 Okay, Mr. Meadows, the meeting is going at six o'clock. You have your quorum, you're good to go. Thank you very much. The appointed hour of six o'clock, having been reached, I welcome everyone to this meeting of the Emersonic Board of Appeals. My name is Craig Meadows at the request of Steve Judge, Chair of the Emersonic Board of Appeals, who is unable to make tonight's meeting. I call this meeting to order as the acting chair. Pursuant to chapter 20 of the Acts of 2021 and extended again by chapter two of the Acts of 2023, this meeting will be conducted via remote means. Members of the public who wish to access the meeting may do so via Zoom or by 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 via technological means. Additionally, the meeting recordings may be viewed via the town of Amherst YouTube channel and ZBA webpage. Please indicate you wish to make a comment by clicking the raised hand button when the comment is solicited. If you have joined the Zoom meeting by using a telephone, please indicate you wish to make a comment by pressing the star nine on your phone. When called on, please identify yourself by saying your full name and address and put yourself back into mute when finished speaking. Residents can express their views for up to three minutes or at the discretion of the Zoning Board of Appeals Chair. If a speaker does not comply with these guidelines or exceeds their lot of time, their participation will be disconnected from the meeting. In accordance to the provisions of Mass Journal Law chapter 40A and Article 10, Special Permit Granting Authority of the Amherst Zoning Board of Appeals bylaws, this public meeting has been duly advertised and notice thereof has been posted and mailed to parties at interest. We'll begin with a roll call of the regular members of the ZBA. I am Craig Meadows, I'm here. Phillip White. Present. Our associate ZBA members, Hilda Greenbaum. Yeah. Sarah Marshall. Here. Also in attendance are Christine Brestop, Planning Director, Rob Mora, Building Commissioner, and other staff, as you see on the call. The Zoning Board of Appeals is a quasi-judicial body that operates under the authority of chapter 48 of the General Laws of the Commonwealth for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, convenience, and general welfare of the inhabitants of the town of Amherst. One of the most important elements of the Amherst Zoning bylaw is section 10.38. Specific findings from this section must be made for all of our decisions. All hearings and meetings are open to the public and are recorded by the town staff. The procedure is as follows. The petitioner presents the application to the board during the hearing and after which the board will ask questions for clarification and additional comment and information. After the board has completed his questions, the board will seek public input. The public speaks with the permission of the chair. If a member of the public wishes to speak, they should indicate so by using the raised hand function on their screen. The chair with the assistance of the staff will call upon people who wish to speak. When you are recognized, present your name and address to the board for the record. All questions and comments must be addressed to the board. The board will normally hold public hearings where information about the project and input for the project is gathered, following the public meeting for each. The public meeting portion is when the board liberates and is generally not an opportunity for public comment. If the board feels it has enough information and time, it will decide upon the application tonight. Each petition heard by the board is distinct and evaluated on its own merits and the board is not ruled by president. Statutorily, for a special permit, the board has 90 days from the close of the hearing to file a decision. For a variance, the board has 100 days from the date of the filing to file this decision. No decision is final until the written decision is signed by the sitting board members and is filed in the town clerk's office. Once the decision is filed for the town clerk, there is a 20-day appeal period for an agreed party to contest the decision with the relevant judicial body in Superior Court. After the appeal period, the permit must be recorded at the Registry of Deeds to take effect. Tonight's agenda. There'll be a roll call, minutes, no minutes to approve for tonight's meeting, public hearing, ZBA FY 2024-09, town of Amherst, requests for a special permit under section 3.231 of the zoning by-law to construct a portion of a three-story, 105, 750, 105,750 gross square foot school building in a 20-foot by 27 outdoor pavilion in the flood-prone conservancy, FPC District, at Southeast Street, map 15A, partial 47, FPC Zoning District. There'll be a public meeting, discussion, general public comment period, and other business not anticipated within 48 hours followed by adjournment. The first order of business tonight is ZBA FY 2024-09, town of Amherst, 70 Southeast Street. Members sitting in this panel are myself, Mr. White, Ms. Greenbaum, Ms. Marshall, are there any disclosures? Ms. Marshall? Yes, I filed a disclosure of an appearance of, or a possible appearance of conflict of interest because I was elected to the Amherst School Committee and I am sitting on that committee as of January 2nd. And they, of course, will be operating this building once it's built as a school. But this is my first term and I've had no official involvement in the design or in this project at all. And I can be objective about this. And I certainly have no actual financial or any other conflict. And you talked with the States Ethics Committee? I did, I stopped, talked to an attorney at the State Ethics Commission. Yes, and I filed the disclosure with the town clerk. Very good, thank you. The following submissions have been received by the town staff. ZBA FY 2024-09 application form, ZBA FY 2024-09 project narrative, stormwater report, floodplain conservancy prepared