 All right, that's being recorded. Melissa, your hands raised. Do you have a comment or question? We just didn't know if you guys could hear us. It didn't seem like you could. So we just, we weren't sure it was registering that there were other people here. We've never been. Yeah. I can explain the format in a minute. I was waiting for. Karen is will be the chair for today. So I'm a staff, I'm a planner with the town and a staff liaison. So I don't, I don't, you know, usually at the chair run, but it's like, there's a number of people here and I don't, I don't know if she's not yet. So yeah, I'll explain it and I can, I guess, explain the format while we're waiting for her. So yeah, for everyone in attendance, it looks like there's 18 attendees. And the format of these meetings, it's a webinar, a zoom webinar. So the, the. The commission are considered panelists, staff, my name's Nate Maloy. And then there's 18 attendees. So those are members of the public. I can, we can see you. You can. You might not be able to, you know, you might not be able to see anyone else, but we can see you in attendance and we can allow you to speak. So, you know, if you would want to make comments through the meeting, you can raise your hand. But at this point, it was, you know, it's going to start off as a discussion with. The commission and representatives from 98 fearing. And we're waiting for one more member of the commission to join. And then we can. Let's see, it's 303 and my clock. So we'll wait maybe just one more minute and, and then we can. We'll get started if we need to, because there's, you know, members here. And we have a quorum. Underwater and you guys. You have a, you have a nice little filter on your camera, I guess. I don't have a filter. I thought that was just very clever of you. Making it so that we couldn't see the details of your house behind you. Like with single lens reflex cameras, right? You know, you blur out. That's why I have the filter. I don't have a filter. I don't have a filter. I thought that was just very clever of you. I thought that was just very clever of you. That's why I have the picture of town hall. So you really don't know where I am. All right. Well, I think the. I hadn't, I don't know. Do you want me to call Karen and find out where she is? She was having trouble with her computer earlier. Yeah, that'd be great. Yeah. I was just going to check my email. I guess I spoke with her just a little bit ago and I didn't. I know she was. At one point questionable, but I think. It's like now we have, oh, here she is. Karen, are you. Able to. Yeah. Great. Sorry. Here I am. We're waiting for you to start. So I guess we're ready. There's, um, 17 or so members. Okay. So I'm opening this public meeting. Of the historical local historical commission. It's Wednesday, February 15th. And I'm going to open this public meeting. At three oh six pursuant to Governor Baker's March 12, 2020 order suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law. Da da da. And pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 and extended by chapter 22 of the acts of. 2022 and extended again by the state legislature. Legislature on July 14th, January 15th, 2020. This public meeting of the town's local historic district commission is being conducted via remote participation. 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. Thank you. I'm going to give a hyperlink to the. Hearing will be posted in the town's online calendar. So now. There'll be a roll call. Right. Yeah. Yeah. Nicole. Miller. President. Bruce Cole. Yes, I'm here. Nancy Ratner. Yes. Steve blue. I'm blurry, but I'm here. Yeah, I wish I were blurry. And I'm winter and I am also here. So I'm opening the public meeting and we have an agenda, which you probably know, which is discussion and possible election of officers. Of as. In first place, then discussion of potential project located on 98 St. St. The discussion of LHD expansion in town center, unanticipated public comment and next meeting date. And I talked with Nate and we propose, since there are probably. So many participants that want to be part of this and maybe have something to say at the end that we. Change the agenda. And start immediately with the presentation. Okay. So. How do you feel about that? Is everybody agreed? Agreed. Agreed. So, um, I don't know, Nate, what do I do now? I was going to say a little bit, something to welcome them. I don't know who's here. Yeah, sure. So I, um, I've asked Ted Parker and, uh, Charles Roberts, their product representatives to join as panelists. And they can let us know if there's anyone else in the audience. Working with them. I don't know if they're, they're here. And then I guess current, if you have anything, I didn't want to say. Yeah. I wanted to say to the people that are. Our meeting with us. Thank you so much for reaching out to us when we feel that this project is in a very, very preliminary stage. We've found in the past that. If this is the case, the, the result is so much more satisfactory. I mean, I'm not sure if I'm having you spend so much money to, to finalize plans that, uh, and then you're locked into something that, that could be very unsatisfactory and not have a chance. Uh, so much nicer to talk informally. Uh, to begin with, to see if, if we can in fact come up with a, a project which is going to enhance our town. Um, the, the, the potential character to be maintained because that's really important. We have an accident. Exodus right now of residents. Uh, we need to preserve that balance. So, um, if we talk to each other and get an exact idea of what it is that you want, and you're able to really listen to the residents who are impacted by this. Uh, and, um, you know, it's a really good thing. So thank you for coming right now. When nothing is really finalized or set in stone. Okay. Ted or Charles, you can, you could make yourself visible or let me know, you know, what to, what to share this, you know, what to present on the screen. You're muted. Uh, Charles was intended to take the lead and he, uh, is his design and he was going to do the presentation. Oh, I just had, I just, sorry. Hi everybody. I just had to press the right buttons. So, uh, thank you for that nice, uh, introduction Karen. And yeah, this is exactly the, uh, the opportunity we wanted to have to present things when they're still in an early stage to, uh, get feedback and response. And also so you can hear our thoughts. Um, so I, I'm representing my, my clients. I think they're probably here. Uh, and they'll, they'll be listening in Ted's, Ted's working on this project with me as well. And, uh, from coal construction. And Nate, do you see, um, is Jeff Squire in attendance? I don't see Jeff. Okay. So Jeff, Jeff Squire from Berkshire design group is also working with us on site plan site design. So, um, uh, with that, Nate, if you could open up the, uh, the PDF maybe and share the screen. Yeah, I can share it. Maybe I'm going to start with the, um, yeah. Actually, you know, if you, if you could go back to the, uh, to the context photos and just zoom in on that top left photo, which is that, which is 98 fearing street. Um, so I talk about that, you know, building a little bit. I'm sure you're all very familiar with it from the, you know, from the, the mass historic review documents, but it's, uh, it's a really nice, uh, arts and crafts house. It's a pattern book house, um, built around 1927. It was, uh, originally a single family house converted into a two family house. And now, and now, uh, a three unit house that's, um, has students living in it. Um, it's, it's, it's a classic, um, those, uh, arts and crafts kind of, uh, of expression of a, um, architecture, the trim, the window detailing, the, you know, raptor tails and so, um, all the components of arts and crafts sort of architecture that we were, we're also fond of. Um, it's a, it's a little bit, it's a little unique in that it's, it's very tall and it has, uh, an entrance, you know, off, off center onto the left as opposed to, you know, a continuous front porch. But, um, these are some of the things that we were, we were looking at responding to in the architecture, um, that we're proposing for, uh, for the back half of the lot. Um, we have two ideas, um, which I'm going to run by you and we've, and, uh, I'll give you a little sense of, of our thought process as we, as I run through those, those concepts. So yes, date. Now we can go to the next advanced, the next slide. Okay. Yeah. Let me just reduce the size of this and then. All right. Let's do, um, Okay. If anyone wants to have, make it more visible or if that's okay, I'm not sure how it seemed. Yeah. Well, it's, it's tiny on my little screen, but, uh, can everybody, is it, can everybody see that? Okay. Okay. So, um, this, so the, the zoning density in this, uh, in this neighborhood, um, allows actually, um, actually, could you go back? Yeah. Um, you know what we're trying to do here is look at what, what's, what's allowed by zoning. What's the standard along the site? What's feasible? What makes sense? And how can we kind of right size the design so that we're, we're balancing what's allowed by zoning, but also being respectful of, of the neighborhood. And, uh, and, and especially, you know, your commission and, and your steward, your property and, you know, And especially, you know, your commission and your stewardship of the historic, you know, quality of this neighborhood. And so in this particular scheme, what we're looking at doing is putting three duplexes in the southern half of the lot, which for a total of nine units on the site so there's three units in the existing building. And then the three duplexes. There's a, we're maintaining the existing driveway down the left side of the site. So that does not change. We are removing the little garage that's set in back