. You know that. Oh, that was my copy. No, it was two, actually. It was like a line in a couple of places. I don't know what that is. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I don't know what that is. All right. So I guess someone should move to approve the report to town meeting as amended. I move to approve the report to town meeting as amended. Second. All in favor. Aye. Right. Thank you. The only other item on our agenda this evening are the minutes for March 13th and March 20th, beginning with the 13th. I have to look through. I didn't have any edits or changes. Go ahead, David. So on March 13th, near the bottom of the second page, in the discussion of Article 9, it says, Mr. Watson agreed it should go to town meeting. I want to be clear. I want to make it clear. I didn't say that I thought the article as presented should go to town meeting, but I wanted to, I was hoping to find a way for town meeting to consider the issue. Town meeting should be given the opportunity to consider the issue. I think if you go back to what Kin says in the previous line, Mr. Lauffel, town meeting should have the opportunity to decide on the issue. Maybe just say I concurred to consider the issue. Mr. Watson. I don't have any more on that one. Sorry, I'm just reading it right now. Sorry. Take 10. That's actually what I didn't catch before. Just if we can strike on March 13th, just strike absent from the top. Sure. And then if we didn't receive correspondence, maybe we should just say none received. Yes. And since it was a hearing. Mr. Froude, there's amended. Meeting minutes. March 13th. Second. All in favor. Aye. Aye. March 20th. I had a couple of things on that one. Okay. Go ahead. So the near the end of the first real paragraph. Mr. Watson understood the STM article one and ATM article eight would both need to pass and suggested a readily available response if one was not to pass. I think I'm not sure what I said, but I think what I meant in the discussion was that the proponent should have a contingency plan if one didn't pass. At the top of page three, Mr. Watson supported the article and noted this was a compromise. If we could just say reasonable compromise, which I think was my point. Which page? Top of page three. At the middle of page three, the large paragraph, next to last sentence, it says STAT proposed. It should be STAT proposed. Okay. So I'll check and I'll catch that. To approve the minutes, Parliamentary Board minutes at March 20th, 2017. Second. All in favor. Aye. That is it for business. Let's see. Thank you. Sorry to bring you out. I can, it's fine. It's a motion to adjourn. Motion to adjourn. All in favor. Aye. Aye.