 Go ahead, we're recording. Thank you. So, seeing a presence of a quorum, I am calling this March 30th 2023 regular meeting of the community resources committee of the town council to order at 431pm. This meeting is being recorded and pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 and extended by chapters 22 and 107 of the acts of 2022. This meeting will be conducted by remote means members of the public who wish to access this meeting may do so via zoom or telephone. No in-person attendance of members of the public will be permitted but every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings in real time. With that, I'm going to make sure that everyone can heard and be here and be heard so I will take roll with that. So we'll start with Pat. I'm present. And Mandy is present Jennifer. Present. And Pam. Here. I have one guest right now. So I'm going to make sure we can hear her and be heard. And that's Carol Lewis, one of the co-chairs of the Amherst Municipal. I have to run through the abbreviation every time. I always forget the am affordable housing trust. So Carol, can you hear us? Yes, I can hear you and can you can hear me. Okay. So shall any ball mill is not present at this time. We will continue to check to see if she signs on and if so, we'll do that check too. We are waiting for the other co-chair. So we're not going to start and we're going to try and hold off on doing that potential that that item. For just a little bit longer, which means I think that are the March 16th minute meeting minutes in the packet. They weren't. They weren't. They weren't. They weren't called me, right? Like I get to this meeting and I'm like, huh, maybe the minutes never made it in. So. It looks like we have March two meeting draft meeting minutes. But we passed them last. Meeting. Did the wrong meeting date. You're right. Yeah, so I don't remember. So my guess is that the March 16th ones never made it in because I don't remember seeing them. So we will formally postpone that. Yes, Carol. I just got a note from Erica. It says it's asking for a digital ID. She's, she's trying to get in, I think, and she can't something is asking her for a digital meeting ID. I'll recent her invitation. She says. Okay. Tell her it's on the way and email. Okay. Because we're still waiting and I don't want to sort of have dead time with other things going on. I'm not going to do public comment right now we're going to wait for some stuff. Normally, that's one thing I'd fill, but I think it'll be more appropriate to do that later. We did just have Shawnee come in. So when Shawnee connects to audio, can you hear a Shawnee. Yes, sorry about that. So we're going to do the agenda first, which is announcements, which I don't have any. Does anyone else have announcements. Is it an announcement or is it a preview? Pam agenda preview. Is it both agenda preview. So no announcements. So we're going on the next agenda preview, which is hard to do at the beginning of a meeting, but I know Pam has an agenda request. So let's hear her gender request. So the agenda request is a request for a, another public hearing, featuring many of the members of the original safe and healthy neighborhoods coalition or planning group, the ones that request of neighbors. I ended up developing our original bylaws for rental permitting. So there has been a request by some of the folks that were of that original group to have a new forum, if you will, specifically for that group. And I, I haven't a sense of the timing or any of that, but maybe something that could be tacked on at the beginning of a meeting or before meeting. Something like that. Okay, thank you Pam Jennifer before Jennifer goes I want to recognize that Erica is here. Piedot. Is it Piedot. Sorry, it's Piedot. Piedot. Thank you for correcting me and you can clearly hear us so welcome Erica Erica is the other co-chair of the housing trust. So Erica just to update you while we were waiting for you we're just doing some really quick agenda items so we didn't have dead air. This one will be done very quickly Jennifer. Yeah, so the actual, you know, an initial safe and healthy worth working group also had two resident representatives. I don't know if they would be included in this. So specifically the individuals who requested this are landlords and property managers. So I don't, you know, that's, it's that part of the safe and healthy working group. I guess what I would like to hear from, you know, it sounds like Jennifer and Pam want to do this so I'd like to hear from Pat and Shalini whether another, whether something like this is desired. We're not promoting it we're just saying the request was made. What I'd like to hear from the committee is whether this is something that we would like to try and schedule and arrange. Yeah, yeah. So I'm, I guess my question is, I'd like to hear more about the request I was the co-chair of the safe and healthy neighborhoods working group I think is what we called it if we're referring to the group that included university represent representatives representatives from the, you know, from owners groups, etc. But I'm just curious what is this is this request to get the group back together or have a meeting with them. What could you say more about what the purpose of this is. I don't I don't understand that group has not been in existence for eight or nine years. Jennifer, do you want to know you can go you go. I'll preface it by saying we, we have had a public forum that an actively solicited input from project or property managers. Several people did show up. I think it's, it's a it's a it's wanting to be heard. It's wanting to feel included in this process because there is such an overhaul of the rental going on. And I'll just say, you know, that opportunity was available to everybody. But if, if the group feels that it's interested in one more round of public forum. The comment was made that we, we have not solicited input from police department fire department, UMass and that those, at least those three entities haven't been at the table in any of our discussions about the rental bylaw, you know, I'll just say upgrades. Thank you. What I'm going to ask is so that we can move on to the heart of our agenda for the committee members to mull this over. While we're also discussing other things we will come back to next agenda preview with the end of this meeting so we're sort of taking a pause from that we're going to go on to our action items and discussion items and then general public comment then we'll come back to this at the end of the meeting so that we don't keep our guests here listening to this if they don't want to. And then you'll have like two hours to think about it while we're talking about other things. So, we have no public hearings. Our first action item is this potential meeting. We've had this potential meeting with the AMHT on affordable housing and we have invited Carol and Erica here with us to talk about this potential potentiality. It's not even a word. At the request of Jennifer the liaison said it would be good to have you guys here as we mulled over whether and what some such a meeting would look like. Welcome. I understand that AMHT has not had an opportunity to discuss this request either. That's correct. So, you know, I would start with is this something that you believe the trust as a committee whole would be interested in. And then I think what we would have to figure out is potential dates and and sort of more specific topics. Whether I think the plan for what I'm thinking about is you hear from us as to what topics might be good for us you take that back to the trust maybe you have your conversation with the trust. And then you can report back I guess through Jennifer and all as as we get it done and then we can potentially schedule something if both bodies. And then work sort of the logistics backhanded but Jen. So Jennifer has her hands up let's let's hear from Jennifer who's our liaison and then I'll hear from Carol and Erica. Thank you know just briefly, it was Ashley Jensen a member of the affordable housing trust. That's how she initiated this and as the liaison, I followed up on her request to meet with the council. Lynn suggested that that conversation should start with CRC. So going forward, you know, I would. I'm happy to be the liaison but you as well Mandy because you're the chair. Yeah. I just wanted to clarify that that's how came about the request initially came from a member of the housing trust. And, you know, we're, I think it's, you know, we're all eager to have more affordable housing so we were happy to, you know, have a forum in a place to start that conversation. Yeah, so I'd like to hear from Carol and Erica. Is this something you think the trust, when you get it to the trust would be interested in because it seemed from our brief conversation a week ago to invite you here that CRC would definitely be interested in it so. And if so what sort of topics would be on affordable housing. Are you thinking. All right, I expect that the one of the things that comes up repeatedly at trust meetings is, well, there's these plans, where do they go there's these goals what happens to them. There are trap we're trying to do X number of houses. How do we even know how many we did or didn't do. And it seems that the housing trust has sort of a set of here are our goals, and there's the comprehensive housing policy, which I'm not even sure is, is it been well anyway there's that and that exists they seem like there's a lot of overlap, but I don't think it's clear to us, or at least it's not clear to me where the accountability for any of this falls where who is paying attention to, oh, we did, here's a goal, we made this progress. Here's a goal we didn't do this for either of us but it seems like something that could well be a joint effort since most of what we're trying to do is kind of the same thing. That's what I think I believe that the trust would be similarly interested but I don't know that because we haven't talked about it. So I'll pass Erica. I think both you and Mindy Joe pretty much laid the grounds. When you look at the, you know, comprehensive housing plan and you look at the implementation plan, there is an overlap of both with that plan and our mission our strategic plan which is actually ending this year so we're thinking about redoing it. We've only through coordinated efforts and maximizing our resources. You have limited resources we have limited resources but if we maximize our resources and not duplicate. That would be a really important I think you know to hear what are because you have a huge really I mean the comprehensive is the word a list of implementation plans. What you think your priorities are what action you've already put into place, where are the gaps and where do you think the housing trust should pick up or possibly lead around some of the priorities. And then how do we support each other to actualize these. I think affordable housing is a huge umbrella we're really talking renters we're talking about home ownership, where you know we're talking about people want to live in town people who are rent burdened and home ownership, home ownership burdened. We want to have you know security in terms of their, once they do have either rental home ownership and prevent homelessness so there's a lot there there's absolutely a lot there. We have the challenges with regard to just affordable spaces period with with also having the you know with the universities and students here who also want to live and have affordable and thriving and safe housing. So I think maximizing by prioritizing what it is the CRC sees as priorities and what the housing trustees as priorities, and if those overlap. How do we coordinate and where there is no overlap. How do we support each other. Thank you. CRC members any comments thoughts. Basically it's open for discussion on how we go about doing this and how we, you know, organize it when you know I guess one question I would have for CRC members is, you know, the housing trust meets. It's a month on a Thursday evening, starting at, is it a seven o'clock start. And CRC tends to meet 430 to 630 on Thursdays twice a month. And so, you know, what type of time, I guess my question for CRC members would be. We would be willing to add an evening meeting in that would be quote a special CRC meeting where we would join the housing trust. If we could figure out working out a day that works it might not be a regular housing trust night because I know TSO is also Thursday nights, and we have at least one TSO CRC member. So would, you know, what are your thoughts on, on how we actually get the two groups together. That we could take or that Carol and Erica could take to the trust is saying here's where CRC is thinking we could potentially get together or not and see what the trust other members have to. So thoughts on that to begin with. Pat, and then Shalini. Basically, I feel like that this is a good idea I feel like the whole town works in silos and we need to find ways to choreograph all this and really coordinate it. So I would be definitely willing to give have an evening meeting that worked for the trust and I would be willing to do that. Thank you. Shalini. Yeah, I echo that. And in addition, what I was going to say is, I think ahead of time