 All right. Good evening, everyone. This open meeting of the Arlington redevelopment board is being conducted remotely for the governor's extension of the remote meeting provisions consistent with Governor Baker's executive order of March 12, 2020. Due to the state, state of emergency in the Commonwealth due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 virus. The extension, which amends the open meeting law allows us to conduct remote meetings in lieu of holding all the meetings meetings in a public publicly accessible physical location. For this meeting, the ARB is convening via zoom as posted on the town's website identifying how the public may join. Please know that this meeting is being recorded and that some attendees are participating via video conference. Accordingly, please be aware that other people may be able to see you and take care not to screen share your computer. Anything you broadcast may be captured by the recording. So we will start off this evening by confirming that all members are present and can hear me and I'll take a quick roll call. Starting with Ken Wow. Yes. Jean Benson present. Melissa Tintacolas. Present. And I am Rachel Zimbary. I am present as well. And from the Department of Planning and Community Development, we have Jennifer eight. Here. Do we have anyone else from the department joining us this evening? We have Kelly line Emma. Fantastic. Thank you very much. So we will go ahead and begin by starting with agenda item number one public hearings. We'll start with docket number 3662 29 mill street. I will remind all of the applicants on the docket this evening that the applicants will be given five minutes for a presentation. Followed by the Department of Planning and Community Development staff, which will have a few minutes to discuss the memo that they prepared for each of these hearings. The board will then have time to ask a few questions, followed by public comments. And then the board will engage in our discussion following public comments and the presentations. So let's go ahead and open docket number 3662 29 mill street. Do we have anyone from from the applicant who is here this evening to present. Yes, this is Jason Perrillo with bluebird graphics solutions. Wonderful. Please go ahead. Okay, so we're here tonight to seeking approval for a wall sign for great sky solar. This is a fabricated aluminum sign cabinet that is three inches deep and it has pushed through acrylic lettering, which allows only the lettering and the logo to illuminate. Does have some zoning issues because of the height off the grade. And also the size, which is limited to 20 square feet. This sign is 24 square feet. And the reason why we're proposing a wall sign is opposed to a freestanding sign is because of this unique situation of this building, which has a very short front yard with a large tree, and also a vestibule that sticks out from the building so a free which would conflict with where the sign could be visible, either as a wall sign or as a freestanding sign. So we're here to answer any questions and the owner of the business is also with us tonight if there's any questions you have for him. Right there. Great. Thank you very much. Did you have any other remarks that you'd like to make Mr. Mr. Perlow. I mean that's the basic overview of the sub. That's fantastic. Thank you. I will go ahead and turn it over to Jenny and for any remarks that she'd like to make on behalf of the department. And Rachel, I think the assaplicant actually summarized quite well the issues that are for the board to weigh and decide here which is it is a non conforming sign that are also asking for an excess in signage compared to what is allowed in this particular district in the zoning bylaw. And we, we are recommending that it proceed, but with with that understanding that it is beyond what is typically allowed. However, I think that the way that they have approached this particular signage is would not be detrimental in any way to the neighborhood or this particular district. And I think that the board has all of the material that it needs in front of them in order to assess whether or not they should proceed with the sign the application does explain in detail how the signage would be affixed to the building and all of the sign dimensions and other relevant information is before you tonight. That's all that I have to say thank you. Thank you so much Jenny. And I'll run through the world call of the board for any questions as a reminder we will save discussion for the end of public comments. So we'll start first with Ken. I have no questions. Okay, thank you Ken. I moved to Jean. I have a question which, unless I'm reading it wrong is seems to be a disparity the application for the sign indicates that it's 24.1 square feet. A typo from planning indicates the sign is 18 square feet. Can somebody clarify which is the right size 24.01 is correct that's a typo on the drawing sorry about that. Oh it's 24.01 and not. This is taking the extreme dimensions of the sign the total height from the top of the crown to the bottom and then the total width so there is a considerable amount of negative space when you're calculating the square footage for this particular sign. Explain, I mean it's about four square feet larger than, as you know, then allowed under the sign by law explain why you can't reduce it by four square feet to be consistent with the sign. We could reduce it. This was just the size that we felt would be the most visible because if we shrink this down more that's going to make the custom solar solutions part of the