by Horsley Witten Group, Inc. dated December 2023, ZBA FY 2024-09 site plans prepared by Dinesco Design, dated November 22, 2023. ZBA FY 2024-09 lighting and planting plans prepared by Dinesco Design, dated November 22nd, 2023. Building and the elevations and renderings prepared by Dinesco Design, dated December 11th, 2023. There was no site visit scheduled for this petition and the applicant currently is in the site plan review public hearing process with the planning board. Just a general disclaimer, the jurisdiction of the zoning board for this petition does not involve permitting the use. The ZBA is only permitting the applicant's ability to construct within the floodplain conservancy district. In this case, the only structures will be a portion of the new elementary school and a large pavilion structure. The ZBA will also be making a footnote, a finding of table three dimensional regulations to allow the school to exceed the maximum height of 20 feet and the number of floors, one story. Who is representing the applicant in this matter? Pam, is there somebody? There is, Tim Cooper and I'm about to bring him over. Hi, Tim. Hi, good evening, thank you. I should note that we have a couple other members of the team in the audience. Rick Rice from Dinesco Design, I believe Janet Bernardo from Orsley Wooden Group and possibly Steve Stannish and Bill Brown, who is our landscape marketer. Could you please state your name and address, please? My name is Tim Cooper with Dinesco Design. I live in the Swamscott. And why don't we have the other members who are going to be speaking? They're coming over, Craig. Yes. Tim, I don't see Steve Stannish. There is somebody, Brian Bacon. Are they with you? Brian Bacon is with Brownstead and our landscape architect and Janet is nodding that Steve Stannish is not here. So as she is representing our civil engineer. Okay, so should Brian Bacon come over as well? Sure. At this time? Okay. Okay, when is your turn to speak? If you could please state your name and address. Tim, I assume you're going first. I am going first if I may share my screen. I have a presentation if that's how. Yeah, please. Second. So as you alluded to in your opening, we are here to apply for a special permit to build in the Flip Room Conservancy. We have a other couple of permits that are before the planning board. And I was just gonna spend a couple of minutes not to go through the process of where we are in the schedule and what we have done to this point. I won't go through the three years of meetings and slides and meet design that we've done, but just to get you up to sort of give some context of why we are before you asking for this special permit. The design team was assembled and the process began in December of 2021. Since that time, the school building committee has been meeting, give or take monthly at some intervals more or less, but reviewing and designing the project. The site selection, there are two sites available, the Wildwood Elementary School and the Fort River, both were viable sites, but there were no other sites available in town and either side have selected what the new building would or renovation would have to be done while the operating school was continued on site. There was no swing space and there used to be no swing space available to move the kids to simplify the construction process. Schematic design was complete in March of 23 and the project funding agreement was agreed by the town council and a townwide vote in May of 2023. So at that point, the basics of the project in terms of site selection, the option, the number of stories, the basic configuration of the building were fairly well set. Moving on to 2024, there is an early site package. The construction will actually begin that is simply consists of putting up the construction face fence clearing this other portion of the site where the building will be erected and doing some sort of soil improvements to prepare for construction. In July of this year, the building itself and its final design state will go out to bid. Construction will begin in September of this year and the new school will open in fall of 2026 and in the fall after it opens. The existing school will be demolished and the balance of the site will be completed. So these are the two sites that were considered. They both have their own unique attributes and we like to think that we did our best to consider all of them. The Wildwood site is considerably smaller than the Fort River site. It's about 14 acres with a lot of it. Use of it becomes difficult because there are some steep gradient, some steep grades and portions of the site adjacent to the existing middle school and up the hill to the east. In addition to the small site, which would mean that you would have to build a compact footprint for the new building, there is only one feasible way to get onto strong street. So all traffic, buses, cars, when the school is eventually built and construction vehicles, ordinarily during construction would have to go through the same exit for the entire two-year construction process. The Fort River site is much larger but has its own issues including the flood prone conservancy which we are here to talk about tonight. Various other regulatory setbacks for the Fort River and Farringbrook to the south and some wetland resource areas scattered around this area. So we went through each site, looked at a new building. We looked at a renovation addition to meet the program of the school as determined through many meetings with the school itself. And then we did this for both sites, Fort River and Wildwood. We tested options that were two stories, three stories. Given the size of the program, one story options were not strongly considered. That would be even larger than the existing footprints of the Fort River and Wildwood buildings which is 82,000 square feet and the size and sprawling nature of those buildings are not conducive to modern education, left a lot of spaces without light or access