if you can share each other's goals that we might have that if you all have specific goals and that can be shared ahead of time and then from the town staff if you could get. I don't know if there's a new production plan. The last one was 2013. But, but since then like what are the number of units that have been created since the production plan and and what are the upcoming departments that are not in the market but that have been approved. So if you could have some of this data ahead of time then we can all come in informed about these are the goals. This is where the overlap is where we can support each other and then what's already accomplished and what would we like to see happen and how and on the how part I was at the finance committee talking about cross siloing over here. They were talking about also like, you know, since there's such a big now awareness around everyone's talking about the lack of workforce and affordable, you know, housing affordable housing. So the finance committee members were like, should we be talking about how to make housing affordable so I don't know maybe we need to be good at least let them know when we have that meeting with affordable housing trust if any members from there want to come. Thank you for all of me, Pam. I would echo all of that I think that's, that's great. I'm was just gonna say I am willing to do an extra time on a Thursday evening, you know, I'll just cook dinner ahead of time, sort of after. So probably, I don't know when the next housing trust meeting is, is it like the first Thursday every month or second Carol Erica. I said the second was the second second, it's April 13, I think is the next one isn't that the second. Yeah, yes, it's the second. Sorry, I was putting up the second second. So I wouldn't, I wouldn't be against adding a meeting in that, in that manner and maybe joining them, instead of them trying to adapt the RC schedule maybe we adapt one of their, one of their meeting night. Pat, then, now let's go with Dave. Sure. So thanks Mandy. Yeah, a couple of quick comments one is, you know, I think a meeting is a great idea. I guess I want to make sure I think coordinating schedules would be very a very good idea. I think it was Chalene who was suggesting we get data out in advance of that meeting so that data is is primarily going to be generated by staff so I want to make sure we have this meeting, at least far enough in advance so we have some time for two things one is, we need to know what questions CRC and the housing trust have, you know, as soon as possible so we can prepare so staff can prepare for that meeting. So, I would just put that out there that we need those questions that would help focus staff attention but also I think focus our conversation. One comment I wanted to make the other was, I want to kind of remind everybody that we spent a lot of time on the comprehensive housing plan CRC did the council did the trust did. So I want to just also I guess diplomatically say I'd love to not go back too far in time I want to move us forward in these conversations. Because there's a lot of information in the comprehensive housing plan and we spend dozens of hours collectively, you know lots of people working on that and I think it's a really good plan the housing trust. At the time that was being developed the housing trust came to many CR housing trust reps came to many CRC meetings came to town council meetings. So I just want to make sure that we are, we're moving forward and not backwards and rehashing things ground that we've already covered. So, I think those were the comments I wanted to make I just wanted to be efficient with staff time but also with all of our time to be looking forward. We're appreciating where we've been that there has been lots of discussion and there are many goals in that plan. We just need to provide new data where are we right now, what has been accomplished, what is still to be accomplished, and how do we propose to get there. So, thanks. Thank you Dave. Pat and then Jennifer. This is about the percentage of affordable housing in Amherst. And I know that that it was developers were sort of awarded if you have a certain number of units in your development, everything gets counted as affordable, which isn't true. I understand how it was an incentive. What I wanted and so we can inflate or Hadley can inflate. It's affordable housing numbers. So I'm really interested in how many actual affordable units there are how many you know maybe a comparison of how many get listed in a in a round but how many are real solid, not incentivizing a developer who's done the work and and has been making profits from this for a long time. And I know there's state stuff involved in this but is there a way to disentangle that information. Carol. I, I have a list that I've been working hard on so has George Ryan. I have a list right now that has a column that totals what the SHI thing says that gives us 12% and another column that totals the actual affordable units. And it's kind of slightly still unofficial because there's a few question marks in places we don't know all of it. Ideally, we'd like to get it to where we know not only how many units but how many with how many bedrooms and the blah blah blah make it much more, much more rich. But right now we do have something or other that we could show you that to me it seemed important that it that I could tie it to the SHI number. So, you know, so we're looking at apples and apples and may not be everything in here who knows but at least hopefully we're looking at apples and apples and so that and that's an ongoing project. And we're working at getting it better. Nate has been adding things to it. George and Nate and with maybe Ashley is also involved a little bit are trying to make it more robust but anyway, yes, we need that. We're working on getting it. Thank you Carol and I know Jennifer I promised you but Nate raised his hand. So I want to welcome Nate who is the staff liaison to the trust and might have some more information on that. Yeah, thanks. I think the, I just want to say that if we if we do that right we can find the exact number and Amherst, but it wouldn't be then comparable to other community so for instance Hadley. The SHI they say they have 275 affordable units and two developments. And that's in two apartment complexes so it's likely that only 20% of those 275 units are actually the deed restricted affordable units. And that's the case across the state right there's a common methodology of how the state calculates the SHI number and so especially around the 495 area the idea was that if you could count all units at a multi unit development on the SHI of 20 or 25% are affordable depending on income level. Then incentivize the construction of affordable units right you're not getting 100% affordable but you know I think the state that 20 or 25% was what could make a project financially feasible so not for Amherst but then it's like we just can't go then look at, you know, other communities and say geez they're at 12% or they're at 9% and we're only at 7% is but they're 9% is counting everything that you know is allowed and so currently Amherst is over 13% on the SHI. But you know if we actually drill down and say okay what how many of those are actually affordable it might be that were, you know, you know the percentage is different but it's no longer the SHI percentage it's just the accurate reflection of what are the deed restricted units. Right. I just feel, may I interrupt. I feel like it's important. I'm not trying to compare us to Hadley or anything. I'm mad at Hadley, since they turned down the project, affordable project, but I really want to know what do we have an Amherst that's available so, and so then we can build from there. I understand why it was created and, and since I'm, but I think that information about the read the actual is really kind of critical. Oh yeah, yeah, I know as long as you have that understanding I think that's fine yeah so I think I've been working but I'll say George and has done most of the work and you know Doug Marshall and the chair the planning board has started so we have these spreadsheets that need to be consolidated but it's, you know, detailed spreadsheet sort of say you know the number of multi unit developments the affordable units and then let's say the bedroom sizes bedroom counts and really have a nice understanding of what that looks like so if we say we have, you know, 500 affordable units we could say well you know 300 of those are two bedrooms and just have a little bit more. It takes a little bit of research right so when we permit these, they get permitted and information lives in a document it's not easy accessible through a software report it's like a manual research through through files but it is something we're working on. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, Jennifer. Thank you. Thank you. No I just had a question. Does the housing trust so we also, you know, we talk about workforce housing and now we also talk about attainable housing, because housing has become so expensive that, you know, there's different levels of what you can afford to build it very, you know so much is not affordable to the workforce. Is that also within the housing trust that's my question per view. Most of the money that we have comes from CPAC. And so that money affordable is 80% I think or it can't be more than 80% of AMI can be less that's fine. In the in the Belcher Town Road project there are some because the town already owned East Street, and no CPAC money was used to buy it. That made it possible to ask the developers to include some amount of workforce or 100% or I forget exactly the percentages but something that could more readily be called workforce housing. A few units of that could be could be done in that part of that project which is, as you know, is a two East Street and the location at Belcher Town Road, but the Belcher Town Road location was bought, at least partially with CPAC money. And so we can't can't have that kind of housing there. Thank you. Can I follow up with that and I don't know whether you'll know this Carol so if there's money from another source, and the trust is doing the RFP or something what's the trust maximum sort of. Am I CPAC was 80 you talked about 100 is it 100 or is 120. I don't have an answer me, I think that we have so seldom had that kind of money that it hasn't come up, but I don't know, maybe Nate has a better answer. Yeah, the municipal approval housing trust you know has powers and, you know, abilities that are through state legislation and so in as part of the general bylaw the trust bylaws part of the town's general bylaws. And it does say affordable housing, but I was just really just looking through the bylaw we don't we don't reference the MGL section that would restrict it to 80%. So, I think the trust can, you know, CPA is 100% of Am I depending on funding it might be restricted to 80 or 60 it could be more. So the trust could honestly, if a trust is really a trust really wouldn't be a developer I mean it might be but right so a trust could for instance own market rate property. Collect rents on those and say we're using that market rate property to subsidize the development of affordable housing. And that could be within a trust purview and a power. You know, maybe it's it's challenge because you know how, you know, how many if not you know market rate units are not affordable are you doing but the trust has trust has the ability to own and manage property. As long as it's mission is to support affordable housing. There could be some case law that really defines what that am I is but I think it actually is pretty flexible. You know but it is tied to say funding sources or what there could be other programmatic restrictions depending on, you know grants or other things so I was just looking quickly I don't see that we actually define that in the trust bylaw we define it in our zoning for instance as 80% or less of the area so inclusionary zoning units would be risk, you know restricted to that, but the trust might have the ability to do other, you know, other income limits. Thanks. And I think other just to add I think that, for instance, if the whatever it's called the transfer fee went through and the trust got money from that. There would not be those kinds of restrictions on it and so there would there might be other restrictions that are as Nate is just describing and we'd have to, and we'd have a reason to look into them. Yeah. Dave. Again, maybe I was just, you know, I don't know how your time is today but again I'm hearing some some questions generated here but I'm just wanted to reiterate that it would be helpful to staff if we. Maybe if questions were sent from CRC members. Those questions could be sent to me, or Mandy and Mandy sent send them to me and then trust members send your questions to Nate. I've heard Pat's questions quite clearly about the differentiation between those units on the SHI and those units that may be counted in the SHI but, you know, what is that breakdown of affordable to not affordable but, and I don't mean to get into those details today, but I think it would be helpful if, you know, like in other conversations we've generated those questions it would really help us prepare