of the existing house to accommodate additional parking and the three duplexes. So the parking is tucked in back of the existing house, sort of intentionally screening it from the street, as much as possible. And then, and then the three duplexes are served just to the south of that parking, creating a courtyard space for the pedestrian access from the parking for folks who are living there. I think I guess you can move on, Nate. Yeah, so the elevations of the building are the architectural expression reminiscent of of arts and crafts. Typical detailing and expression. And then the covered upper siding, a board and baton, lower half for the sighting, and then portraits with exposed raptor tails and tapered columns. Nice wide trim and trim boards and accent accenting details to to break up the scale of the house and modulate it and sort of bring it into that that language that we're familiar with The windows are, they're responding similar to the existing house the windows respond to what's going on inside so there's, there's, there's variation within the windows but what we tried to do was was create an overall balance between the solid void of the building and let the windows become reflective of what's going on inside. These, these elevations are preliminary. And one of the things we'd like to like to hear from you is is sort of the additional levels of information you'd want to see going forward, in addition to whatever sorts of changes or modifications you might want to see to these elevations. This is a view from the Southwest looking down into the courtyard that's being formed by the by the three duplexes, the parking in between the existing house, which is model in that white form, and then and then Fearing Street which runs along the top edge. So, trying to to to maintain as much of the existing vegetated screening between the, the neighboring properties and and these buildings. These are pulled back a fair degree from the neighboring houses immediately to the to the east and the west. And so, minimizing the impact on, you know, on our immediate neighbors, and then I know one of the things that the commissions interested in looking at is, is the view from Lincoln Avenue and that's something that we don't we have really looked at here but we can, we can definitely bring that forward in the in the official public hearing. Okay, next is this is a view from the northeast looking the white structures existing house and just give you a sense of the of the parking between the new buildings and the existing building and this the sense of scale of these little duplexes and how they're going to sort of not overwhelm the existing site not overwhelm the neighbors, but be an architecturally compatible I think with what's going on in the neighborhood and with this little house especially. Next. It's similar right. Yeah, there should be a different one. There should be a ground level view. These are these these are interior courtyard views these are these give you a better feel for the for the detailing and care architectural character the buildings with the, the, the tapered arts and crafts columns and the exposed rapid tails on the porch and, and the tram, sort of rounding out the windows and creating sort of a belt line between the upper clabbered siding and the board and bat and siding below. Okay, next. Similar. I love abuse. Again just giving a sense of the character and quality of the space. Is there is there one is there one. Oh, here's one. So this is, there is there's an existing magnificent tree, which you see just the left we tried to model as closely to scale and sizes to where it is the existing house on the right. And then this gives you a sense of the scale of these duplexes tucked in behind so they, the buildings are, you know, they're modest in size and scale and they're there. And that's what in there so the impact on the immediate street is is is hopefully negligible, but they do harken back to the house that's directly in front of them so I think there's a nice kind of back and forth happening. So one of the things we can try to do is actually paste this view into a photograph from the street so you'll actually be able to see, see the character of the existing house side by side with what we're proposing. Okay, next. This, we started off with this scheme. And this was this was the idea of a of a of a four unit apartment building, and then a six standalone single family unit. So for a total of five new units. And we were working with a different understanding of the Zen density allowances. And so we were just, we were trying to think of think about also just from a property management point of view and and and and sort of building technology point of view how would you how would you create an apartment house that's got four units in it, and a little standalone single house that would be compatible with each other and with the existing house. And the architecture is very similar to what I showed you in the previous scheme. In fact, they're, they're, they're virtually identical. The difference comes in and sort of the scale and appearance of the buildings in terms of their massing. So you can go to the next slide. So this was, this is a two story for unit apartment building. The, the units are all identical and they stack and mirror. So there's a there's a real regularity with a rhythm of the fenestration and around the building. Same same material detailing with board and baton and clavards and, and, and trim. So it's very similar in that respect. You can't around the page. Yeah. Excuse you. In the same similar porch detailing suppose wrapped or tails and battered columns. And then I think on the next sheet we got the little, the little house next door. Yeah. And it's playing with the idea of a similar architecture and a similar scale, but just sort of interpreted to a smaller house, smaller single family house. I think we have some exterior views of that, Nate, which you can. Yeah, this one. Yeah. So that's, that's that same view looking from the parking down a shared sidewalk to the entries of the two buildings. Yeah. You can see the similarity. Yeah. Yep. And so you can see the similarity in the, the architectural expression of these buildings relative to the duplexes but very different in scale, and sort of relationship to one another I think. Okay. Yeah, view from the street. So you see the big apartment house, sort of like the big house little house. This might be. Is that it. That's it. Yeah. Okay. All right. So, yeah, thoughts are welcome recommendations for how to proceed with the public hearing and any kind of feedback is welcome. Yes, I mean, so yeah, Ted and Charles, thanks. I have standpoint. You know, I know it can be tricky local sort of district. You may want to go. You know, first, but then we're asking for a lot of detail, right? We need, you know, architectural elevations we need materials, you know, anything that's a structure on the site so fencing light poles I mean all that type of information is needed. And I think that the local sort of district regulates views from the public way and it's any public way so this site is visible from fearing Lincoln and Cosby, and I think it would be beneficial to have, you know, elevations and anything that shows how these buildings will be viewed from those three streets. So for instance in this one. So the imagery, I mean, I think you need to put in all the surrounding buildings to show context in terms of massing and scale, you know, vegetation is exempt from review by local sort of district and I don't know how accurate that is for screening now so I mean I think like a figure ground plan and then have that translated into a massing model will be really important for views. On the other side you can insert images into photographs or you know, you know, elevations into photographs I think that's important I think, you know, elevations from the street or from the different views will be important and so, you know, I think there's just more information that's needed to understand how this will actually be viewed and be impacted, you know how will impact the surrounding so you know to me this is a star but I think we would need, you know, I would ask for architectural elevations, both like you showed out of the building and then also, you know, oversight is how it's viewed from the public way to really understand the relationship of size and scale to, you know, to its surroundings. You know, the commissioners may have other comments but I think right now there's just, you know, to me there isn't enough information to even start making, you know, really fine decisions about this. It's not sharing if it's easier for everyone to see each other. Am I on or. Yeah. Before we even, I mean I have a lot of, I have some, I have a ton of problems with this. But before you even get, get to them. I want to talk about the garage in your application for its demolition you say that it's derelict. Is that correct. That's correct. I think today, except for a door being a jar, I don't, it looks very solid to me what, what about it exactly is derelict. It's, it's on grade I don't think it has really an adequate foundation I think for to be preserved it would actually have to have excavation and a foundation built under it, it's, it's leaning. Anything valuable storage because it's there uncertain as to its structural integrity. That's why it's called derelicts. So in your opinion it's, I don't, I don't know the definition to derelict. I mean it's been standing for since 1927. So how much longer without the work I mean basically seems to me that you just want to take it down to build these other structures. So, you know, I looked around it very thoroughly, and I just didn't see any evidence, except for a door being a jar and that it was derelict. The other thing that's my biggest peeve and I've got a ton of them, but I know the other commissioner is the parking lot. And I have a call into the Massachusetts Historical Society about whether park, you know parking lot of the sides in a name in a historic neighborhood. That's mainly that's residential is not in keeping with our with our mission as a commission. And I can read you what our mission is. Oh, if you'd like. I just want to interject that in the bylaw in section nine exclusions. 