sign, almost illegible right now those letters are seven eighth inches high so if we shrugged this down more that would bring those letters down to a size that might be really tough to read. Yeah, I mean I'll hear what the other members of the board have to say I'm in agreement about the location on the building based upon what you've said and also that the previous tenant had a sign the same height it looked like to me, but I'm not sure about that it's in the public interest, which is our task to approve a sign that's larger than allowed by the bylaws but I'll listen to what others have to say about that that's it. Thanks Jane. Jenny, could I ask a point of clarification from you or Kelly regarding the sign measurement specific to section 6.2 point for the sign measurements in the bylaws and specifically in the bullet point. If we talk about irregular shaped signs. There's a diagram which shows that rather than taking the full area that the applicants are permitted to create basically bounding boxes around some of the irregular sections with that. Then bring this applicant into compliance if we calculated the sign that way instead of the full width versus the full height as he is indicating the 24 square feet is taken on Rachel. I think potentially I would need to go back into the calculation though, but I do, I do see your point of clarification. I would prefer to to look at this a little more carefully before answering you. Okay. Melissa, any questions for the applicant. In terms of the illumination. Was that what was the hours of operation of when it would be eliminated and then I guess my other question was related to the energy. I was just curious, you know, this is a solar project the new tenant and I was curious if there is any solar kind of to this building. We're actually hoping to apply for a permit for solar as well. We are just renting from the Damian Trust. They still own the building, but we would like to install solar on the building regardless. And so we will likely be passing a permit request along the desk in the relatively near future. And this light will of course need to meet our standards and standards as well and not just aesthetically but it'll be eliminated via LED. The illumination. We, we don't want a flashy bright tacky sign. So the illumination itself is also going to be quite relatively minimal. If that makes sense. It makes sense. In terms of question, Rachel, on the dimensions, are you saying if it was boxed kind of outlined that the dimension would be slightly different potentially on how it's calculated? Is that what I'm understanding your question was? That was what my question was if you took basically the section that protrudes above and added that to the rectangle below, would that bring it into or under the 20 square feet requirement was my question. I believe it would. Okay. Rachel, if I get to answer that now, the 18 feet, 18, the number, the sort of discrepancy that was being referenced by Jean. That number is actually the calculation of which reflects the 6.2.4 or regular shaped signs under B. So that is actually the calculation which does bring it under that what is shown technically on this plan. Great. Thank you, Jenny. So could you confirm then that the only that the only item that we'd be looking for in terms of non compliance with the bylaws would be the height. And more signage. Yes. Okay. Because of the area. Okay. So did you have any further questions? No further questions. And I'll bring it back to jeans and to originally raise the question before we open this up for public comments. Did you have any further questions? Now that we have that clarification point of clarification. No, it's good to have that point of clarification. Thank you. Great. All right. Any other questions from the board before we open this up from public comments. Seeing none, we will now. I missed what Jenny just said. Was there something about the number of signs? Can you explain that please? I was talking about more signage that that would be an excess of signage technically, but I think that you, we've just clarified that point. And I think the focus is on the sign height. Okay, so there's not an excess number of signs. No more signs. No, it was that it's a non conforming sign. And we've just revisited that if you calculate it based upon the irregularity. Guidelines, if you will, and measurements that would be under the amount. Great. Thank you. Great. Thank you. All right. At this time, I will now open this docket for public comments. If you would like the speakers in the order in which your hands are raised, please use the raised hand function in zoom which you can find at the bottom of your screen if you are joining the computer. I will ask any member of the public wishing to speak to please identify yourself by your name and address. Three minutes for any comments. The first speaker this evening will be Chris. Thank you madam chair Chris Loretty 56 Adams Street can you hear me okay. I can thank you. Thanks. I have a few points to make about this first on the staff memo that you received. In regards to an existing non conforming sign. I just wanted to be sure that board was clear there is no sign on that on that building. And if you look at the Google picture from last November there was no sign. I suggest that you really need to consider this as a blank slate. But my main point is that I don't think a lighted sign is appropriate for that building. This is a residential district. I believe all the way from mills. I'm sorry from summer street to Mass Ave. And there are no lighted signs there I often