for the meeting we're going to have with the trust and, and the CRC. So we can have all that data in advance to you before the meeting. Thank you David. Yeah, does it make sense to think about how we can work together in terms of if he did have a sense of the number of units of affordable housing that are needed, according to the trust, and then is it possible to get a sense of what the affordable areas we have that allow for that kind of development. And that's where CRC can come in if indeed needed about how in a what sort of specs specs or zoning is needed in those areas. So like, you know, looking at the big picture of we kind of get a sense of what our neighborhoods what are different areas and so what is needed to make that happen. And so that's why I think then if that's what we are looking, David, since you asked like what is the purpose of this meeting I'm just trying to think like how do we make our meeting matter and make it, you know, move us in a direction where we're taking certain actions in my mind that's how I'm thinking and then the staff questions would be like what, can we get a sense of what are some areas where in the village centers and so forth or, you know, wherever near transportation or do we have those locations available for building. I'm going to jump in quickly Mandy so. So yeah, I would recommend that everybody start with the comprehensive housing plan and really dive into that that if I'm not mistaken help me out here council members that was presented to the council and I'm not sure if approved accepted by the council I'm not sure if it was accepted or approved. It's been adopted, but thank you Mandy by the council so that is the plan of the council from from council. That plan then flows to the town manager, and then to me and the staff, many of some of whom you see on the call today. So that is the plan that primarily drives the work we do so I would encourage everybody on this call in the housing trust to start with the comprehensive housing policy, and certainly we can. We can also look at any documents that through the years have been generated by the housing trust but I would start with with the policy that has been, you know, adopted by the council, and then we can get into some of the, you know, goals and objectives. From that policy or recommended in that policy and, and that would speak to where do we want development to happen shall in a where can it happen by zoning. Where might the zoning change and how do we incentivize, you know, more housing both home ownership broadly defined workforce and and rental. Again, you know, we can also talk about I think it'd be an opportunity for staff to say, where have we been and what have we, what we have we as a community accomplished. How many new units, do we have, how many units are in in production. How many zoning have we passed to make housing more affordable more more easily developable in in in village centers, etc. So, yeah, I think it could be a really robust conversation when we have it. Thank you, Jennifer and then I'm going to try and wrap us up or at least with a summary. All right, so I wanted to respond to Shawnee in terms of these conversations because we could make it a really comprehensive conversation because the planning board has actually been having to they had a second one last night really great discussions where they they're in a room together at town hall, and they've taken out maps, and they're going literally sort of district you know by district and looking at where different kinds of housing could go. So actually Nate, even though I had a question last night I think those seem like really productive, you know, great conversations. So I'm just saying is in, you know, responding to Shawnee in terms of, you know where to look that that actually conversation is happening right now in the planning board. So maybe we all get together, I don't. Okay, thank you. So here's what I'm hearing that we will try to join a trust meeting I'll, I'll touch base with Carol and Erica about how we can start pulling CRC members to see evenings we might be available, you know, figure it out. I can't imagine it'll be next week because that would put staff in too much of a bind so we're probably looking at may meeting, but but we'll figure out those dates, as long as the trust when it meets next week I think next week is the trust talking about this potential anyway so it would be premature to schedule anything without that meeting but once you guys have met will we need to get together try and find a time and make sure everyone's available for that time. I will also, if okay with CRC reach out to the planning board to see if maybe they. I don't know how we would make it. That gets really big. We're at like, almost 510 1518 people I think. But, but I can, I can reach out to them and see, you know, or Pam you're the liaison to them so maybe you could reach out to them to see but in terms of topics. What I'm hearing is start with some information on what's been built, base it on the comprehensive housing policy. See what's that will also I'll make sure the policy gets sent out to and put in today's packet so so people don't have to go hunt for it I think it's on CRC's website. And then go from there with, you know, some of what Shalini said, things like that. I think in the meantime people can send me questions and I will compile them for Dave and share them with the housing trust chairs. So that they have them as potential questions that they can bring up to the trust at their meeting next week. Before we, you know, in terms of that's where CRC thinking is going in terms of some of the questions and topics of conversation. I've got a lot of hands so that's my summary as to where we go from here, Erica then Pat, then Pam and then Nate. I just want to quickly before we end just to let you know that the Amherst and municipal affordable housing trust is working with the social and social justice committee safety and social justice committee, and the, the Human Rights Committee as well as the local board of health to do a listening session on affordable housing in May. So I just wanted to let you know that because we are going to invite as many town organizations as possible, just to listen to both residents like to be residents in Amherst so just another actual item to think about in the future. Thank you for that. Do you have a date or anything yet that you can advertise on this video. Well, so we did have a date but we've been asked to push it back. So we're we were thinking May 9. We may have to push it back a little bit for the same reasons that we're being asked to think about may just to make sure that the staff have enough time to really support us in doing this. Erica Pat. Date issues may 9 this Carol's 80th birthday I don't know if I want to give her up that night. We have the same birthday Carol. Oh, wow. I looked, I looked ahead to the second Thursday in May, and it's the 11th, and I believe we have a CRC meeting from 430 to 630. Perhaps we should could just shift to joining housing trust that night. I will consider it and talk to Pam about that in terms of trying to get our own non housing. Well, non affordable non conversations top done. Maybe the housing. Mainly rental rent. But I will talk to Pam about that but thank you for bringing up that option I will make a note of that option. Pam. I'm just going to zoom in on the 11th as well. And maybe we just have a CRC meeting and then we take a break and then we go to the other meeting as well. I'm really not too worried about that. I was thinking that in this at least this initial round. I would like to go out to the planning department. Staff to perhaps represent what conversations have been occurring in the planning department, rather than having an additional five or seven people from the planning board attend. I think, I think that's getting really bulky. Just depending if everyone wants to talk, you're there, you know, you're there for hours. So I would love to ask. And this is something we could request ahead of time. But perhaps staff represents what has been discussed. That's a good idea. Thank you, Nate. Yes, thanks. Yeah, I was going to say that we're the planning board, you know, they haven't having some discussions about where could they increase density and village centers, or how do they work on village centered zoning. You know, maybe student housing overlay. The first thing for like the trust and CRC if you have ideas based on that policy Dave mentioned, you know, there's about 50 action steps that could be taken or different objectives that could be met. And there's ideas that the CRC and trust may have just in general, right in terms of how to get affordable housing that could be relayed through, through staff or as Pam suggested through her to the planning board and they could figure out what are the methods or the techniques to get there and so last night's meeting I was mentioning, you know, 40 are as a tool to try to incentivize housing as an overlay but there's others and so if, if generally, you know, for instance the idea is like oh how do we create more home ownership opportunity that could be presented to the planning board during their discussions and we could try to strategize in terms of what are actual steps that could help get there or a range of income limits what does that mean in terms of zoning in terms of allowing different types of housing. And so it may not be very specific but it can help guide the planning board as they're looking at this as well so I think, you know, that's one way to do it if you have comments or questions, you know, we can always relay it and then they can talk about it and maybe at one point we have a big, big meeting but I agree that it gets to be a lot of people. Thank you, Nate. Carol, you're, there you go. Yeah, I just wanted to say I, I'm there. I don't think necessarily it has to be only the CRC that decides to move to a different time. I mean maybe we can, we can have you ask your people what they might do, we can do the same thing it doesn't. The trust routinely meets once a month with this regularity and it's helped us get people to show up at the right time. But there's nothing that says that we can't have other meetings if we need to call them or that we couldn't move a meeting a little earlier or something or other so don't assume that all the moving about has to be yours that's all I wanted to say. Thank you Carol. With that I want to thank Carol and Erica for joining us for this sort of planning part I think we're all excited to sort of be bringing people together to talk about the important issues and less siloing right I think Shalini mentioned hyper siloing like trying to figure continue to to grow into the new form of government with new committees and all figuring out how less siloing and more working together can happen so you know thank you for that. I think we all look forward to figuring out when and how and being in touch so thank you. You guys can stay if you stay we're going to push you into the attendees or you can have your evening back. I don't know if you're here or but we are welcome to stay we're actually going to move on to the zoning priorities and housing discussion next and then we'll come back to rental registration. So it's almost a continuation and a little bit of this conversation but for CRC to to start talking a little bit about stuff so I think Athena is the one that needs to move people over so Athena if you could move Carol and Erica over. Thank you for having us. Thank you for coming. And once they're moved over yeah we are taking the discussion item out of order because it helps Nate and Chris, because Nate has a historic commission meeting at some other meeting tonight. And it helps them be able to attend this portion of the discussion and so that's why we're taking it out of order so we're going to move on to the discussion item that is zoning priorities and housing. And we're running a bit behind but I think it was worth blowing up my potential timings to sort of conclude that conversation but we might drop the engagement report. So that we can get through the other things is what I'm thinking right now but we'll see how we do. So zoning priorities and housing this is a continuation or sort of the next step to what we discussed last week, last week, two weeks ago. Where we made a recommendation to the council to potentially rescind. The zoning priorities that had been that had been referred to the town manager, other than the ones that were still outstanding other than the design guidelines form based zoning. My report I wrote I will give you an update on that report you'll see it when I looked at the referrals. And I made it very clear in my report that this was my recommendation not discussed at CRC but I'm going to be very clear with you. We had an outstanding referral from a proposed zoning change that dealt solely with apartments and the definition of apartments it's the only part of the referral that had not a referral from a prior council. The only thing that was left was the definition of apartments because the last it was actually a proposed zoning by law change if Chris remembers and and planning board talked about what to do with the definition of apartment with 24 CRC talked about it. We had hearings on it we talked