to ventilation, which is part of the reason that this building is being replaced in the first place. Here's just some of the analysis that was done three years ago at this point of what was going to be available on the Fort River site. And our understanding of the setbacks and constraints have evolved over the years of the design process. The FEMA floodplain has actually been redefined in the time that we have been working on this project. These drawings show a river setback at the Farang Bark and it's an intermittent flowing body of water. So the setback is a little bit reduced. And then we even looked at in some detail before the site was selected what construction would mean to the skid kids, staff and the users of the site during the two year construction process. For a renovation addition at Fort River, the shaded areas would alternately be available to the contractor and the school and then the parking lot completed at a later point. A similar sort of process of shifting around the site of the construction and the school use would happen with new construction with a little bit more space given to the school during the construction process. Obviously a new building adjacent to an existing school is a little less disruptive than a renovation in addition. And we did similar exercises for the Wildwood site which proved just how tight it would be during those two years of construction all of those vehicles would have to go through and they'd want to exit to Strong Street and there would be very limited parking once the area for construction was laid down. So it's not a fully developed analysis but it was pretty clear that alternate offsite parking would probably have to be used at some or a majority of the construction phase. And at the end of that analysis of both sites it was determined by the school building committee that the Fort River site is where the project should go for the reasons of minimal disruption to the students when the project is built, multiple access to streets to mitigate traffic concerns and the added benefits of the Fort River site. There is room to develop athletic fields which would be a community asset beyond the school itself. This is a plan of the existing school, the 82,000 gross square foot single story building shown here and then around it is parking for about 175 cars. Partscape play space to the north and relay structures to the east along the building in various locations. And then there is a softball field and multi-use fields that are used for soccer and ultimate frisbee to the east and south of the building. This is what we are proposing to replace the existing school. This is a three-storey building south of the existing building with surrounded by a bus and service drop-off loop that will enter the site from the existing entrance. Buses, fans, service vehicles will loop around and egress at that same entrance. Parents and staff will use the north entrance which will be wide into three lanes, one entering the site and two leaving. And as parents are dropping off, they will circle through the parking lot and drop off at the front door which is adjacent to both the north and south drop-offs here. The main entrance is on the west. There is a second primary entrance off of the bus loop to the south. And then surrounding the building are play areas. There is a structured play area to the north just off of the cafeteria. This has a resilient port and play surface which is soft for kids to play on. And then to the north and east, there are asphalt play surfaces with games painted on site and basketball courts, two half-cores in the circle here and two full courts to the east of the building. In addition to the playground, there are outdoor learning spaces. One is the pavilion which is part of this special permit in this location. It's a roof structure that will cover a class of students on the outsides if they can have a full class meeting outside. Adjacent to that pavilion, there are gardens, planter gardens and pollinator gardens that we have discussed with the educators and will be woven into the curriculum. There is also a floor garden to these which is saplings and an opportunity for the kids to interact with nature and forest floor. Throughout the site, there are stormwater management features to control the ground water and stormwater on the site. One of the major concerns about building on the site in the first place was the existing high water and to mitigate that, we have elevated the first floor of the new building two feet above the existing first floor and underneath the building, there is subslab drainage and porous fill layer that will allow water to drain and move away from the building. The athletic fields to the north of the building are also raised above the existing grade with subsurface drainage and porous fill that will allow rainwater to filter through and drain and prevent capillary action of surface water from getting to the play surface. So that these athletic fields should be usable more of the year, will be usable more of the year than the existing fields at the foreverter site, which are frequently muddy and covered in water. And then the red line that is moving through the site is the extent of the flood prone conservancy to the west of that line is residential village center zone. And then to the east is the flood prone conservancy. You can see the three-story classroom section of the building here, east of the line, as I mentioned before, the pavilion. So these are just some views of the building and what it will look like. The view on top is approaching from the bus drop off loop just as you pass the storage building and the building on the bottom of the page is looking from the north as you've passed the building that the parent drop off loop. Some closer views from the bus drop off loop on the north, looking at the main entrance of the building. The masking of the building actually steps down as you get to the west end where people approach. So there's a single-story