9.2 it says specifically excluded terraces walks driveway sidewalks and similar structures provided that any stuff structure is substantially at grade level. And it also says that when I just finished the strawberry is not not exact. And I would argue that a huge that a huge parking lot would fall under that category landscaping without shoveling, and I have a call into the Massachusetts asking that very point. There's no specific mention of parking lots in either case as an exclusion or not so that's a that's the first issue in my book that needs to be addressed. I have a lot of other things like even like it does not look like you guys did a lot took a lot of effort, even the windows are like not multi pain, like the original structure. But they look like haunted house to me, and the massing is to me inappropriate, but I don't want to like type, you know, I'm just one person so those are my initial feelings but I deal before the other commissioner. Nate, are we going to have hands. Should I call on people. Yeah, I mean, I guess if, yeah, I mean, it depends I guess how it goes. It looks like Bruce has his hand raised but sometimes I will call on Bruce. Okay. The first is, I guess, Ted or Chuck. You've got two proposals in you've got the, the three duplexes on on the as new and you've got another that's the complex plus a single family. I mean, is, is you, you undecided yet as to which you would prefer to proceed with. I mean, we, we are you asking us to review both or, or are you telling us that you prefer one but you have thought of others I'm not quite sure what you was. So I'd like to know which whether you've got a preferred scheme and then we can focus on that, or, or what. Good question, Bruce. Thanks for that. So, you know, our original scheme was the apartment building, the four unit building and the little single family house, and we submitted that. And so you had everybody, I think you all had access to that information. Then we came up with the idea of the three duplexes which I think we prefer in terms. And so, and so I feel, and my clients can speak up if they're available to to to second this that that's the preferred scheme that we would like to that we did that, you know, I don't think we necessarily have to spend time talking about both schemes I think that's the scheme that would make it the least for us. So, yeah, this I hear in the stead interrupts are I'm going to proceed on that basis. But the other, the other thing that I think, and this system. Well, first of all, we, we've done this kind of approach before this. I mean, we being this commission with the sunset hearing development that Barry Roberts put forward. And we, we started with very preliminary sketches we also actually started with a site visit which we haven't done here yet. So, but at least I haven't I can see that Steve has been folks that live in the area and of course that that is the bulk of our commission appropriately but people that live in the in the districts but Nicole and I are not necessarily because we're not here because we're, we're not in the commission for our residential status we're here for a professional affiliation of some sort. So, we haven't had a site visit just so that everybody knows that, at least knows it about me. And the other thing that's going into my head. I think I'm talking to you here but I guess I'm talking to my fellow commissioners as well. This is, I mean when I look at the. I'm reflecting I'm remembering on how we dealt with the sunset fearing thing and I know that massing there was important we felt that we had a man, an obligation to review the, the project, and how it fitted in from a number of points of view but of course was part of that. And this. This project certainly is different. I think from surrounding although it could be argued I suppose that it's not really it's not one big development it's a development that has got one plus three appropriately scaled structures. I guess, one of the things we're going to have to do is to decide to what extent we accept the zoning density here, and then figure out how, whether or not this proposal, or any proposal that might come before us for this parcel. There's a deal with the, with the, and not the entitled density because it has to be, I'm sure this requires a permit from probably the zoning board is it. Nate, do you know or is this it was just by the. Yeah, this would be allowed through a special permit with the zoning board so it's you know it's not allowed by right it's a you know discretionary permit. So it's a discretionary permit and I think that what I can see before us here and probably with a lot of people in attendance is. We're going to find as a commission that we're going to be tied into an argument as to whether the zoning density is appropriate. And I guess we have to decide whether we want to argue with that, or whether we want to accept the zoning density as not as the designated possibility on the site and then work to make the best development project we can with that development. So that I think we my sense is that we should recognize upfront, which, which bus we're on. Because it's going to be a lot of people, particularly people that call in I suspect as we as we as we experienced with the fairing sunset. There will be many comments and so forth that are more properly appropriately will be appropriately addressed by the zoning board. And I don't think that's inappropriate I think it was good that folks who called in people in resident local residents or whomever were really rehearsing their concerns they were getting some answers. They were hearing what other people were saying so what this commission is providing here I think is an opportunity not just for us as a commissioners to work through our obligation but there's going to be the constraints of the public conversation here and and and I'm encouraging us to acknowledge that, but also know what our job is, and be able to keep our eyes on that ball. But it was a little easier for me with the sunset fearing job project because it seemed appropriate. The question was, under what guidance or conditions from us might be. That was my, that was my general feeling as we were proceeding with that project here I'm, I just don't know it seems to me to be a. The site was intended to be developed this way. As a, you know, as a. It doesn't seem consistent with the way the sites are being developed the buildings themselves may be scaled and so forth but their aggregation and so forth on the site doesn't doesn't feel as easy to deal with this the fearing sunset project so I'm thinking about how I'm going to deal with that I think I'm going to personally I think I'm going to look at this with an acceptance of the possible density here and and then and then see what the best result can be. I'm not sure whether they do you want to advise us on whether we should contest the zoning potential of this site or should we steer clear of that. I think, I think you'd assume that the, you know, the three duplex option, you know, is allowed by special permit so you know it's difficult the applicant to do a simultaneous process with the zoning board or, you know, I think Bruce what you're kind of getting at was if you think of those three buildings you know how does the commission look at it in terms of massing. What does it really look like and you know, a section elevation on the site and is that, you know, so I thought with the Lincoln sunset I wasn't there but you know I thought that the commission said well some of the massing was too big right for instance it was just too bulky to blocky. And the result was to to accommodate that was a change in design which maybe then less than the number of reduced the number of units, you know changed roof lines and certain things and so to me that's where the commission would look at this and so if for instance you know the buildings are too massive. Let's articulate the roof lines a bit more and the result was maybe one less unit, because that's what would fit with the architecture that's how the commission goes I think the, you know the ZBA might also think that they might say well this is too much to right there's too much of an impact and they might want to change the design and then that the app the project to come back to the local historic district for a view so I mean I would assume, you know what was shown there nine total units three duplexes plus the original house. Let's proceed with that. And, you know, if it moves forward and then the zoning board also has comments or things, you know has to become an iterative process because I don't think we could hedge our bets and say well let's, we're only going to aim for four extra units. I think we can do that, you know, through the, by looking at the massing the citing the, you know, the other elements of the design but you know units can be small, you know, they could be small units right they could be one bedroom units and so the unit is something the size of the building and massing is up to me. Yeah. Yeah. And we have to make our. I mean, as the sunset we made our decision we we grounded in the end we grounded the certificate or appropriateness and then the whole show moved on to the zoning board and then it's the issues that were apparent appropriate they were played out. Here I'm just, I'm just wondering, what if we decided that the massing on the