about it we never got to a resolution as to a recommendation basically and so it was still outstanding. In my report based on the recommendation that CRC made to rescind everything one of the things in that zoning priorities list was apartments definition. So in the report I also recommended. Gotta love Roberts rules that the per the chair and only me I said we didn't vote on it because I didn't know when Lynn would put things on. So I thought they should be done simultaneously that the committee that the council discharge the recommendation from the committee, which means they take the recommendation back without me letting the committee do anything with it. And then table that that referral indefinitely or table that item indefinitely basically squash it on the basis that if we were to ever come back to that. We should start anew. We should not do it based on a referral from three years ago with hearing that happened three years ago and all. So that's what I included in my report making it clear that it was not talked about in CRC. But I thought it was entirely consistent with CRC's recommendation. If you all have a problem with that, let me know and I will write a supplemental report that says hey. No, but I thought it was entirely consistent with the unanimous recommendation that CRC made and to deal with them all at once. So that made sense to me. But that's just an update. Before we go to Chris, we're going to just have a conversation about priorities for zoning what do people want to be working on zoning wise. Last time we did this we've made a recommendation to the council to direct the town manager to prioritize x things so it's going to be an open conversation but Chris you lowered your hand now so now I'm confused Chris. Oh, I thought you were going to put me off till later so I was just going to ask where can I find a copy of the report that you wrote that report based on last week's things should be in the packet Athena what packet are you putting it in. It's going to be in the packet for the 24th. Of people. Council packet for the 24th. Yeah Chris I can forward it to you. Thank you. That's all I wanted to know. No problem. Pam. Yes, I was going to ask about that report also I couldn't remember seeing it in our packet. I'm not sure it so it hasn't been in a council packet I will make sure I upload it to the report section of SharePoint, because it might not have gotten uploaded to SharePoint's report section for CRC. I will make sure to clarify will it go to the CRC packet for April 24 or town council. That's the town council packet for April 24. Okay. Great. Before then. Yeah, hopefully we need it before then. Um, so, um, priorities, priorities that CRC might be interested in. We've talked about design guidelines for a very, very long time. And I know that there are literally the planning staff sitting here looking at us tonight. And there are two people. And I totally understand that any kind of robust public involvement is going to need more than two people. And that's a very good reason to not be working on the design guidelines. But I would love to still reiterate that it is definitely a high priority. Um, I would just love to get that on the record. The second item that has been on my, my list for some time is an official review of all the potential parking garage locations in the downtown. Similar to the review that was done for the town lot on North prospect street. So that's again, that's, that's something that we just love to check off that block and also get the official, the official word on the potential for the boltwood garage. Rather than just that I would love to just see an actual report from the, from the engineer. Um, Um, a third priority, which is starting to reach out a little bit is talking about the gateway. The gateway properties between here and you math. And, um, in Comparing you from comparing Amherst college with you math, you mess is not really in the business of providing any kind of new faculty hire or new staff hire. Housing, but, um, if I were to envision something along that script of, of North pleasant street. It is an ideal location for dense, you know, dense development in my mind, sort of townhouse style for, for faculty to rent. You know, when they first arrive in town, it's so hard for them. I figure if they, if they rent in town first, get to love it or they're not going to want to move to Belcher town or Hadley. Where it's less expensive to live, they'll work hard to stay in Amherst. So rather than rather than trying to make that into. Four story or five story mixed use development. It just seems like it's a really great spot for dense, but. Human scale, faculty housing. So those are three that I would love to see to down a little bit. Thank you. Anyone else want to take a crack at their thoughts. I have more if nobody else has any idea. Oh, I got, I got some I'm just I try to give everyone else an opportunity. Just saying. Pat. Yeah, sorry. I'm interested in gateway property it's interesting what Pam is proposing but I'd like to see options for what development could be there. I also really want to see more density where it's appropriate and village centers. We talked about some of that this morning but also expanding outward, expanding the or the boundary of village center where also where it's appropriate. And for me, and Mandy will do a better job of adding some of this. But in how can we create infill housing that brings young families brings families with income disparities, etc. Back into town and I really feel like we need to look at smaller housing, smaller size housing smaller. Because I feel like that's the direction that young people are going in today they are not interested building large single family homes they're really interested in maximizing relationships and delivering environmental goals, etc. and building smaller. So I'd also like to investigate the use of tiny homes, tiny home communities in and around and I'd love to see the DPW site that Amherst College offered us to be a tiny home community I think it would be kind of really an amazing and I think it would draw a lot of young people, not just in young people young 40 years old is young. And, but that that we don't think about that as much so so if we could really begin to think about expanding zoning priorities in that direction to in terms of dimensionals dimensions and relationships. Diddopam and Pat. Actually, that specific suggestion for the location that Amherst College open offered would be, I don't know who revisits that but that's a great suggestion. You know I also always saw the ad use as being part of the small houses that you know to be able to encourage now that the zoning allows for that everywhere to be encouraged and trying to enable that to happen. And I certainly think you know when we talk about infill it should be all over town, you know certainly the places where there's the greatest space. Yeah, so I just, you know, I think design guidelines, you know, are, you know, very important. And I believe the planning departments even looking at, you know, I know that you're, you know, understaffed now but that you were looking for consultants to bring you know so that I think that's maybe already started. You know, certainly the garage location. I know that you know something I hear that people are interested in. And yeah I think I know that you know even the townhouses on sunset and that are being built now on sunset and fearing there was a lot of conversation I know the developer is actually was reaching out to administrative staff at UMass like young coaching staff. Because there's all different there's one bedrooms to that you know there's all different sizes to really try and have that be a place where, you know young faculty and, you know, the extent to which UMass is our largest employer that workers that work for that large employer could live that close to campus and I think, you know, looking at that for Gateway and then, you know, a lot of, if we had people who lived in that area and it could be dense that are here year round and use downtown year round that would be really terrific. I just want to say for when this is I know it's digressing but they open protocol, which is a new restaurant it's been about eight years coming but it won his present it's only been open a week. I'm not an investor dear. I'm not an investor but we went through last Saturday night at 630 and it was packed, and it was it with people like our age. I know I'm older so I'm not, I mean, people, you know, it was just there's a, there, people do want to go, you know, they want to go out in town I'm they want to go in the village centers to but there is, you know, that those of us that live here year round, you know, want you know people want to go out and when you know people seem very excited to be there. So, it seems that maybe that gateway area would be a natural source for people that would use downtown and you know other, patronize other businesses on a year round basis. I think as much as we can also I guess encouraged development and people living in places where there would be the synergy to support our business base would be a priority. Thank you. I'm Nate. Is it all right if I say a few things or do you want to see our members to speak first. We always like to hear our staff's opinions. Thanks. Yeah, I mean, yeah, I like everything that's being said I will say the design guidelines we're really close to getting their request for proposals out we do have a community planning grant that also is looking at streetscape or we're integrating into that so it will be a really positive thing. I also think that hearing from the planning board and discussing the preservation plan and now PVPC the other week. I feel like the design guidelines are really important, you know all over town, not just downtown so my hope is that we can take what we learn here and extrapolate it and apply it to other places. You know in terms of zoning and housing I was going to say that I, you know the housing market study from 2015 the consultant said it that we really need to balance student housing and other measures that could be zoning or non zoning to protect neighborhoods and then other places to allow density and I feel like, you know, even with the planning board discussions I like how they're talking about, you know, planning for Village Center redevelopment but I do think we need to talk about student housing and let's just say I don't even want to say mixed use buildings but because I really think there's an imbalance in demand and housing and I think it's really important to address where can we have student housing that is student housing. And then how do we allow mixed use buildings and apartments in a way that it's not going to be, you know, all students except for the inclusionary zoning units and so I think there needs to be some strategies it could be non zoning strategies but some some ways to manage that. Staff has also talked about, you know, could we have an updated definition of apartments. So right now developers will do a mixed use building in certain zoning districts because we don't cap the number of units. So they could put in retail space that really is kind of an afterthought knowing that they'll get 5080 whatever 100 units. So building whereas an apartment building we cap it at 24, you could have multiple apartments, you know, buildings on a property but you know the fact that the apartment definition, and the way we allow it to be zoned is different and so you know staff has often said could we have a tiered definition of apartments could we have, you know, some other ways to encourage you know even different kind of townhouse style development and so right now we have a townhouse definition but could that be updated so I do think that, you know the Village Center some of it is, you know how do we permit and how do we define different types of housing or building types and can we be more flexible there. I think with the proposal that Mandy and Pat brought forward with, you know duplexes and triplexes that's a start and I think part of the discussion, made me realize that you know some of it also might be changing changing zoning districts on the ground right so in some areas like RO or RLD that come pretty close to a Village Center. And so if we make changes to those zoning districts that that could apply all over you know Bay Road, where maybe we don't really want it and so then is that an overlay zone. You know how do we, if we are talking density or housing, you know, how do we achieve that is it by changing a use classification is it zoning districts is it overlays and so I think, you know staff has had a few ideas about how to address that and I think those you know could work in tandem with a lot of things. Part of me also thinks that the design guidelines, you know needs to happen so then we can shape what it looks like so zoning can say let's put something here I'd love to be able to say we'd like to have 12 foot sidewalks and Village Centers or 10 foot sidewalks and have a setback and curve and you know a lot of things we've been talking about for a while and I'd like to be able to get those in place before we, you know move forward with some of these measures just because you know then we have the ability to shape the development