walk along Mass Ave and there are quite a few residential buildings with office uses in them. I don't think any of them have internally illuminated signs like this. This is a sort of sign that's more appropriate for a restaurant or other type of facility that than an office building. I would ask that if the board were to approve such a sign with internal illumination that they restrict the illumination hours to the times that the office is open. Otherwise it becomes more like a billboard where people see this bright or lighted sign at night in the in the office is even open. So that would be one request I would make if indeed you you see fit to to approve it. I would suggest that the sign is too big and it is too high and that it could be lowered closer to the the height of the entryway and still be visible and that would be more appropriate. The final thing I would like to do madam chairs ask you to ask the applicant just how this building is going to be used it's been described as as an office use and remembering that this is right next to the bike path. I would like to know whether they're going to be having you know construction vehicles and trucks Park there, whether it will be used for warehousing equipment and the panels and other equipment that is going to be installed, or is it strictly speaking a an office because I think that that should come into decision making. And if indeed it's going to be more than just strictly office use. I'm not sure that's allowed under the zoning bylaw. Thank you. I'm actually going to keep our discussion tonight to the sign since this is a signage application but I appreciate your remarks Chris thank you. Are there any members of the public wishing to speak this evening. If so please use the raise hand function. Seeing none we will close public comment. Excuse me. Seeing no other members of the public wishing to speak we will go ahead and close public comments for this for this docket. And I will run through the members of the board for any further discussion on this signage application starting first with kin. I find no issues with the sign. I think it's reasonable to be this size and height, because I think once that. I'm not sure you call it a bush or tree. In the springtime developed, you're not gonna see anything. I'm familiar with that year that things are pretty fluffy tree there and putting it putting it lower the feast of purpose I believe of that side. And I believe the signage is not on 24247. Can we ask what the hours are operational for the signage. Yes, I'll throw that to the applicant for their planned hours of operation for the sign. We were assuming that the the sign would stay lit into the evening until eight nine o'clock. So we're going to see our warehouse is in Woover. So it's only the executive team, six of us that are going to be utilizing the office as an office. The sign is not meant to be flashy or bright in any fashion. So the light is not actually going to be throwing any actual illumination. So we're just going to be using a clear acrylic to just display the name of the company and somewhat minimal fashion. After the sun goes down and most importantly during the winter. Of course, that's fine eight or nine sounds reasonable to me, Rachel. I am for the question I'm in favor of this. Approving this. Great. Thank you, Ken. Jean. I have nothing else. I'm comfortable with this sign I would like to is if it's part of the condition to kind of ensure that the hours of operation. And then personally would like to see that you know, I don't know the energy piece I just think it's ironic if you're kind of illuminating a sign for a long periods of time, and you're solar and so I think that maybe that's just my two cents on that. Is there any condition you wanted to, or do you just wanted that note? Well, I don't know if I put that as a can. Right. No, you're a tenant in a building. So, and he would already said that you're kind of moving forward on that. But maybe in terms of the hours of operation going back to that. Ken, you said you're comfortable with it. Do we need to put a condition on it? I guess, Madam chair or Rachel. I mean, I believe that there are already restrictions in the, in the bylaw. Could you confirm that those are included? Yep. We don't necessarily typically include them but under 6.2.4 C. There's a section about sign illumination and what is allowed. We could certainly reference that section of the bylaw in the conditions. Okay. That would be great. Thank you. You're welcome. Rachel, if I might sort of go ahead. So the, the bylaw says no illumination between midnight and 6am. So the question is whether that's acceptable, or whether based on the representations of the applicant we want to add a condition. I think he said eight or nine PM that sort of says one to 6am. Yeah, no illumination between 9pm and 6am. And the other one, because there's, there was some discrepancy in how you measure the sign, you probably want to have a condition that says the sign shall not exceed 20 square feet. Since we now know it's only 18. We don't want to add that. I think though that because the application shows the dimensions that we wouldn't need to add that as a, as a condition because it's, it's shown. It's clearly shown in terms of the dimensions in the, in the application. The only thing about that is that their application indicates it's 24 square feet and change. And sometimes what we do is look back at the application to see if they're following it. That's why I think, because there's a different calculation, we probably want to put that as a condition or