basis of massing it was inappropriate, and we were to decide to not grant certificate or appropriateness on the basis of some kind of reaction to the the massing and so forth. Of course that could get us in trouble we could find ourselves the town and land court, you know we have to be careful about being going out on a limb like that, but if we wanted to do that. I guess we should understand that this that would be. That would be an interesting test of the, the probably I mean I don't know enough about where the, the powers of these kinds of commissions on whether in other towns with local historic district commissions people have said whether whether any commissions, I guess this would be a you know whether any commission has basically decided not to grant a certificate of appropriateness even though the zoning and indicated that that that density was appropriate that was a was possible, but that this commission or something like that said, it's not appropriate doesn't matter what the zoning says we just find it's not appropriate than which, and with the so decide, is that something that's happened in other towns. I'm assuming, I'm assuming yes you know local historic district is a general bylaw and zoning is land use and so this is really not a land use, you know they're different regulations and so you know I've often said that a local historic district should approve something that could be denied by the ZBA or not approved by the Conservation Commission if there's wetlands and so, you know, there is that right there is the, the idea that, you know, if a product needs multiple permitting there can be kind of, you know some some inconsistencies but I think that a local historic district could say yeah, for instance if you thought if you thought that this application couldn't proceed, then you know some of it is well what are the findings or reasons why not the applicant could come back right with changes and so just as we did with the first Amos media project where we said no and we said no because of the following and we had for we've made findings. Sorry I'll stop now Karen. Yes, I understand it. Our purview it's not the use of the residents, but the architectural and the aesthetic aspect and how does it fit into the neighborhood, and the surroundings. Will it diminish the historical flavor of our beloved Emily Dickinson town and college town. This is a residential neighborhood that people that have been there for a long time. If we feel that something like this, even if it has zoning is going to destroy or be harmful to what we're trying to preserve. I think we are absolutely allowed to say this is just not going to to make it in our town. What I really would like to see of this architect and these builders is a way for them to figure out how to design units that are going to attract young families with children because those are the ones that are exiting and a town if our town continues to go that way, the whole historical the whole, the flavor, the character of the town is really damaged. Can you give it a fresh look and look at it and say, my children and my grandchildren they need to live in town they can't live in one of these big houses, but they do need a yard they don't need a huge parking lot. So how are you going to. It's probably really easy to have a profitable sort of thing and still make a design that's going to address these these needs so I say yes the historical commission can say no this is not going to do it that's my feeling. Okay, I'd like to hear from other people like Nancy and Nicole. Nancy. I am having problems seeing this as part of the historic as being consistent with the historic nature of this neighborhood I have done a site visit and it the yard is very visible from Lincoln Avenue. And if it's just a parking lot for a large portion of it and it looks like it would be a parking lot for a large portion of it. That strikes me as totally inconsistent with the historic nature of the neighborhood. So I'm especially troubled by the, the parking by the massive amount of building that would go on to what had been a backyard. I understand that there is an interest in town to have infill but infill of this nature seems contrary to what we're trying to establish in an area that has a lot of character to it at the moment. I would like to see that character in these designs so far and you can be making a lot of changes but I would want to see much smaller buildings, I would want to see them much more designed as current says for a family, rather than making as many apartments as possible to stuff in as many students as possible. And that seems to be the plan at the moment. Okay, Nicole, what, what's your feeling. Yeah, so I mean given that this is the first kind of real application like this that I'm reviewing on the commission. And I didn't have that kind of historical perspective of the previous larger complex. I more reflect back to what Nate was saying from the very beginning is that I'm not getting a very good picture at all from what it, how it's changing from the street views. Because I, yeah, I can't, I can't imagine that the parking lot and that the three duplex buildings are obscured from the streets. So I think it would need to have a lot more information I feel very lacking of information to be able to even say, if that's like the main perspective of how is this changing the view from the street I don't feel like I have that information. I think it would be good to start with a site view that we all get together and at the place talk to each other about possibilities. I think that's how on sunset fairing. We started and it was really helpful just to be able to talk to each other and brainstorm what would be positive development because we do need development, we all agree that that's important. But how we develop is going to determine whether the town keeps going down or gets more and more mixed and family friendly. So it's really important to initially stand there and brainstorm. I think Steve. Yeah, just a brief thing I in terms of Bruce's point. We just wanted to cite chapter 40 c section seven factors that we considered by the commission. And this is a quote in the case of new construction, or addition to existing buildings or structure structure the commission so consider the appropriateness and size and shape of the building structure. In relation to the land area on which the building or the structure is situated, and to the building's instruction the vicinity, and the commission may inappropriate cases, because dimensional setback requirements, in addition to those required by applicable requirements. And it says that the purpose of presenting development is in congruent to the historic aspects or architectural characteristics of the surroundings and of the historic district. So my reading of that is that we are not strictly wrong by zoning. Yes, I have that up on my screen I was reading it as you were saying it Steve. Yeah. I wonder, should we now. Since we've gone around the commission has given their preliminary views were just brainstorming right now. Should we open this briefly to the 2027 participants that are very eager to speak. And if so I want to remind those participants that this commission, our purview is not the use of the building so we can't talk about who it's being built for. We, it is, as I said, the, how does it fit into the neighborhood and how, what is the flavor and the character of the neighborhood and will, will that be enhanced or at least not, you know, shouldn't be a detriment. But we, yeah, try to keep that in mind I think of course how it's built. The whole that's going to that determines who is going to want to live there too of course. Yeah, do you do agree we should open it to person or Bruce you want to say something. Yes, I think it's good that that we should really hear what folks have to say, I just wanted to say that what you said earlier about meeting on site and brainstorming stuff we have to recognize that that would be a public meeting and it would have to be advertised. And typically women meet on site we do not do that we, we discuss the site and make sure we understand the nature of the site and whether this light, whether this light pole works or whether this fence is here or there, things like that but if we were to do what you suggest Karen we just have to keep in mind that that would be a very different type of site visit than we typically do. Yeah, thank you for bringing that up. Right yeah I was gonna say a site visit usually just information gathering. It's not doesn't even have to be posted because it's really not a public meeting, there shouldn't be any discussion other than clarifying questions in terms of the site. Yeah, and so, you know, just in terms of information, I think I'll just say that, you know, in the neighborhood there's a lot of outbuildings, there's you know some you know accessory drawing units and other things and so to me it's important to say okay what what is the footprint of those buildings. That's why I think a figure ground, something with dimensions of the buildings and the vicinity and the neighborhood. I think that information is very useful for the local historic district when this moves forward and so right now the plans don't show any of that context I think that context is very important so, you know, although Charles you said the buildings are small I mean they look like they're at least 32 by 32 I don't maybe maybe larger and so, you know, is it that those proportions aren't working, you know so is it something that the proportionality isn't, you know, makes it so that the buildings up here, you know, bulkier and more massive than if they were a rectangle and so to me though that's the information that can really aid the commission so you know what are the footprints and dimensions and proportions of