a little bit more. Thank you. So, I think I'm going to sound a lot like Nate a little bit here. In, in talking and getting prepared for the zoning proposal that Pat and I brought I spent a lot of time looking at zoning and our zoning in particular I spent on and even with my lighting map right and lighting proposal I spent a lot of time staring at the zoning map. And looking at dimensional requirements and you know one of the things I would love to focus on as a priority is, you know, and the broad picture is finding ways to make building housing cheaper. There can be things like smaller lots, or, you know, or apartments in different areas, or you know there's a lot of ways to potentially lessen the permitting requirements right there's there's many different ways to approach it but, but you know one thing I realized is, you know, when you look at our RG, which is a very small area of town, the minimum lot size for two units on it is almost a third of an acre. It's actually a little bit more than a third of an acre. And that's supposed to be our high density area. And that doesn't seem very dense to me. But that's what our dimensions require and I say that because when you, and then when you look at the RG. And when you look at our favorite neighborhoods in the RG. One has large lots but the other high street Whitney Street all of that, most of their lots are under around 10,000 square feet. They're almost all non conforming at either under 10,000 square feet or under the 100 foot frontage requirement I think RG might have, or under the 50 foot frontage requirement these frontage requirements the lot sizes, the all of that adds costs or prohibits density that we might like, actually, right. Because if we want, say more single family homes that are owner occupied they have to be on separate parcels. Because you're not going to build two single family homes on one parcel and condo that parcel for owner occupancy for ownership. So they have to be on two separate parcels. So how do we incentivize and the larger the parcel required the more expensive the housing because you have to buy the land and land is a set price. So one of the things I would like us to prioritize is finding ways to build cheaper like what could we do that would allow developers to develop the housing we want at a lower price point. Because we can develop all the apartments we want or all the single family homes we want but if the only places to develop those single family homes now are on a lot that requires an acre. And an acre require, you know costs in Amherst $180,000 or whatever the selling price of an acre of land is in Amherst. Now, well, you're not going to get a cheap house. But if you can build a house for on a 10,000 square foot lot instead of a 40,000 square foot lot, we've just reduced the cost of the land, maybe not proportionally. But maybe you can build a house cheaper and maybe that house will be smaller to because you're might not a developer might not take that acre and build a 1200 square foot house they might build a 4,000 square foot house. And so, I don't know what the solution to that is but that's something I would like us to be talking about. I definitely want us looking at the Village Centers. I'm not as much of a fan of overlays as Nate might be, because I think it complicates our zoning. I'd much rather see us say, if this is our Village Center and we want businesses there, we have a BVC zone. Let's make those parcels BVC if we want the residential right outside of there. Let's make all the parcels outside of that RVC and then tailor the zone dimensional requirements to that so re looking at essentially the whole zoning map, because I think it doesn't really match what Amherst has become or what our master plan actually asks us for, because I think there's too much. It's a relic of its past, in some sense that needs updated for that. And then the only other thing I would say is that student housing solution. Our business in town is higher education. I don't think we can ignore that. And so I think we have to address head on what we're going to do with student housing, where we want it, how we want it, do we want them in mixed use buildings integrated economically and and socially and all into neighborhoods or do we want their own districts where they are sort of put in their own little area near the town and we say this is a student housing like we've done with the RF zones, right, you know, that's an RF zone for student housing. What do we want and all I don't know what the solution is but we can't ignore it. And so those are, those are sort of my three high high level things I'd like to look at Jennifer. Yes, well you won't be surprised that I'm going to, I, I totally disagree about the RG. Pam and I live in RG districts the new district for is entirely is RG neighborhoods. The RGs are already zoned for great densification it's not to say there aren't some houses that are on bigger lots but they are you can have nine structures on an acre in an RG neighborhood. I live I'm looking out right now on Cosby Street Cosby Street is small houses on small lots. McClellan Street is best in Street is page Street is fearing Phillips Alan I could go on and you know Pam lives on cottage street, we are already very dense, we are living as you say that the values that we should live we are small houses on small lots. And again, you can already have nine structures on an acre. So on 98 fearing street. There is a house it was built as a single family house not on a, you know, particularly not on the science, lots that many of you live on. It was divided into a triplex because we're already zoned for multifamily housing. It's been a triplex for years. A new owner and investor came before the local historic district commission that was the first stop. They are proposing to build three additional structures in the backyard. Each structure will have three separate units, nine in these three structures for bedrooms in each. They didn't pretend it wasn't for students they said this is for students they'll get over $1,000 a bedroom. They put a 24 or 21. They want to tear down all the trees and get rid of the lawn and have 21 parking spaces between, you know, they're going to have like 36, I don't know, 24 to 36 students living here. It borders three streets fearing a small part of Lincoln and Cosby. Everybody will move. I mean they said that it nobody wants to have 36 students living in their backyard or to no longer look out on green space but be looking out on parking lots. You know, each street could do this again it was built by an investor someone that bought by an investor who was proposing to do this. I do believe I'm getting a little emotional but I mean this is a neighborhood where people have lived for decades, and it's not okay just to destroy neighborhoods. And as, and people said at this hearing they said they will have to move because it will become unlivable. The only people that would buy those houses would be other investors to rent them to students. The university might love that they'd have lots of beds investors might love it they'd make a lot of money. And, frankly, others might love it because it's not their neighborhood, but we are going to, we are going to fight hard to protect our neighborhood and to be able to continue to live in Amherst. We are already the RG neighborhoods, you can have you can have the most coverage on a lot. We tend to have small houses on small lots. We walk into downtown every day everyone in my neighborhood goes solicits patronize is at least one downtown business a day. We live near town so we walk we don't drive as much as other people do we're living the values that you claim you want to see. The first place you want to rezone and densify are the RGs, and it's, I just, I don't, I don't understand that, you know, I just have to. I'm sorry to get emotional but I want to just say again you can already have nine structures on an acre in the RG neighborhoods so if we're going to densify I would suggest starting someplace that could actually use the density, which is not the RG neighborhoods. Thank you. I just want to say thank you to Jennifer for stating that. Shawnee. Yeah, thank you Jennifer for highlighting that. I think this is exactly the, I don't even know what I want to say but I think what I want to say is that we have to acknowledge the challenges that we have in this town is that it is. On the one hand, we, we, you know, we want to make our town affordable and to make it affordable for families, especially, and low income people that we have the challenge of the plot sizes and I don't know which areas like Mandy June has that memorize I don't have it memorized but I think maybe this is the challenge we put to the staff to solve with us for us is that, you know, we, the cost of building as manager was saying is high because the plots and I'm not even going into where this is happening, but that is a problem right now I know somebody who was working for the mobile food market and he's an urban planner, and he used to live in Amherst, and he said I can't afford to live here and I said okay you're an urban planner, and you know and so what is one thing if you could change in analysis at the plot sizes they're too large to make it affordable. So again I'm not saying let's start with RG I'm just presenting this as a general before we jump to solutions. Let's put in what are our goals which is how do we bring more family family oriented homes that's kind of our goal here how to make it affordable for teachers and firefighters that's what all of us want. And at the same time we have this challenge that some of the homes or plots that are there are being bought over by developers to convert them into student housing. And we live in a capitalist society. So within this framework that we live in. Not building and just stopping it is also making the prices go higher and higher it's not solving the problem and over time as people are retiring our own neighbors are selling their homes to developers because that's the best price they're getting or whatever the reason is it is our neighbors who are selling to developers for whatever reason right they need the money or whatever. So if we don't do anything that is going to keep happening and the prices keep going and the families leave or whatever so I'm saying not doing anything is not a solution either. So I'm glad we're having this conversation and I really encourage us to listen to each other and to put all the problems. Challenges we have it's not us versus the others and we're all in this together so let's bring up these challenges that we are seeing in our neighborhoods. And let's talk about our goals and then figure out what are the ways to solve. Okay I didn't make offer anything helpful here at the end let's work together. Thank you so much Melanie so I want to respond a little bit to Jennifer. The plot you keep bringing up 98 fearing point eight four acres. 36,481 square feet. Should have nine structures structures. Let me finish Jennifer. We have a rule at least as our console to not interrupt. The plot of land I live on is point 73 acres. It's actually smaller than the lot the plot of land that is one block from UMass that point eight four acres. Jennifer mentioned Cosby Avenue McClellan page streets so there are lots of land on four hundred square feet. You can't build and have you can't if that plot existed today without a house on you could not put a house on it under RG zoning. You wouldn't be able to, but if you wanted it's point one nine acres, because in RG you need 12,000 square feet minimum to put a house on. So most of those McClellan Street plot properties are non conforming. And so you know Cosby Street, 8300 square feet. We've got some on McClellan 6894 square feet, less than 7000 square feet. If we put that those McClellan properties of around 8000 square feet on that. If we put that fearing Street property, the 98 fearing, you'd get well 8000 times four is 32,000 so you'd get five single family homes on that easily. If you sized it to approximately the McClellan 8000 you'd have four or five single family homes on that one fearing Street property, and Jennifer you just talked about how McClellan properties are fine sizes. Part of my point, I was talking about Cosby, they're very Cosby, let me give you Cosby sizes, but they're a why don't we make all the neighborhoods are 300 square feet, 9300 square feet, 7800 square feet. So, so I guess what I'm saying when I say dimensional tables and smaller lot sizes is, you can't split that. You know, right now you can split that fearing Street 98 fearing Street up potentially, if you had a road to it. From that 36,000 square feet you could get three single family homes if you could put it into three plots of land, but you can't actually put it into three parcels, because there's not enough frontage to three parcel it under our table. And we recognize that some 7000 or 8000 square foot pieces of property are perfectly well sized for a single family home, yet we don't anywhere in our zoning allow for such small single parcels to put a house on. So part of my request is how do we change our zoning so that we can build potentially single family homes maybe duplexes and all. Maybe and so let me pause it maybe if that fearing Street property could be split