entrance to the building at the west end. And as it steps up to the cafeteria, gymnasium, and library and eventually the classroom. So there's three-story building. Looking from the north on the lower image here, you can see the cafeteria where my cursor is with the library above it, the entrance at the west end of the building. And as you get past the multifunction spaces in the building, the classroom building, three stories is to the west. Here is a rendering of the outdoor education pavilion. The final specification for this has not been seen but this is representative of what it will be. It'll be an open structure with a roof and it's included in the presentation. We also have some elevations to show the building. The predominant exterior material is brick masonry with various colors with accent panels at the windows and large expanses of curtain wall at the cafeteria and media center. These are some of the materials that we'll be using, the field masonry and the accent colors with final colors to be determined within the next few months of meetings. That is our proposal. And if you don't, I would love to know if you have any questions, comments. I guess I'll just start it out by asking, I assume you're doing ground source heat pumps. Do you know where the bull holes are gonna be and how many they'll be? Sure, we are doing ground source heat pumps. There is a field of 84 wells south of the building, starts about here. If you can see my cursor, it's the center point of the building and goes east to a little bit past the building. There are 20 foot on center in two directions, 84. They go about 500 feet deep. And the vault where all of the piping is connected is about in this area under just at the end of the drop-off loop where it makes its turn. And then they go to the third floor mechanical room in the center of the building. All of that at the exterior end of this system should essentially be underground and invisible. Likely forever. It is a, that part of the system is low maintenance and carries a 50 year warranty. Right, understood. Are there questions from any of the other members of the board, Sarah? Thanks, Tim. I need somebody to explain to me the purpose of a flood prone conservancy and how this is different from the 100 year flood plain which we're told in the application report has been revised. So does that mean this red line is out of date? Is the concern that there might be standing water on the site that would damage the building? And this is what this storm water. I mean, we have a report that discusses storm water but not like flooding. So I need some explanation about those terms and considerations. Tim, do you want me to take that? Yeah, I was just going to say if Janet is going to explain the flooding part and how we're dealing with much better but the flood-blown conservancy part of it is a definition by the town for the zoning. But with that, hand it over to Janet. My name is Janet Bernardo. I'm a professional civil engineer with the Horsley-Witton Group. We designed the storm water management for the site and we did provide some compensatory flood storage calculations. The 100-year floodplain itself is almost at the edge. The only portion of the site that currently impacts what the FEMA floodplain is near the Outdoor Learning Center to the far right. So there's a small piece that we are impacting and that we will be providing compensatory flood storage for and have discussed that with the Conservation Commission. The district, the town has this zoning district line that we are here because it's your line. And so I am happy to describe the storm water if you want but the reason for the line is the floodplain used to be a little further up but even this line didn't match that line either. So we're abiding by your zoning districts. Thank you. I wonder if that's why Chris has her hand up. Maybe this floodplain, flood prone conservancy. Christine, could you explain that a little further? Sure. There was a flood prone conservancy district established back in the early 70s. It was really before Wetlands Protection Act came about and a lot of the knowledge of no not wanting to fill in floodplains. So the town of Amherst created the flood prone conservancy district. At that time, we did not have Topo for the town as accurate as we have now. We had USGS Topo which was a 10 foot contour and so we were only able to map the flood areas very in a very gross manner and the town did the best it could and it came up with this flood prone conservancy district. So over the course of the last 12 or 13 years we've been working with FEMA and our consultant, AECOM to actually look at where our actual floodplain is. We had old floodplain maps which did not coincide with the FPC district and we were relying on those. Again, those were based on 10 foot contours and now we have new floodplain maps which were adopted by town council and have been accepted by FEMA and those do not comport with this red line. They're much farther. That line is much farther to the east. I don't know if the applicant or the consultants have a map showing where that line is but it is much farther to the east. So it's not contiguous with this red line. This red line is really, I would say an outdated concept and we're hoping eventually to either eliminate the FPC zoning district or have it be contiguous with where the actual 100 year floodplain is but right now we haven't done that so we have to live with the fact that we have this FPC zoning district. So when you see that part of the building is being proposed to be in the FPC district that doesn't mean that part of the building is in the 100 year floodplain. It just means that it is in an area that was shown as a floodplain back in the early 70s and was never changed to be accurate. I think that's- Can I ask a follow up, Mr. Chair? Yes. Thank you. So Chris, so you're saying that this site plan, if the 100 year floodplain or map, whatever you call it, were there on it the building is fully outside? That