buildings on Cosby on you know best in on fearing on Lincoln in the vicinity and so how does that relate to, you know, especially outbuildings how does it relate to these and then the views from the street like I mentioned I think those are really important views to see. So. Nancy. Nancy. Yeah, are we also allowed to ask about the removal of trees in order to build, because there's some nice trees there right now that provides some screenage but if they're gone, then the screening would change what would be visible from all the houses in the neighborhood the street view. So, you know, landscaping is typically exempt so you know the local historic district isn't really. You know, doesn't mandate treat you know, maintenance of trees or can prevent removal of trees so in some instances we, the Commission has said that an evergreen screen can be similar to a fence in terms of screening but we're you know. A local historic district is not a tool to, you know, for landscape preservation so tree removal or site preparation is really not, you know, much of the purview of local historic district. And so yeah clear if you want to open it I can, you know there's two hands raised I can allow to talk. Yes, could you take over and allow people to talk and we want to limit the since there are so many people that are probably wanting to speak. Please do not speak for long no longer than two minutes at the most. Thank you. All right, so Jesse, you can you're allowed to unmute yourself. Hi, Jesse major. I live at 32 Cosby Avenue I've been there for about 16 years. My backyard, Caddy corners this backyard that we're talking about just full disclosure. I sent you guys a letter describing some other issues I just wanted to add two points to this conversation. As I read the bylaws of what you guys do it says protection of the distinctive characteristics and architecture of buildings and places. When I look at these plans, the characteristics of that place is completely opposite of our neighborhood. In terms of the number of structures, the number of asphalt the number of parking spaces, it's really quite different from anything in the neighborhood as far as I'm aware, I think that's really important, right. And I'd like to make echoing something I think that Karen and Nancy both brought up. This feels like a very one way decision, meaning no family is ever going to live on this lot again, if this is what happens. And that's a big concern I think of mine and other people so I just wanted to put that out there. My maybe we're not discussing use right now. But again that changes the characteristic of our neighborhood. The more and more places where families or young professionals will not live drastically changes the characteristic of the neighborhood, and I think that counts in the discussion. Thanks. Thanks for the opportunity. Thanks. Right Melissa. Hi, we're Melissa and Graham, we live on Lincoln Avenue, our backyard is also county corner with this lot. Alright Jason to the lot and I promise you there are not enough trees that you won't be able to see this from Lincoln Avenue. The buildings are set back about it looks like three to five feet from our property line. And they would, you know, look directly into our backyard and into the backyard of all, all the neighbors category to this the site plans make it seem like there's a large screen of trees on all sides that actually doesn't exist if you come and visit the site. Exactly are not trees. It's our backyard not trees there's structures back there. But beyond that the amount of light pollution the amount of noise pollution. I want to echo what Jesse saying this development will drastically change the tenor of the neighborhood. And I think that the, the buildings are disproportionate to the lot size. Each one of these buildings is larger from the site plans if there to be believed in the existing house. So it's, it's an enormous amount of usage on this lot compared to what the usage is on the other lots in the neighborhood. It does not seem to be in keeping in any way with the general form of the lot use in the historic district and it, it seems like, as Jesse says, it will be the death knell for families living in this neighborhood. Certainly would not have purchased this house if we had known that that was going to be there. Yeah, that's not why we came here. Yeah, we're done. Thanks. Young men. And yourself. Thank you. I'm my name's young men moon. I am owner and resident at 100 fear and street which is the directly adjoining property from 98 period. So this proposal concerns me greatly. I'd like to echo expression by Karen opening remark when she said Exodus of residence. I've been here living here for 18 years and about three years ago I built a small extension a bedroom and an efficiency apartment. So now I'm an owner occupied, you know, place here. Now, you know, imagining this new structures being built into into 98 fearing, I can see how the character of this neighborhood would entirely change or in fact reinforce further in reinforce what has already been happening you know my neighborhood on the west west side is entirely filled by you mess students. And so is the house across from the street one on I'm sharing street. Essentially surrounded by student sort of, you know, dorms, if you will. I, you know, I understand that you know you're not supposed to talk about who is built for, but at the same time I would argue, the use of the building determines the appearance of the building to be designed because let's face it. So it is revenue generation that is the main reason why this project is being proposed, right, and it is really at the expense of the neighborhoods. I'll echo the previous speakers, my neighbors Jesse and Melissa, you know, to have 20 car parking lot that is entirely true anomaly in the neighborhood. The parking lots in our neighborhood might accommodate just several cars and most. The only exception I can think of is the house at the corner of the main street near the johns library that has large, you know, condo complex. I can think of any freestanding, you know, single individual single family houses that has large parking units that accommodate 20 cars. So the way this project directly impacts me. I'd like to bring your attention to the presentations that there was given the aerial views that were shown are for me unrealistic because the proposed buildings are shown, you know, kind of far distance. In the initial I level views they are limited to close abuse from the parking lot, the proposed parking lot and from ferries tree, not from my house for example, where there are not actually many trees like Melissa pointed out. And in fact those big trees on the southwest corner of the lab, belong to my property, and I've been contemplating cutting down those trees in order to allow more sunlight exposure to my solar panels. So I'm trying to go green here and if I do remove those those three big trees already I mean the the existing garage is highly visible from Lincoln Street has been pointed out. But you know, once I remove those three, it'll be entirely exposed. And the way the diagrams of the plants show, you know, like Melissa pointed out, there are not trees around those corners. I should also add that, you know, right now the house with the existing house or alone there are eight cars at any given time at night. And, you know, because I know that you know you're planning to expand the parking lot but there you know there's always one car that sits on the, the abutting grass, okay, the lawn, which has already damaged the lawn. I just wanted to mention how this, you know, over a population of students is actually impacting the appearance of the neighborhood district district. I should stop there for now. Thank you. Thanks, Jennifer. You can unmute yourself. I'm on Lincoln Avenue and I, you know, concur in everything that, you know, the previous speakers have said. I know that we're asked not to speak to usage, but the impact, it's impossible not to respond to the impact that this project as it seems to be currently proposed would have on a entire neighborhood. There's an understanding that right now there's nine structures that would be intended to have four bedrooms each. So a lot that was initially built a family house. It's been converted into a triplex, I believe there's probably 12, eight to 12 residents living there now could have up to 36. I mean that's clearly not what that size lot was intended to accommodate. And the ramifications on not just the next door neighbors but really a whole swath of this small neighborhood would be extremely detrimental. So I am right now, if you drove by my house on the corner of Lincoln and Cosby you would think I was very far from Fearing Street. This is my third floor office which faces onto Cosby. I'm looking at Miss Graham and Melissa's house now. So I would see that parking lot, you know, from a couple of blocks away. So this, where this huge parking lot, which is nothing like a driveway, all we have in the neighborhood are driveways, a parking lot is in no way contextually appropriate. There will be seen by, I don't know, three dozen, a couple of dozen houses between all the houses on Cosby on a huge swath of Lincoln and on Fearing Street. So I would just say that this project is what is being proposed is beyond I think the neighbor's worst nightmare. Yeah, I don't mean to be hyperbolic but there has to be a way we can scale back and make it contextually appropriate. It appropriate in scale, and not something that really upends a neighborhood. Thank you. Right now I don't see any other hands raised. That's interesting. Yeah, so I don't know how we should proceed I think I would like to. Am I mute. I'm just going to raise the hand. Okay, go ahead. I'm sorry, I, you know, I, I guess I got a little bit excited. I wanted to conclude by