into five single parcels you'd get five single family homes on it, or four single family homes, but you can't split it into parcels and build on it. So you get rentals, because you can't. No one's going to condo it so you get rentals. A block from UMass when I talk about student housing and I agree with workforce housing a block from UMass we have to recognize who wants to live in the prime areas of our town. And that those neighborhoods that are walkable to downtown and to the colleges are the prime desired living areas of our town. And I think we have to have a conversation as to what we what when a town grows and areas change what we do with zoning. We can't expect all areas to ever not change when Jennifer talks about, well other areas should densify first I go back to our master plan that says infill that says we don't want to build in the outlying areas in the rld areas. And so how do we as a town come together and say, how are we going to grow and how are we going to address these issues and I'll just bring up one more thing which is a question you know what I'm going to ask if there was a clock on I'm pretty sure I'm sorry, I'm not going to ask Jennifer. I'm going to ask Jennifer to hold and I'd like to hear from Nate after. Yeah, but I'm going to ask Pam Marie one more thing she said at the retreat that she wants more non students living in town than students. And so I did the numbers right now we have about 24,000 students living in town between on campus and off campus which means we'd have to grow to 48,000 residents we have 40,000 residents now. That's 8,000 new residents that's about 2000 new units. So I asked Pam to think about where would she put them and what would they look like. Okay. I said okay Jennifer if I go to Nate. And then I'm not going to then Pam and then you can come, then you can come back to the clock on you Jennifer, and I apologize for not timing even myself. Nate and then Jennifer. Yeah, thanks yeah, I'm going to say that I think, you know 98 hearing is a good example in a lot of ways. It's kind of a pilot like a test case for allowing infill. And I think the, some of it is yet to be really careful with the unintended consequences of allowing infill you know it will change the character of the neighborhood and is that, is it what we what we expected, and is it what we want and so, you know zoning sometimes doesn't get down to the aesthetics of the building it can kind of do massing and footprint but if you know our zoning allows a certain lock coverage or building coverage a developer could build just a big block of a building. You know, it could be that we have really nice examples of infill right so 32 North prospect, the Marsh House, you know condominiums there was examples but that's, that's because the developer, you know, voluntarily went that way and perhaps there's a little bit through the permitting the boards helped get there but if we if we allow it it doesn't necessarily it might not look what we want it to look right we might have idea that oh we can allow a second dwelling unit on a property and it's going to be of a proportion that is appropriate to the house on the property. But I will say that at 98 fearing the duplexes were 40 by 40 square feet, two full stories and then a roof. And from the street it looks it looked like it was going to be a giant wall. And so when the developer came to the local historic district as a preview meeting. You know, we're saying that it's a single family neighborhood and they said well, we don't want it, you know, we're going to do more than one unit and it's like well. The nuance there is that you could do a development have additional buildings but make it appropriate to a single family neighborhood character right so you could have outbuildings that maybe just aren't so big but allowing the zoning, you know right now doesn't really capture that so I do think we have to be careful in terms of how we allow infill because we might have an idea of what looks really nice right oh someone's going to put a nice little townhouses behind the house on a property but that's maybe not what we're going to get and so, you know, as staff we try to balance okay what what are the different development scenarios so when we were looking at footnote and the other year. We had Maureen look at okay what is the existing density and RG and it and end up being pretty, you know, there's a lot of flexibility there's actually a lot of density of someone uses the bylaw to their advantage. And, but what we don't have is, you know, unless it's going through a special permit, or a site plan review a really good process to work with the design of that and so I do think that's really important I like the idea of infill. I think that the difficulty is we already have the street layouts we have the homes facing a certain way and so if we were to do it again today. It could be really easy to say let's put in smaller lots and have a different kind of character of a neighborhood but we don't in some instances and so. Yeah, I think that it is really important I think it's a great discussion to have and so, you know, I, I, you know, I think the 90 fearing I think going through the local historic district and then it has to get a special permit if it proceeds I feel like it would. It'll take a different shape than the way it was presented and I think that would be a good thing for the property. And so, I, you know, I, I think we can allow infill but I think we also have to have some other measures in place to help it. And so, you know, I think that's where the discussion has to take place what do we want it to look like and how do we guide that. Thank you, Nate Jennifer. Pam, do you want to go first since I've spoken. Yeah. Sure. Just, it was very quick. I was just gonna say, I'm not sure that we necessarily have to absorb all of the, all of the population and Amherst. Period. It's not, you know, having a better balance between students and non students doesn't mean that all the students have to live here. So I'm not trying to, I'm not trying to build up so many people in town that that it outweighs the students in that manner, just to clarify. Thank you Pam. Jennifer. Yeah, so I think if we're really committed to infill and I think we should zone whole. I think we should zone many parts of Amherst like the RG. I think it's very easy to say that other people should, you know, sacrifice their neighborhoods. Frankly, that other neighborhoods don't have to be sacrificed. You can get we have many small houses 98, and I want to say 98 fearing street the only thing that might make it so that doesn't ruin all the surrounding streets is that we have a local historic district, which I think some of some people voted against in town meeting but the local historic district is is the first stop that you have to go and it has to be contextually appropriate if not for that and then some of the other RG neighborhoods they don't have a they're not a local historic district so what was proposed for 98 fearing street would just go up. But nobody is the reality is as Nats, as Nate said, if you're going to further, you can already, we, you only need like 12,000 square feet in an RG neighborhood to build we you can build where you need 80,000 in an RN. No, no. An RN is 20,000 I'm sorry. I think it's 20,000 you only need 12 in an RG. So if so there's already in, we're already zoned for infill. Why you're picking on the RG, when we're already, you could have the greatest lot coverage and then it really feels like everybody else can have their large lots, and we'll just keep densifying the RG. You say students want to live here because it's close to campus. This is one of the oldest neighborhoods in in Amherst. We don't want to live here because we can walk to town. We like being, you know, we have a very small footprint, my backyard is probably smaller than your front yard, and I walk into town every day everybody here walks into town every day. We're again, living the way everyone, we have, you know, a lot of smaller houses, we have the greatest lot coverage, the smallest lots the greatest lot coverage of any residential district in Amherst. We walk into town, we walk all the time we walk places I mean Pam walks to town meeting. I mean to the council meeting every week, every other week. So, I don't understand why the, and the reality is, as you change the zoning and allow for more infill. This is consistently student housing. They are, and again, this 98 fearing street, they could be, I think they could make $24,000 a month on what they have on what they are planning to build there. And there was no pretending that this was for family this was for workforce. This is what is going to get built here. And, you know, again, people are not, you know, people love their neighborhood, and they're not going to leave. So that we, you know, it can become an extension of UMass housing and we're already have, and people haven't objected to it you know there's eight, there's two dorms with 800 students opening at the corner of Lincoln and Mass Ave. But this is a neighborhood that people love many people have lived here for 3040 50 years, and to keep read to try and rezone it so it becomes an extension of, you know, UMass housing and so that people in that you know who live in town, feel that they have to leave I don't see what it's accomplishing. And again, I would suggest that we look at the zoning for the RG, and do that in many, you know, more districts in town if we're really committed to, you know, small lots and infill and small houses. Thank you, Jennifer, Shalini. So, need when you said that, you know, like the design element is really important in and they're like unintended consequences. So, to me that is like okay that's a problem to solve like. And we are hiring a designer now is that designer going to be helping with just the downtown area or would be creating the design standards for other RG and neighboring areas as well. The focus of the design centers was downtown and, you know, perhaps adjacent areas so it could be, you know, the thought would be that it could have maybe like three kind of design typologies or areas that looks at but I wouldn't necessarily get into infill design standards and so, I think that maybe we could take elements of what that came up with and apply it but you know it wouldn't be essentially an infill design standard so the planning board. It was just sent around that you know South Bend in Indiana came up with what was the catalog from the 1950s they took two years to develop but they came up with a catalog of infill design designs for you know one to three or one to four unit buildings and essentially the developer and you chose that then it's a different, it might be a little bit easier permitting than if you were going to do something on your own and they actually, you know, have the architectural plans elevations and everything and they're really trying. It's, you know, in some ways you could say it's prescriptive at the other, on the other top, you know, on the other hand you could say wow, you know what you're going to get and if you really want that infill they already are giving it to you. So that's how we work. A few other places are kind of going that route but the design standards we're looking at we're really about, you know, village centers and you know, say, secondary streets and those village centers are downtown and then not really necessarily residential infill. Okay, so that's one thing to keep in mind that as we look at making changes that we're also looking at how does that fit into that particular neighborhood. The other thing I was going to say is that can we focus on workforce housing. And I can share the report where New Hampshire State had a bill or the state level I believe for workforce housing. And they did a report in 10 years like what was the case studies or what did they learn and what would it change about creating. So, you know, is there a way for us not, it's not about like we don't want student housing where we want but can we just focus on workforce housing and what would it take to build more workforce housing. So that was my question and then just the comment about make all of Amherst RG. I don't think that's fair because I gave up the privilege of walking and we literally when we moved from Shootsbury to Amherst we first wanted to live closer to town so that we could walk to the cafes and have that Amherst cinema. But, but we weren't finding the kind of space we wanted so we gave up the walkability for the trees and the land that we have around here. But that being said, I do agree with what Pat and Madi Jo had proposed which was actually opening and it wasn't just focusing on the downtown village centers it was talking about opening one level up across the town so I'm in favor of having more density in my neighborhood is all I'm saying. Thank you. I'm not seeing any other hands and we have a couple more things on the agenda this is obviously the start of a conversation. We will hopefully or maybe or maybe not get to a set of potential recommendations to the council. I think just being able to talk about our own thoughts and all is is helpful for the committee as it does its own work to so I will continue to try and get conversations like this on agendas. Shalini and then Nathan. Shalini