is correct. And the pavilion? Yes, that is correct. Thank you. Are there any other questions? Are there any more presentations that you have? Excuse me. That is the end of the presentation. Yeah, Hilda? I'm just curious. It's not really relevant but curious why the height is more important in a floodplain area than the footprint in terms of whatever. Why are we concerned about that? Why were they concerned about the height rather than the footprint of this building? Back in 1970. Yeah, you probably don't know the answer. Probably doesn't know. I don't know. Doesn't know. Do you want me to take your guess? Yeah. I think they didn't want buildings to go into this FPC zoning district and so they made the restrictions such that people wouldn't be encouraged to put buildings in there. In fact, there is a prohibition against having residential buildings within the FPC zoning district. In this case, it's not a residential building but in any case, they just didn't want much to go into the FPC. And I think they didn't have a good idea of what it was, where it was, or how it acted. They were in the very beginning stages of understanding that. So you're being asked to agree that the building can be more than one story high and more than 20 feet high so that it matches the rest of the building that's in the RVC zoning district. So I don't really see any reason why this board in 2024 would want to restrict the building to be one story and 20 feet high. Yeah, well, I just wanted to verify in my own mind that this whole thing is irrelevant and really should go be deleted from the bylaw. Ms. Marshall? Yeah, I wonder if the applicant though could articulate some of the reasons why the building either needs to be or even if it didn't need to be, would ideally be stacked three stories and not spread out. I believe there are various benefits from masking it that way. Sure, I mean, there are a lot of things to consider. First of all, this is a school and the distance between people in the school which is important and increases time learning is shorter actually with the three story building the amount of time and distance it takes to go upstairs rather than the same building three times long is shorter. That's one consideration. Two, not to be gross, is cost the ratio of exterior to the area of the building has a big impact on cost because that is in fact the most expensive part of the building and cost unfortunately matters. A small footprint also again helps with cost because there's less foundation and it means that there's less impermeable area outside. So the stormwater management, water infiltration all become easier to manage if the building has a small and footprint. Those are some of and those are the major reasons why it is three stories versus two or one. Thank you. Laura energy efficient, yes. It is that that is the other part of the smaller envelope party. Right. Thank you. If there aren't any further questions from the board we can go into the public meeting. Mr. Meadows, do you want to take public comment? Yes. I'm sorry. I meant to take public comment as opposed to public meeting. Are there any members of the public that are have their hands raised? I don't, oh, I'm sorry. I thought you could see too. I'm sorry. No, you have only one person in the attendees at this time and they do not have their hand raised. Okay. Well, in that case, we will go to the public meeting. Now that we've gone through the public comments which there are none, we will now enter the public meeting portion of the hearing. The public meeting allows for board members to deliberate on the petition before us. No public comment will be accepted and the applicant may only speak if answering questions from the board members or providing further clarification. I'll ask the board members to provide their thoughts and comments and opinions on the petition before us. Are there any comments from the board members? Appears not. Well. Oh, well, of course. Sure. Well, I would just say I'm relieved I'm relieved to know the history of this flood prone conservancy line. It sounds like a relic and we're not we're not going to permit a building that could be damaged or cause problems with water flow with the water table with any fits. Like it sounds like it's really not an issue. It's just an artifact of this zoning map. I do have one for that. I saw that you had a solar PV carports indicated on one of the slides that you showed us, but they're not on the site map. Is there a reason for that? There is an outline shown. I can share my screen again to answer the question. That's okay. So the white line here shows the segments of the PV over the parking lot as they were submitted. Sorry if that was not clear. We do or potentially have, that is part of our ongoing session with the planning board. Since you bring it up at the West end of this one segment is within the setback and we are looking at ways that we can change the layout so that that is no longer the case. But this is the general area of the PV outside. And it's, since we're talking about it, it's in that location so that it is operable on day one and the building complies with the Townsend zero bylaw on the day it opens and avoids the construction and demolition north of the phasing line, just about here. Okay. And you had not considered it over any of the other parking that you've got elongated parking? So that the reason that it is not along of the northern part of the parking lot is because after the school opens and the fall of 2026, the construction crew, the general contractor will need access to build that parking lot and to take down the existing school. So there is no reason in the grand scheme of things why it could not be there and it's arguably a good location. But for it to be serving the school on the day that it opens, it has to be south of the outline. Okay. I'm still trying to understand the tax implications. So I've got a meeting with an energy tax accountant tomorrow. I'll ask a further question of him as