saying that, you know, if this is just if the proposed project has already been placed. I might I probably have never bought this. My property at 100 periods through. So, so again to kind of, you know, loop my comments. If this project is actually built the way it is proposed, I would be, I might be compelled to join the Exodus. And I would hate to see that happen to my family. Thank you. Yeah, I think, I think we really are at a crossroads the way we decide to develop is going to determine what kind of town we're going to have. And if we really let investors maximize profit by putting as much in which, you know, is seeming what's happening that Exodus, we won't have the Amherst that's historically worth keeping everybody's going to get out. Let's face it. So we need to develop. I would say there's a place in, for example, Lincoln Avenue, a house which onto the back of it put a beautiful apartment. It's totally in keeping there's a lot of space. There are so many possibilities for for developing for becoming a developer and adding to a town and and attracting the kinds of people that are going to make the town vital. The shops that will be downtown not just that you mess should put their students some. Anyway, that's my opinion. Okay, so how should we continue Nate. It was like Melissa had just raised her hand again. I don't care if that's. Yeah, I did I just just to echo what you was saying. Ram and I have already talked about putting our house up for sale after seeing these plans and hearing about the potential inevitability of something like this going through. And I just want to point out that if people like if this thing goes through and people like in and us put our houses up for sale, the only people who are going to buy these houses are going to be people like the LLC from Belcher town that owns the existing property, and they're going to put up a bunch more properties. That's what's going to happen. As soon as the Exodus begins, the only people who are going to want to buy the houses are going to be the people who are going to do this exact same thing. So this is, this is a really critical moment for the preservation of this neighborhood. I don't think we're being hyperbolic by saying that we're aware of the fact that a family is not going to buy this house if there are 36 kids living in the backyard. It's not going to happen. So we're going to end up selling our house to a developer. And we don't want to do that. We don't want to leave, but we're going to get chased out of the neighborhood by these situations if we everyone is. And I think the historic commission has to understand what something like this is going to do. People are moving to this neighborhood because they want to be in a neighborhood like this, not a place that has 36 people living on a single lot. So, should we close the comments or are there other hands Nate. I don't see any other hands at this time. If you don't mind. I just feel like especially because I'm Nicole Miller, I'm a realtor and realtor was kind of recruited to be on the commission from that professional perspective. And I mean, I would concur with the decrease in value of family homes, especially specifically adjacent to the parking lot into multiple additional structures. I'm just kind of adding adding that from like, since that's my role on this commission that I would agree professionally that that is not adding value to the two or increasing kind of a family home perspective for future sales. Thank you, Nicole. Ted. Hi, my muted. You can hear me. I'm listening carefully to folks I, I understand that people's reactions to this proposal. I'm just unclear as to the degree to which there's some of the subjects that were brought to this meeting fall into the purview of the local historic district commission. And I think that there are this, this project will undergo review by other bodies, the zoning board of appeals going to have to review it because it's special permit. I think the planning board will have to review to if I'm not mistaken, Nate, am I correct. The planning board won't necessarily I'll just be the zoning board. Let's be the dba. Yep. And some of those questions are, I think some of these issues may be more appropriate for that forum rather than this one I think as the local historic district commission considers the project. They should limit themselves to the criteria which are spelled out in the bylaw that they should use to evaluate the project, whether or not it's a single family home, or it's a multi family home, or it may contribute to if it's a rental property or not a rental property is not. It's not part of the, the, not part of the criteria, as I read them, perhaps, I'm mistaken and happy to be disabused of my ignorance, but to use to try to make a density ever proposal by using a proxy of some architectural critique seems to be also a misuse of the power of the local historic district commission whose brief, whose purpose is to protect the characteristic and architecture of the neighborhood and to preserve the architecture of the neighborhood. I guess you can make an argument that that adding new buildings is somehow detrimental to the existing architecture, but I think that's a bit of a stretch. And I think that's the reason why multiple levels of review that projects in Amherst especially projects in downtown Amherst are subject to review by multiple bodies. And I'm not trying to dismiss any of the concerns that people have here or would have been expressed here. I just don't know that they fall into the purview of the local historic district commission, I'm not certain that they do, and I would hope that that the commission reviews their criteria and applies them very, very, very, you know, close to what their actual authority is that's all. Thank you. Steve. So I just want to respectfully disagree with everything that said, if you look at the bylaw and chapter 40, there's three different major purposes stated in Massachusetts general law, and all those apply to this project. One of them is to maintain and improve the settings. The settings, I emphasize, of those buildings and places. Do you think that this project improves and maintains the settings or they encourage new designs to have all the existing buildings in the district. This is just, you know, even this whole thing about calling the garage derelict after almost 100 years. It's just the blind to like, you know, maximize profits off of student rentals. The bylaw that I just quoted makes it very clear that the massing that all these things that Ted is saying, we don't have jurisdiction over. We do. That's why we got historical. This is, this is the turning point. This is where we have to dig in our heels and use the tools that we're legally given to preserve the neighborhood because that's what the purpose of a historical district is. I to disagree with Ted, which is what on the basis of a lot of what we discussed earlier when I was quizzing Nate about precedence and so forth. I'm going to, I think I am thinking about this. Maybe the way the conservation commission would think about it is not suggest and it suggested this is a, this is a wetland of metaphorically speaking this is a sensitive area that from the historic district perspective. It's like a big giant wetland of historic relevance. And we have to assess whether this development is is suitable in that context. And I think as Steve has pointed out, and and so was everybody who's spoken and I'm surprised there wasn't. I was surprised that there went many, many more contributing partly because I remember the Amos media thing where we listened for an hour and a half people saying, and I made copious notes and a lot of the, the wording of our denial and our findings were verbatim statements from the 50, well, the 20 or 30 odd people who responded. And I think it's clear that this development is not in character. It's out of scale. And I think I also agree and whether I, it should be appropriate for us to take into consideration that this might be the death knell of the neighborhood. I can see that it may well be. I mean this is such a colossal scale with all this parking, and it's not even parking that's distributed this one big parking lot without any breaking up into smaller pieces. As has been pointed out, there's no places, there's no recreation here so it's very clear that the character is changing in terms of the nature of the residential occupancy. Now, I would like to think we could argue that the historic district, the preservation and character of the historic district has to do with preservation of the character of occupancies that if it changes. I mean, the nature of occupancy here is very important. And if, and this project at this scale has the has the power not only to change the certainly will change the, the, the nature of the occupancy, the nature of residential occupancy on this lot. And this has been pointed out by people who from the public who commented, it will inevitably and possibly rapidly inevitably spread out from from here. I think that this project really doesn't and can't, at least in its present state, make any reasonable claim to historic character or legitimacy. I think it's too big. It's too consolidated. There's no, there's nothing but parking and building, and the parking isn't even distributed, or, or, or attenuated or broken up. So, I don't know, I mean, we can think about what the findings might be and this is not a hearing so we have purposes to give some feedback to the developer and to his design consultants. I agree with, I think everybody else have I've heard on this commission and everybody who's called in that this is not appropriate. This is not appropriate. And if, and I can work on, as well as with others and services to reasons why, but it's not appropriate. Charles. Would you like to say