mentioned, you know, can we say require or limit, you know, restrict housing to, you know, save non students of workforce housing and I think it's a tricky, it's a tricky topic. There's issues of fair housing, you know, students aren't a protected class and so the planning board has asked that to just because the market demand, you know, so I think students bring so much to the town but in terms of when we talk about housing, you know, they bring the ability to pay more per bedroom per square foot and there's a really high demand for housing. And so, I mean I do think that is something that's worth researching you know it are there ways we can incentivize development of different housing types to encourage, you know, different end users and so, you know, I don't have an answer for that but it is as you know being talked about I was going to say that just, you know, the governor has a pretty strong vision for housing and is hoping to come out with you know a plan and some ideas and so I think, you know, they've already you know there's a few things online but the housing trust has been looking at that saying okay well what kind of guidance could we get from the state level in terms of housing or zoning or other strategies and so we're hopeful that in months there might be some more information in terms of where they're going whether that state level policy or regulations or, you know, other other things in terms of say programs or funding and so, you know, the trust is trying to, you know, keep up to date with that as well because it may be some some interesting ideas. Yeah and I think along with that what I've been also reading and how they're strung down and other websites is to proactively nurture developers who are who specialize in let's say tiny home neighborhoods because generally speaking tiny homes is not going to be as comfortable as building, you know, multiple units, building so that's what draws most of the people but but there are developers who like to develop, you know, like I know that the pushmen area is still available owned by and she's willing to, if she if it can be worked if someone can work with her to make that into tiny homes and for starter homes for people so all I'm saying and I don't know where she's going I'm not promising on a behalf or anything I've just heard to say that but I just feel that they might be developers out there and instead of waiting for them to come to us maybe going to them and saying okay what do you need to make this happen like what sort of zoning would make this appealing for you to develop or what support do you need to act proactively cultivating developers. Maybe Keith Ferries from Wayfinder is he seems like he has a lot of experience talking to him like what you know what can we do and what sort of developers can we invite into town or locally to build that so that's one thing I wanted to say and the other thing I wanted to say like for us as CRC I think again we we tend to jump into solutions but I think just us as a committee even agreeing to like I think we went into what we think and that's great as a starting point just our thoughts, but I think as we move forward just thinking about what we've been hearing as what are the parties for a town because that's what we can relate to. I mean we have a comprehensive housing policy so that does lay out our priorities to some extent so maybe we as Dave was saying maybe we start there and say out of this as a committee now in this council what are our priorities and then we figure out what are the challenges to that and then what are some solutions because I feel right now we are like a lot of like blocking and, you know, pushing and blocking and it's kind of random which is what it was meant to be, but I think in the next meeting if we can come to some consensus as a committee like we feel really compelled to offer this is our goal and this is our vision, and now let's talk about challenges and solutions. Thank you, Shalini. Pam, you had your hand up and then you put it down. Okay. No problem. So we're going to move on. Thank you all. We are going to, I'm going to nix the engagement report today I am going to try and do some regulations but I'm going to start with general public comment so we know how long we have for regulations so I just wanted to let Rob and john know that depending on how long public comment takes, I do intend to go back to the rental regulations, if we can. So we're opening up to general public comment on matters within the jurisdiction of CRC for up to three minutes if you would like to make public comment at this time please raise your hand. We have one hand raised so we will recognize them. Athena, can you allow Dorothy Pam to speak and Dorothy when you're in please state your name where you live and make a comment. Hello, can you hear me. Yes. Okay, Dorothy Pam 229 Amity Street. Just a comment about tiny homes I've been watching some of the TV shows, but I have to say that there is a problem in cold climates, where we have to spend inside because I've seen some of them with most incredibly clever uses of space, where you pull out things but you can't stand up and walk around. We spent half the year inside the house. We can have smaller homes. Okay, the not so big house movement, which comes out the arts and crafts movement is a really great movement but it's it's more space than a traditional tiny home. So, I, that's why I'm worried about places that have not enough room for people to move around and interaction, because just think of this last winter how many, how many months did you spend in the house and it was a lot of time. But I do think that we can have smaller lots we can have smaller homes. But we, I think that Nate was really talking some stuff I like to hear about getting some of these design issues clarified and straightened out so that people have a clear idea of what it is we're looking for, and that we can have change without losing everything. Okay, so kind of like organized change. That's what I have to say today, but thank you so much for having this discussion and, you know, I probably I go with Pat that the land donated possibly donated from Amherst College is part of a possible solution. I think that is not the big A affordable which means but more accessible like workforce generally needs a subsidy of some sort, because market forces make the housing too expensive. So we have to find some way so that the, all the cost does not have to be bought by the person who owns the house. And I think that we can do that. You know, we've got a good town we've got some great institutions, I think that we can actually put our mind to it and figure out how we can do that and create housing which is a workforce housing family housing mixture I I like own a mixture of owner and rental, because that allows more independence in some ways for many people. But that's the future. Thank you. Thank you Dorothy, we have one other hand so Sam M please come in and unmute state your name and where you live and make your comment. Can you hear me. Yes. I just have a general comment. I tuned in because there was a interesting as well. My general comment is it's clear from listening just to this meeting, the members and also from community members. I have different opinions out there, and I would advocate that it's in the best interest of all to not rush to decisions, but rather to really recognize the magnitude and the implications of any particular decisions related to zoning housing and to take your time. And that could be more than one cycle of election year or whatever, because once changes are made, they're permanent, and people may live in a particular neighborhood or area for 3540 years. So, that's my my comment, more information, more time more reaching across the people who might think differently may wind up coming up with a more amenable solution for all, while still achieving the goals so that's my better and an example, the way with that related to rental, I attended the outreach session that you held and thank you for holding out for Landlord's an example of this would be depending on when this new rental bylaws implemented if it is implemented an example would be the permitting process is scheduled to take place in a June 15 and a June 30. It's already may it's already April. Not everyone who is not a renter or not a landlord may not be aware that leases don't just pop up two weeks before a permitting process there's a need to find potential new tenants, well in advance of any particular deadline. And so when changes pop up very suddenly in a particular cycle. Things may already be in place for the renters and landlords and in that regard my advocacy would be to not implement any particular rental bylaw changes this June. If they're advocated because that's a very short time cycle for people to, there's no time to adapt necessarily and what happens if somebody has an existing lease and something gets tagged. Then what do landlords do they have to pay for a new place until they're allowed to rent that's what the losses. So again, my advocacy would be to take the time, get it right. And not be hide, I guess, to urge a comment up with a decision urgent manner, but actually hear from the other stakeholders and members to try to reach an ideal solution so I'd advocate that you hold off any bylaw through the following year phase it in. Thanks for listening and I appreciate you holding the public comment session I understand you're extremely busy, but thanks. Thank you Sam. With that, there are no other hands. So we are going to close public comment at this time we're going to move on to the residential rental bylaw regulations. We're going to spend about 10 minutes on this maybe a little bit less. Pam you've got your hand up. You're muted. Thank you. Looks like Dorothy Pam still has her hand up perhaps she wanted to make another comment I don't know. I don't think so I think that's just lingering and our public comments are just one per person per time frame under the rules to with that I'm going to share my screen for the regulations. And I have it to write where we said we would start. So the changes here I tried to clear up everything above start review here is stuff that we talked about and did the change but I thought I'd show it as a change but we talked about it and maybe changed it in the meeting, or things like that. So what I'm going to show is all the proposals. I was told to fix some stuff, but then I'll when we get down to a big section that's added I'll talk about that and why that just got added for talking and some history but we're on the number of units inspected on regulations. So some of these changes, you'll see a 25 went to 20% that was, that was a new change made to correspond to the new five year. Kermit inspection requirement. And so, you know, Rob had talked about up here. In the inspections of five year every five years each residential property is inspected. And so if we go to the five year inspection, it would make sense that for the large number of the large apartment complexes that have higher than 25 units the goal is to make sure that all the units are inspected within that five year period, which means you need to have a minimum of 20% not 25%. So that was the basis for thinking of the changing of trying to keep things slightly consistent between that there any other changes comments on number two and then we'll move to inspection standards Pam. Yeah, thank you on exactly that point. We have a tendency to say something like not less than and my poor brain has to sit there and cogitate what not less than X means why can't we say, you know, at least, at least 20% get inspected I really there are four or five examples of that throughout this document. And I'm just offering this suggestion because it's, it's awkward to try to calculate, not less than maybe we just highlight it and come back. The number the number is not even the number is not even the issue but it should say 20 right. Yeah, I just realized I fixed the number but not the written word. So I will highlight this and see if I can come up with a better wording. Yeah. Thank you. Anything else for number of units inspected. None inspection standards the only proposed change was the proposal by Rob to remove the assessor's thing which I think was also removed higher up in the application section to. There's another section we had this wording that the two weeks ago we were okay removing Pam. In, in letter D. That right. No, excuse me, must be in section E. We say that you have to keep the records on file for five years well we just extended this, the period of inspection to five years so we really need seven years I mean you need to be able to look back at the previous round to understand what the numbers were, we need, we need a longer period. I don't know what an appropriate number is seven was what I was going to suggest when you pointed out that inconsistency. That sounds like a plan. Inspection checklist. So Rob added the comment is just a holding of a link to that CMR so people could go and read it if they wanted to. Rob added some language of applicable criteria of the state building code and fire regulations. Town of Amherst zoning and general bylaw standards so I think he's just including more than just the CMR into what they should inspect Pam. We'll move