opposed to you. He wouldn't be able to answer that better than me. Probably. Okay. Seeing as there are no members have comments we'll move on to the discussion of the conditions. In practice, we will vote on the conditions in block. If any conditions seem to generate a high level of disagreement, they will be singled out and disgust voted upon separately. Let's go through the conditions. Possible conditions of approval one, the project will shall be built and maintained according to the approved plans and application package. Any changes shall be reviewed by the building commissioner to determine if submission to the zoning Board of Appeals is necessary. Said changes may be reviewed and or approved by the zoning Board of Appeals at a public meeting or if changes are significant enough, said changes will require a formal modification of the permit or condition. The approved plans include storm water report, flood-prime conservancy zone prepared by Corsley-Witton Group, dated December, 2023. ZBA FY 2024-09, site plans prepared by Dinesco Design, dated November 22nd, 2023. She 1.0.00, overall site plan prepared by Dinesco Design, dated November 22nd, 2023. She 1.2.01, grade plan. She NE, prepared by Dinesco Design, dated November 22nd, 2023. She 1.2.02, grading plan. She Southeast, prepared by Dinesco Design, dated November 22nd, 2023. She 1.2.03, grading plan. She Southwest, prepared by Dinesco Design, dated November 22nd, 2023. She 1.2.04, grading plan. She Northwest, prepared by Dinesco Design, dated November 22nd, 2023. She 3.1.02, proposed site plan, prepared by Dinesco Design, dated December 11th, 2023. ZBA FY 2024-09, lighting and planting plans prepared by Dinesco Design, dated November 22nd, 2023. She 10.1.03, site plan, prepared site lighting plan, she's been prepared by Dinesco Design, dated November 22nd, 2023. She 10.1.05, site lighting photometric plan, prepared by Dinesco Design, dated November 22nd, 2023. She 1.4.11, planting plan, she Northeast, prepared by Dinesco Design, dated November 22nd, 2023. She 1.4.12, planting plan, she Southeast, prepared by Dinesco Design, dated November 22nd, 2023. She 1.4.13, planting plan, she Southwest, prepared by Dinesco Design, dated November 22nd, 2023. She 1.4.14, planting plan, she Northwest, prepared by Dinesco Design, dated November 22nd, 2023. Second, the most recent order of conditions shall govern the FPC portion of the site at all times. Any updated permits filed with the Conservation Commission shall take priority after the fact. Three, building height and number of storage shall be designed in accordance with the approved building elevations and renderings prepared by Dinesco Design, dated December 11th, 2023. If we are all in agreement for these conditions, I will entertain a motion to approve the list of conditions with edits if needed for ZB FY 2024-09. All moved. Is there a second? Second. Motion has been moved and seconded. Any discussion? This requires a roll call vote. The chair votes aye. Mr. White? Aye. Ms. Greenbaum? Aye. Ms. Marshall? Aye. Very good. The motion passes. We'll now move to the discussion of the findings. We will go through each finding and vote on the findings in block. And here's why I have to do a little adjusting. Section 3.229, in instances where the special permit granting authority issues a special permit in the FPC district, said authority must find that such factors as those listed in section 3.228 above will not appreciably affect the water table or water quality, reduce flood storage capacity or interfere with the natural flow and drainage of the area. Footnote A, requirement may be modified under special permit issued by the special permit granting authority. And actually what I just read should have been under section A, footnote A, but issued by the special permit granting authority authorized to act under the applicable section of this bylaw in applying the criteria established in section 10.395, the special permit granting authority shall consider to be a proposed modification of modified dimensional requirements in the context of the patterns of the same dimensions established by existing buildings and landscape features in the surrounding neighborhood. Or review the proposed construction of the school will exceed one story and 20 feet. Granting this waiver will allow for the school to have a continuous roof line with the rest of the building located in the RVC zoning district. 10.380 and 10.381. Excuse me, Mr. Chair. Yes. Are you gonna run through all of these and then we'll discuss them or? Yes, we're gonna vote on them through block. But we may have points to discuss or issues. If there are any points to discuss, we'll go back and discuss those points. Thank you. 10.380 and 10.381, the proposal is suitably located in the neighborhood in which it is proposed and or the total town as deemed appropriate by the special permit granting authority. The proposal is compatible with the existing uses and other uses permitted by right in the same district. This does not apply to this petition. 10.382, 10.383 and 10.385 and 10.387. The proposal would not constitute a nuisance due to air and water pollution, flood, noise, odor, dust, vibration, lights or visually offensive structure or site features. The proposal would not be a substantial inconvenience or hazard to a butters, vehicles or pedestrians. The proposal reasonably protects the adjoining premises against detrimental or offensive uses on the site, including air and water pollution, flood, noise, odor, dust, vibration, lights or visually offensive structures or site features. The proposal provides convenient and safe vehicular pedestrian movement within the site and in relation to adjacent streets, property or improvements. Board review, the proposed project does not appear to be detrimental to the area or the water resource in regard to pollution. 10.384, adequate and appropriate facilities will be provided for the proper operation of the proposed use. The board does not, this does not apply to this petition. 