something. Sure. Well, I respect everything I've heard here and say I do agree with some of the things that I've heard. And I would like to, you know, I, I represent my clients and my clients interests, and, and what I think what I need to do. And I don't know if they're still here and participants and Saturday, but I'm going to go back to them and I know they've heard some of this and, and, and try to think about how we can take the concerns that we've heard and, and, and develop a project that is answers them and is more appropriate in terms of the numbers of bedrooms. And parking where the parkings laid out screening. Accurate inventory, we do, we do have a site survey that has an accurate inventory of all the trees that'll be a big help. And, and see if we can, if we can. We retool design or re-design a project, really from full clock, I think at this point. And in a way that still is beneficial for the for my clients, but it's also ultimately beneficial. And the need, there is a need for housing. There was a lot of student housing in this immediate on the street so it's not student housing isn't coming out of nowhere here. But I do understand that it's about density on this particular lot. There's a big difference between this slide and the fearing street like it's fearing street had an edge to deal with there. So it's a long street defined to hold a corner. It's urbanistically, it's an extremely different lot than this. So, and this gets back to sort of the uniqueness of this property and how it's, you know, we're building something on the back lot. We don't have street character is insane with the, the driver's pressure does. So I just think, I don't know if the answer is there, necessarily, but I think it's funny. And I think that no matter what we do, coming back to design it's thinking about how our backgrounds develops. Is there an opportunity to take the garage and turn it into an ADU or like a little one bedroom studio and then as a starting place maybe. So, I think it was the simple thoughts that I bring to bear. Thank you for that response. We really appreciate that. And I think it's, it shows that coming together early is really important. I was going to say I myself haven't, I heard from my husband that that garage is so beautiful he was thinking of having it moved and exchanged with the garage that we have here on Elb Street so maybe you could make a really beautiful little house out of that. Yeah. It is, it is a beautiful garage Ted and I went in there. And it's, it's scary. I don't, the floors aren't trustworthy the sills are rotting. It's really a shell. It's that when you go inside is, is, it's not to say it couldn't be done. But it would be, it would be as expensive to as would be to build a new building and doesn't mean it shouldn't happen just as just like it might be a historically and a much more valuable in the long run if our, if town develops the way we want to then it things are going to continue to thrive, then things that are really beautiful and historical are going to be worth a lot more than other things. Nancy. I, I, I like the idea of you taking that garage and making it into a studio. And that's something that I would support much more than what you've presented today. It seems much more in keeping with the neighborhood, and with the historic nature of the neighborhood I think it's a charming garage from the outside, or if there are things you can do to shore it up and turn it into a studio for a family that seems far more appropriate. But you know that wasn't. Go ahead. Oh, no, no, thanks. That's okay. I just. Yeah, I mentioned, I think, Charles, I like you mentioned like the backyard development and so you know, there are a few homes on the colon that have, you know, two primary structures on a property but I think the architecture and the relationship between those homes is different than what was presented. And so, you know, it could be that you have another single family home on the property. And, you know, I don't know if the commission would say that what was presented doesn't resemble that in terms of scale proportion architecture and other things and so, you know, I like the idea of having a different design that could respond to the context of the, you know, the property into the different views from the streets and so, you know, and it might be that right it's not what was shown here, it could be you know it doesn't necessarily mean it has to be reduced units but it needs to be, you know, architecturally appropriate and meet the, you know, and have fit in that context and be compatible and so, you know, that's kind of that's the design challenge right I don't know what what it means in terms of units or anything I'm just saying in terms of the architecture. You know, is there something that that could work as a backyard development. And it would be so nice if developers started aiming at bringing young families into town if they could lose the focus on maximizing rent with students, but really zero in on the need for we need children we need the town to stay vital for young families and that would be really doing something for our town to redesign things with that in mind. Nate, do we do we wrap it up and continue our meeting with the other agenda points. Yeah, I mean unless there's any other questions I guess from Ted or Charles I don't you know I think we could. We could wait to hear from them I mean if you'd want to come back at some point, you know there is no formal application yet. And so this is, you know, and we could have another discussion if you'd like, we could wait to hear from you. I don't know if you have any concluding comments or questions. I think that I won't speak for Charles but I think we'll just put our heads together with the with the clients and decide what to do next that involves completing the process of the head Charles. Yeah, I think I'm going into a canyon. Can anybody hear me. Yes, we can hear you. Yeah, I think to echo what Ted said, I heard he came as finally, I think we got to go back to our clients and just reprogram the just consideration. Yeah, I am in a canyon. I think we get, I think we know what you're saying. I think we're good. Hi. Yeah, thank you for those comments and thank you for going back and looking at this with fresh eyes with the with it, the real needs and desires of the people around and the town of Amherst in mind. Thank you. So, Nate, should we go to the next agenda thing. Yeah, Ted and Charles I'll make you attend these again. Thanks. Thanks for coming. Yes, thank you so much for coming. We really appreciate that you reached out. Yeah, so I mean, we, the first agenda item was election of officers. You know, Karen is the vice chair and acting chair. You know, because the chair did resign and so every year the commission should review and just confirm, you know, officers whether that's just a chair or vice chair. And so, you know, that that can be a discussion now. You know, I think we discussed it really briefly at the last meeting but I'd like to say that, you know, it'd be nice to have a chair, you could dominate someone or we could just kind of just think about it and say that for next meeting that, you know, we would want to have either, you know, a bigger discussion about it as members consider whether they'd want to be a chair themselves or, you know, have a nominate someone. Where's my raised hand thing. Anyway, I wonder. Is there someone that really would like to be a chair. I mean, I absolutely can't and won't. And I heard and Bruce can't and won't. I think. I don't know Steve would you like to be a chair. You know, I think Nancy would be a great chair. I was going to nominate Nancy. Yes, I would like to be when we get to the next item. I will speak to that in terms of the downtown LHD but if Nancy's willing, I think she'd be terrific. I do too. I do too Nancy are you willing. You could you could we could say let's just consider it and we don't you know if you don't mind you know if you're you can always. You know we you know I can talk over the phone or you know you mean current phone calls before next meeting if you want to consider it more so I don't you know I don't want to put you on the spot but you know seems like two members. I think you'll be a good chair Nancy so we can always talk of what that means like what's the role of the chair and you know time commitments everything. If that would be as long as she'll support me through it and tell me what I need to do. I mean I don't really have any sense of what's involved in being a chair I have to admit. Sure. We should I nominate Nancy to be chair. I second. Should we should we vote or should we postpone it. Nancy I think. I think. Yeah you can go ahead and vote and if you might decide to vote me out. Good. Okay how do we do that Nate. So I guess there's a I guess I'm gonna say there's an official motion right Steven emotion Karen you second and then we would any discussion and if not I guess we take a roll call. I support you Nancy. I'm sorry. Yeah current I guess we would go to a vote it doesn't seem like there's much of a discussion. Yeah let's go for a vote. Okay. Nicole do you want to start. Yes. Approve. Bruce. I've heard yes. Steve. Yes. Nancy. Okay. I'm Karen and I vote yes, and that's the majority and you are new chairman. That's great you want to take over immediately. Wait till next meeting. Okay. What about vice vice chair. Yeah I think that's important so vice chair, you know we'll serve if chairs absent and that is important to have yes. Steve, are you interested in being vice chair. Yeah I would be I would be interested in being vice chair. Yeah. Okay I second. I second the motion for Steve. Bruce. I'll make the motion for Steve. I'm not sure that Steve is going to make the motion for himself. We probably could. I can still second. Okay. So shall we shall