on failed inspections. There were no real big changes if anyone wants changes to failed inspections. If not, we'll move on to our discussion on energy efficiency standards. I can't get my hand up fast enough sorry. Just works to I noticed that. In here I tried to do sort of a line by line of what the process would be. You'd have a regular inspection I was trying to make some kind of connection between the number of inspections that would be required and and are possible or to fees at some point. And I'm well aware of the fact that that people are worried that we would be charging for a follow up inspection or a follow up inspection so I was just trying to list them all out. It occurred to me as part of that process that an inspection of a. I'm looking for a potential for some kind of a fee discount and I understand we aren't really talking about fees right now, but if there's a fee discount if you in fact are going to be inspecting 20 units in a building or in fact a building of 24 units that the conditions are probably fairly similar. But in fact they are separate units so we need a we need a unit fee but maybe there is a 20% discount on the cost of it. Because there are so many similarities between them. It's just I'd like to just make a note of that and and move on something we're going to. Yeah, I will add that note to the feed document that we've got going. So we put it in the right spot. Anything else with inspections. So energy efficiency standards Rob recommends deleting the CRC in agreement with that I believe we deleted a number up in the application sections so it's, it seems like we kind of had that conversation but that was to what we ask for not, are we going to have standards themselves. I see nods about general agreement to deleting them. If that's the case I will make the appropriate deletion in the bylaw to. There are, there are a couple of items that I think people felt relatively comfortable with is sort of checklist items and I don't remember where we cover that but I think it's not. I think it's not right here in the section. It's application requirements and I think we ended up deleting all of them, because it's not here. I'd like to insert some I mean I think if if I'm, if I'm not mistaken. The climate committee, I think is trying to get a handle on some statistics. And if, if we can ask, you know, what is the fuel source for your property properties fuel sources of is, you know, are we 100% electric in town or are we 10% in second town. There are a couple other ones that were just sort of check a box that I think are usable data, not just, you know, anyway, I would be happy to supply that list again. So, Jennifer, and then I'll pretend my hands up. I thought there was something about like we were going to ask how many, if they had solar panels or there were, I thought that that what we had deleted most of it there were still a couple of questions, you know that were easy and not burdensome to answer. But I don't know if we should go look at that section. I'll go back to the prior draft, but, and the minutes from that meeting because that was the meeting two weeks ago we should look at those minutes. My notes would be in the draft. I know we were going to delete a lot I think in the end we decided to delete them all because even the ones that and Rob might have a better handle even the ones that Pam just mentioned like fuel source are findable somewhere else and so there weren't really any that were on that list that we don't have data on, but Rob. Yeah, I was just going to mention that when we talked about this before I reminded everyone that, you know, some of these items, and it may not be capturing everything that Pam's thinking of but gross square footage fuel type types of fuel systems number of rooms is all information that's currently available through our assessors records and are, you know, as a result of inspections of those homes over the years. So, you know that's available and something like solar installation is available through permit records. So there's ways to get this information. Probably as accurate as we would get it any other way you know if we were to, if we were to have a check off box on the rental permit application, and somebody checks off boil for heat it doesn't necessarily mean that they also don't have a mini split serving in the home. So there's dual fuel usage is out there, which is becoming pretty common now, but you know some baseline information is already available in the assessors records today if anyone wanted that for some purpose. Thank you. Yeah, I could be convinced to not. So it sounds like we're in agreement to delete energy efficiency standards. And what I will convey to ECAC was it was that part of it was mixing two different things and so a separate bylaw seemed a cleaner way to do some of that then putting it just in rental. And then the other part was the, the, we talked about it more with application requirements more of a difficulty in trying to streamline the application so it's not onerous was one of the other things we talked about but I will at least communicate to ECAC or Anna, who is our liaison to ECAC these discussion discussions because they've been interested in it. One more thing. Yeah, let's see if we can get through C and then we'll put our start here at D for next week. C was just some more types of management, what management plans would include and Rob added parking management and complain and violation management. Pam. Yes, thank you. We have snow ice and obstacle removal. But we have a new going. We haven't changed it yet, but I'll make a note that we need to match it. Yeah, I think, I think I'd like to see rather than compliant and violation management, it would be good to have it complaint and violation management. Oh, that might have been what it was supposed to be. And I, and I kind of asked what is this. I think it was probably just a switched thing. So I'm, I'm asking for myself under a basic management plan. Is this a list of how we will pursue complaints and violations how we will manage complaints and violations. That number six is. Yes. I think. Yeah, Shalini. I just to link it back to the data we collected that most of the residents didn't know who to complain to. So, most, I think most of the tenants knew who to complain to, which also should be made clear, but I don't know this. This is, does this in some way help the neighbors to know if they notice some violation. And who to complain to Rob. Do you happen to know whether a plan that includes how you're managing complaints would include ways to notify non tenants of how to complain to management. Yeah, so that's what we call the complaint response plan in our land use permits and they become pretty common request and part of the management plan, even though they may not be specified in a list like this. And that's where the property manager the owner will list their emergency contact. And, you know, back when we were able to display that information on our website that information was available. And the other way to get it is through the rental permit itself will have the agent and a contact contact number that would be available to anybody to use. Great, thank you. And also regarding trash I think the other thing that came up in the responses was that often the tenants don't know what's included and what's not included. So it's just making sure that that's clarified. Thank you, Pam. You're good. Okay, we're going to stop this review again. I just before I just want to point people out to an appeals Rob had added a, oh we should have regulations for appeals and had nothing under it. I drafted some stuff under it the BLC is aware that they would handle the appeals, the BLC has this draft of these regulations, and they are they were had thought they'd take it up tonight at their meeting. But they've told me that they're planning on taking it up on the sixth at their meeting, which happens to be a CRC meeting and we overlap on meetings. I'm going to work with Marion to see but I'm hoping I've pointed this section out completely to them and said we would really like feedback on my draft I actually pulled it from I think the ZBA regulations. And they're appeals process so I didn't make it up out of thin air but I wanted to point it out is it's like completely newly drafted, but the BLC who would handle the appeals is aware of it and hopefully we'll have some feedback from them. In two meetings or so not at our next meeting because they won't have conversed by our next meeting but that's why there's a lot of red there that people haven't seen before. And with that, we're going to go back to next agenda preview, have people had time to think about the request that Pam and Jennifer brought Jennifer. And, you know, we weren't trying to be mysterious just to give a little context that there were some property managers and landlords that they seem to be particularly that wanted to have a conversation with the CRC and there seem to be particular concerns about the inspection process. So that. And we're just relaying this request. Mandy that would be, and that would be a second conversation with them which I'm not saying is necessarily a bad thing but we have met with them with the management and stuff like that. Yeah, I appreciate the that you're that you've dared it down to inspection process so I think my thought would be invite them to a meeting a future meeting. It's looking more and more likely that we won't finish this at all until May to get some recommendation to the Council. I would not want them there until we've made it through all of the regulations and sort of have a document right that we've made it through all the changes from all of the last listening sessions because we're still trying to make it through from the last set. So, given we have two meetings in April one next week and one I believe the 27th. If my date is right is it the 27th and not the 20th because of. Yeah. Yeah. And so we have time next week on the agenda, or we will if, if the, the, we can't obviously make any decisions but it is the second night of Passover and on the first night of Passover was the zoning bylaw our continued hearing is set for on the zoning bylaw changes. The planning boards was going to be on the fifth but it's the first night of Passover they're going to open their meeting and the plan is to immediately continue it to their next planning board meeting. And Pam Rooney has suggested that maybe we want to do the same thing. We can't talk about it now, but the agenda will then for to plan for that potentiality the agenda is going to have a lot more than just the hearing on it. In case that's what this committee wants to do, based on second night of Passover and still waiting on planning board stuff. A new draft that is a working draft will be out. Not a continuing working draft will be out tomorrow it will not probably be exactly what is presented. The next time there's a presentation on it, because there's still some language issues that might crop up. But, but, but the bulk of the big changes can be in a packet tomorrow afternoon for for browsing for that bylaw. So next week's meeting will look very similar to this one, but I think I'm going to push more on residential rental engagement report regulations bylaw to trying and and and fees. I hope to get fees on, and then we'll see if I can put new sense on to. But so that's sort of where I'm sitting with agendas, which means if we do this week, we're looking at may at the main meeting, if we put this on, which might be logical for people to sit with the thing, and then maybe we can get a recommendation to the council by the end of May. Why is it not possible to talk about a hearing being being pushed forward. It would, you know, somebody has to weigh in just to see if we're going to if we're going to delay it or if we're going to proceed that evening why not just say it now. So, so two reasons, because we would be deliberating on it and it's not on our agenda. Number one, and you can't actually continue it until you've reopened the hearing number two you can't make that decision, but I would worry about which is why I'm trying to be as open as possible and saying that motion is coming. And that's why the agenda will have everything on it. The committee can make the full decision but not make making that decision outside of the hearing itself, while it's not on our agenda concerns me with open meeting law issues. I would think we're just being proactive. It just concerns me so, so we're operating under an assumption that something may happen, which is why the agenda will have more than just the hearing on it. But if the hearing is not continued it will just be the hearing and will drop most of the rest of the stuff. Sounds like a plan. Any other questions on agendas or potential going future stuff. Seeing none. I don't have any unanticipated items. Does anyone else. Then we are adjourned at 639. Thank you, John. Thank you Dave. Thank you Rob. Thank you Chris is already gone. Thank you Athena for taking your minute make minutes today. We appreciate everyone. I'll have an agenda posted tomorrow. But Pat you're talking but you're on mute. I was making a personal connection I wanted to meet with Jennifer to have coffee. Let's call each other or text. Nothing to do with this committee.