10.386, the proposal ensures that it is in conformance with the parking and sign regulations, articles seven and eight respectively of this bylaw. The board review does not apply to this petition. 10.387, the proposal provides convenient and safe vehicular and pedestrian movement within the site and in relation to the adjacent streets, property or improvements. If the special permit granting authority deems the proposal likely to have significant adverse effects and traffic patterns, it shall be permitted to require a traffic impact report and the proposal shall comply with section 11.2437 of this bylaw. The proposal provides adequate space for safe pedestrian movement. 10.388, the proposal ensures adequate space for the off street loading and unloading of vehicles, goods, products, materials and equipment incidental to the normal operation of the establishment or use. This does not apply to this petition. 10.389, the proposal provides adequate methods of disposal and or storage for sewage, refuse, recyclables and other waste resulting from the uses permitted or permissible on the site and methods of drainage for surface water. This does not apply to this petition. 10.390, the proposal ensures protection from flood hazard as stated in section 3.228 considering such factors as elevation to building, drainage, adequacy of sewage disposal, erosion and sedimentation control. Equipment location, refuse disposal, storage of buoyant materials, extent of paving, effects of fill, roadways and other encroachments on flood runoff and flow of storage of chemicals and other hazardous substances. The board review, the applicant has demonstrated that they have appropriate flood mitigation factors in place for the proposed structures. The conservation commission further reviewed this and gave their approval during the NOI process. 10.391, the proposal protects to the extent feasible, unique or important natural historic or scenic features The board review, the proposal does not protect the Fort River with the flood and stormwater mitigation that will be in place. I excuse me, does protect the Fort River with the flood and stormwater mitigation that will be in place. 10.392, the proposal provides adequate landscaping including the screening of adjacent residential uses, provision of street trees, landscape islands in the parking lot and a landscape buffer along the street frontage. When a non-residential use adjoins by the residential district, an uninterrupted vegetation buffer shall to the extent feasible be established and maintained between buildings associated with uses under this section and the nearest residential property boundaries where natural undisturbed vegetation already exists on the site prior to the site preparation and clearing the majority of that vegetation may be retained. And included as part of the buffer along with the addition of new plantings, selective removals, other mitigate management of site plantings art as are determined to be necessary to maintaining an effective year round visual screen. Board reviews does not apply to this petition. The proposal provides protection of adjacent properties by minimizing the intrusion of lighting including parking lot or exterior lighting through use of cutoff luminaries, light shields, lowered height of light poles, screening or similar solutions. Except for architectural interior lit signs, all exterior site lighting shall be downcast and shall be directed or shielded to eliminate light trespass onto any street or a budding property and to eliminate direct or reflected glare perceptible to persons on any street or a budding property and sufficient to reduce a viewer's ability to see. All site lighting, including architectural sign and parking lot lighting shall be extinguished outside of these business hours established under an approved site management plan, except for lighting determined to be necessary for the site security and the safety of employees and visitors. For the board review, this proposal does not present any light spillover issues into the neighboring properties. 3.9, 10.394, the proposal avoids to the extent feasible impact on steep slopes, floodplains, scenic views, grade changes and wetlands. For the board review, the site is located in the FPC zoning district. However, the district does not coincide with a 100-year floodplain. The proposal will not be located in the 100-year floodplain. 10.395, the proposal does not create disharmony with respect to the terrain and to the use, scale and architecture of existing buildings in the vicinity which have functional or visual relationship there too. Within the BLBVC, BN, COMOPLI, or PRP districts or any other residential zoning district where the project in question occurs within the boundaries of a National Historic Register district, the special permit granting authority shell if deemed proper, deems the proposal likely to have a significant impact on its surroundings, be permitted to use the design principles and standard set forth in sections 3.2040 and 3.2041. One through nine to be evaluated, to evaluate the design of the proposed architecture and landscape alterations within the BG and about BL districts and for any town project within any district, the provision of section 3.20, design review shall remain in effect. For the board's review, the proposal does not create any disharmony with respect to the surrounding terrain and architecture. 10.396, the proposal provides screening for storage areas, loading docks, dumpsters, roof equipment, utility buildings and similar features. For the board review, this does not apply to this petition. 10.397, the proposal provides adequate recreational facilities, open space and amenities for the proposal's use. For the board review, the proposal has adequate green space and recreational amenities. 