we vote. I approve. Bruce. I approve. Nancy. I approve of myself. And I also approve so Steve you are the vice chair. Now clerk, I'm not sure. Have we had a clerk just that involve anything like taking notes. I don't think we have a clerk. I don't think we have a clerk. But sometimes, I mean, I'm not, I think, I think, I think the bylaw might call for a clerk and the role might be pretty minimal. At this point. But, you know, and other, other commissions. You know, they might have more of a role right taking minutes or other things. I think that's not the case in Amherst. So it's just in name only that we have a clerk. Why don't we vote for, why don't we wait for granted to return. That'll surprise her. Yeah. Okay. We can wait with. We'll surprise her if we vote her in, but. He was very worried about being voted in his chair. Perhaps. Yeah, I think that's as long as you have a chair and vice chair that for the most part will, you know, help. You know, the commission can operate with that. Right. Okay. Okay. I have a parent. I have a commitment that started four minutes ago. I'm wondering where do we stand here? Are we going to continue to discussion of the expansion, Steve? Yeah, I can give, I can give it to you really quick. The research is done. Research is done. Susanna Faving has done from these. For all 10 properties that are historic. So what we're going to do, I looked it up on the handbook, but we don't have to form study committee. We can. The committee can be the study committee. So what we're waiting for is. The first thing I'd like to get is a little bit of a sharp on the committee. And I, you know, I don't know how that's what the interview process is going on because she could be very helpful in writing the significance and doing a lot of the stuff. And I think she would be very helpful. I think that's a, I think that's a very very good question. I think, you know, what I would say is that the study report and the outreach. Made a week, making any progress on the. Interview process. Yeah. The town millers office is setting up interviews for. Vacancy. So I know that they reached out last week. And. You know, I'm, my guess is the next few weeks, there would be people that would be interviewed. Okay. Well, I hopefully it would be Elizabeth because she's the co-chair of literally wrote the book Amherst and A to Z. So I couldn't think of anyone better. The other thing is, I know you get the planning department is so understaffed now. I know there's only two of you left, but you and I and Bruce were gonna get together to come up with some ideas to approach the land and property owners about it. So Bruce and I actually were gonna get together on our own but if we could do that, that would be the next step before we start doing outreach. Yeah, sorry, yeah, I think you can. Yeah, I mean, I did speak with one property owner. We was in a meeting and I mentioned this, but I think it was somewhat, incidentally. So I think, yeah, I can, I would say that you two can get a time to meet and then let me know. Yeah, I mean, I feel like I've been a ping pong ball in the last few weeks. I've been really busy, I apologize for that. I honestly, I can't get the work done. I wanna get done cause I have so many meetings. Yeah, no, I can't imagine. You know, I have things, I have a backlog of work. I've been working at night an extra time just to get caught up and so meetings have been tough. Sorry about that. Yeah. No worries, no worries. I'm actually going out of town for three weeks next Thursday. So that'll give you a breather. So I guess I'll have to wait. You know, I found out my term is for three years and not one year. So that takes a little bit of the pressure off. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, I looked at the, I sent around the establishing local historic district guidebook from Massa, you know, the updated one for the Massachusetts Historical Commission. So I think, you know, some of it was right. I think the strategy could be what, right? What are the outreach steps of the property owners and then, you know, how do we get the process officially started? It's interesting that the research is done. So really, I mean, that's, that's usually the heavy lift when with Well, you've seen so much is in a paving gun. Sure, each one is a little masterpiece. Yeah. Yes, I read what you said around that. I, and Steve, I'm also going away for a month starting next Thursday. So it doesn't look like, and I've got things we have to do to get ready for that. So I don't think next week is going to work. So I guess it'll be April. Okay. Where are you going? Oh, I'm going to a Lutheran. Oh, it's a long behind Bahamian Island. No, it's a, I'm going to get rid of my tennis elbow and a few other ailments. I hope. Nice. Yeah. Steve, what about yourself? Where are you headed? Jenny and I were biking in Chile for a few weeks. Oh, nice. Yeah. But Jennifer will be doing those zoom calls from Chile. While writing. Yeah. The beauty of zoom, huh? Yeah. Oh, it's a curse. Thank you so much for sharing today. I know you've had a lot of stuff on. Really appreciate it. And then, yeah. So, you know, we don't have just like, you know, we haven't received any applications yet. You know, the, the demolition of the graduate 98 freeing will have to be at some point in application, whether they want to take the garage down or build something new, you know, and there's been a number of permits in the district, but for work that doesn't involve exterior changes, or, you know, there's one or two that are replacing windows with very similar windows. And so there hasn't been any activity. I mean, I will say that once, usually when spring comes around and people start planning some projects, the commission could get busy. So, you know, anticipating if in the next few weeks, we might get, you know, some applications for something that requires a hearing, you know, whether that's, you know, like a, you know, renovation or front porch or something, but I don't have anything immediate, nothing that's really imminent, but. Okay, so let's target April, four and three months to get to go. Yeah. Great. Well, I'm going to disappear because I want to get my people are waiting, but I'll see you shortly. Bye-bye. Bruce. So, should we go on? Are there any unanticipated items, Nate? Or have you already covered that? Yeah, I just covered that. I don't really have anything yet. Okay. And public comment. Wait, there's still a few members of the public here if they want to raise their hand or that's Melissa. Just wanted to say thank you all so much for letting me speak and for being so considerate with the proposed thing on Furings Street. And congrats to Nancy and Steve. Okay. I hope it's okay if I hang up for just, you know, the rest of this, because I think it's so interesting. Oh yeah. Well, thanks for it. You can stay. It's public. So thanks. Oh, thank you guys. It looks like Pat. I'm going to join this group sometime. Yeah. Pat Brinkman. Sure. Hi. I'm Pat Brinkman and I'm actually on Cosby at 26 Cosby next to Jesse and Kim and across from Jennifer and Steve. And I wanted to say thank you too for all of you thoughtful comments. And I really didn't really think I needed to say anything more that hadn't already been said. Appreciate that. Thank you. Thank you. Except that actually there are three very important maples, sugar maples on the border that I'm concerned that the way that the current design is going to wind up killing those trees no matter what happens. So I'm really fearful of that too. Sorry, just clarification that right may be right on the property line or close to the property line. They are probably right on the property line. Yeah. All right. Thank you. Oh yeah, Charles said they had a survey so that'll be useful to see to know exact location of trees. I don't see any other public hands. I think I don't see anything else Corrine. So I don't know if there's any other business unless there's any other comments from the commission. No, I gotta sign off. I gotta go, you guys. Sorry. Hi. Hi. Next meeting. Yeah, next meeting. I was just wondering, whenever you get an application, how soon do we have to meet after it? Like you were saying some might be coming in but I recognize two members maybe gone for three to four weeks. Yeah, so we can always ask an applicant in writing to extend that period but typically it's within 45 days. Okay. So an applicant could be willing to, could ask for another week or two. The curse of Zoom, I guess, as Bruce said, I could always put it out to you. The commission just asked, who's available? We'd have to have four as a quorum. So as long as four members could attend, that's it, we could have a hearing then. I'm back, sorry. So does that mean you're not gonna set a date or it can just wait for you to- Yeah, I mean, I think we could say like in early April and I'll reach out in March to confirm that. And then if we need to have a hearing at some point, I would also just email the commission. And so, we could just kind of assume early April would be the next meeting. I mean, we could just tentatively put it out there and then confirm later. I don't know how that works. I like when you reach out, when you say, okay, we've got this and how about we meet? Sure. We'll talk to each other soon. Yeah, thanks for me. Okay. So, I can't remember. Do I have to do anything at the end? Just, I- No, you don't know. I mean, some people say you have to take a vote to adjourn, but I think if everyone's ready, we can just say- Yeah, we're ready. Thank you all. And thanks for putting up with me. And I'm so glad I'm- No, don't have to- I don't have to- Don't say that. No, Nancy, reach out to me and then we can meet. That'd be great. Okay. Great. Thank you. Yeah, thanks, everyone. I'm going to end the webinar then. Thank you very much. Bye, everyone. Bye.