10.398, the proposal is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this bylaw and the goal of the master plan board review. The site is in harmony with the goal of improving Amherst's educational facilities. If we are all in agreement with the findings, I would entertain a motion to approve the findings with edits if needed for ZBA FY20-20409. Ms. Marshall, did you have a comment? Well, would you like to move in a second and then we can discuss or? We can do that. Okay. Is there a motion? So moved. Second. A second. Ms. Marshall. Okay. Sure. Ms. Bestrup, did you have a comment or question? I just wanted to suggest that in footnote A, when you have your board review statement, that the finding under that should mention the fact that the building is three stories high and 43 feet. So it will exceed one story and 20 feet, but I think you should mention those two numbers. So everybody is clear that you're granting a special permit to allow 43 feet and three stories. If that's acceptable to the board. Yes. Very good. We'll include that statement as you suggested. Now, Ms. Marshall. Thank you. Maybe Chris can explain why the staff have found so many of these findings not pertinent to us. Is it because we're only dealing with this flood plain, flood prone conservancy bit in the height? I mean, is the planning board dealing with all the others or? You want me to answer that? Yes, please. So yes, the planning board is dealing with all the other things. You're really just dealing with the idea of structures within the FPC zoning district. So you don't really have to deal with lighting or landscaping or any of those other things. Okay. Thank you. At the height of the structure. But you do have to deal with the height of the structure, both stories and the actual height. I'll say this, Mr. Chair, I think you deserve a sip of drink after reading all of that. Thank you, Vern. I thought I was going to have one next to me, but there's nothing there. Okay. The motion has been moved and seconded. Any discussion? If there's no further discussion. This requires a roll call vote. The chair votes aye. Mr. White. Aye. Ms. Greenbaum. Oh, you have your hand up. Ms. Greenbaum. Okay, I got to saw that. Hold it. Did you have a comment? Yeah, I did. I'm just curious why you have to put in all of the verbiage of all of the conditions that we're not dealing with on the 10 point. If that's planning board stuff, why do we have to just include it if it's not relevant? Ms. Bestrup, do you want to answer that? I would say it's, what you normally do, I believe, you go through all of the 10.38 findings and then you discuss whether the project meets or does not meet each one. So I think that's why you did it. I'm not sure. That is what we typically do. Yes. Okay. So that we put everything in the wasn't, all right. It happens every time we go to vote on something like this. All right. You do things differently than I think I used to do, but that's okay. So it's your turn to vote. Hilda. Oh, we voting? Yes. Oh, aye. Okay. Ms. Marshall. Aye. Okay. The motion passes. Are there any final comments from the board? Or the applicant before the motion is made to approve the special permit. Okay. Since there are no comments, I would entertain a motion to approve the special permit, ZBA FY2024-09 for the time of Amherst and to close the public hearing. Is there a motion? I'll move. I'll take one of those as a second. The motion has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Can you tell me who's seconded and who? Hilda seconded. Mr. White. Mr. White moved. Mr. White. Okay. Thank you. This requires a roll call vote. The chair votes aye. Mr. White. Aye. Ms. Greenbaum. Aye. Ms. Marshall. Aye. The motion passes. Congratulations. Thank you. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Thank you. Since Rob is not here, are there any next steps? The next step is to write up the decision. Okay. Which I will help Rob Wachilla to do. Thank you. Okay. Are there any members of the public that wish to comment on matters, not before the board tonight? If there are, please indicate so by raising your hand or by pressing star nine if you're on the telephone. I don't think we've got anyone. Just us. To know what in the attendees, Mr. Meadows. Okay. In that case, is there any other business not anticipated within 20, 40, within 48 hours by members of the board or anyone else? No. Okay. Well, then I would entertain a motion to adjourn. Close the meeting. Is there such a motion? Okay. Ms. Marshall made the motion, held a seconded. The motion is not debatable or requires a roll call vote. The chair votes aye. Mr. White. Aye. Ms. Greenbaum. Aye. Ms. Marshall. Aye. The meeting is adjourned. Thank you all very much. Go watch basketball. You've got time. I'm going to go to bed. That's great. I love your background. Yeah. By the way, yeah, so this, I don't know if you guys are familiar with this, but this is the long room. It's the old library here at Trinity. Yeah. Beautiful. It's about 70 yards from me. It's fabulous. That's nice. It's gorgeous. Are you literally there? Or is that a background? You're literally there. Well, no, I'm not literally there. That's the background, but that's a picture that I took like two days ago. My mug says Trinity College. That one, that's what I was holding on. He is literally in Dublin. Yeah. I'm literally at Trinity College. So. Okay. That's great. All right. Thank you for joining us. My friend, Peter Shea used to love going over there to visit his son when he was attending. I bet. And go to the bars. Well, one thing I found out really quickly and then I'm going to hop off of here is, so I was lucky enough to secure an apartment on campus, this area, because it's been around since like 15 something during the Irish war for independence. Since this was established by Elizabeth the first, they stationed British troops and like tanks here. I saw a picture of literally a British tank outside of this building and my apartment and the apartments here were actually the quarters for British officers. Wow. I was like. Going there. Whoops. I don't think you have to record this. I'm trying to stop recording. Okay.