permit. Yes, what we could do is request an updated application for record. Jenny, would you say that that's feasible. I'd be happy to accept an updated version of this, just noting the correct measurement, but I could also just copy the section. I would say that the condition seven, where I discuss the advertising features and sort of move the piece about the approximate size of the allowed sign as approved by the board as a condition to make it clear that that is what has been approved and then I will request an updated from Jason and updated. So anything in elevation or just the sign details is fine for the purposes of the record. Sure. Thank you. Thank you. I'm in favor. What I'd like to do first is see if there are any other questions or comments from the board. Seeing none. Is there a motion to approve the application with the following conditions. Seeing no illumination between the hours of 9pm and 6am. And first I'll throw that back to the applicant to confirm that you would be amenable to that condition 9pm to 6am being the hours of non illumination of the sign. Okay. So with the two conditions, the non illumination timeframe I just mentioned, and then the condition that Jenny will put into the approval letter with the confirmed square footage of the sign per teams request as well. Is there a motion to approve with those conditions. The motion. Second. Thank you. We'll do a roll call vote for approval starting with Ken. Yes. Jean. Yes. Melissa. Yes. And I am the S as well. Congratulations. Your application has been approved. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Thank you. We have a document that closes docket 3662 for 29 Mill Street. We will now move to docket number three, six, six, six, five, six, 45 mass Avenue. We have Mark Sides on the line with us. There he is, actually. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen of the board. As she said, my name is Mark Sides. I'm from poor states group representing JPMorgan Chase regarding the proposed development at 645 Massachusetts Avenue. The space was previously occupied by not your average Joe's bar and restaurant. Chase is looking to move into that space and develop it as a approximately 4141 square foot banking center. The reason for this application is that because this is a B five central business use area. We are looking for an approval for a banking use, which is allowed by right, but in excess of 2000 square feet requires a special permit. So that is the primary reason why we're before you this evening. In addition to that, we are looking for some relief on the parking regulations for both automobile parking and for bike parking due to the proximity of the municipal lot and on street parking surrounding that particular building. Great. Thank you. Do you have any other remarks or will that be it for you for the time being. That'll be all for the moment. I'll be happy to entertain any questions of course. I appreciate it. Thank you so much. I'll turn it over to Jenny rate for any remarks on behalf of the department. Thank you, Rachel. I want to say a few things. First, I want to say that the we would prefer that they, this particular applicant complies with the bike parking bylaw there's absolutely no reason why based upon the amount of square footage that they have in this property, but they cannot comply with the bike parking bylaw, both inside and outside. We very much want them to do that. We've also requested that they make some modest changes to the facade, as well as the signage that's proposed to the facade. They are removing the awnings that are there right now those awnings were put up by not your average Joe's. They are they're not historic to the property in any way but I think that the changes that are being proposed. One of the biggest challenges I think that they're creating is to accessibility, and I would like to see the applicant address the issue of accessibility, both to the main the primary egress of the building as well as to an accessible route to an accessible space, which has not been defined at this time. Another thing that I wanted to point to point out to you is the change of use. I have left that open to the board to talk about, which is, we do have a number of banks and financial institutions lending institutions, etc. In Arlington Center, of course, it would always be nice to keep a restaurant or have another restaurant in its place. This not your average Joe's actually replaced another restaurant that had been the center for years at this particular location. So it is disappointing that we are losing the restaurant of course but the board does have one area to talk about which is whether or not we do have a lot of this particular use in the center and what that might mean to Arlington Center and the type of sort of liveliness and activity that we would prefer to see on our main streets. And I think that that then speaks to how the bank is proposing to sort of interface with the street I think is very cold and completely the reverse of what we have had at that site for basically decades based upon the prior restaurant use. And, you know, I think there's there's ways that they could change or make some modifications to what's proposed in the facade, including through public art, the sort of opening of the windows. So there's a little more transparency and other modifications as well that I've noted in the memo. So those are the main things that I want to put on the table for the board to reference. Otherwise again you, this applicant has provided all the materials that you need in order to, you know review and for sort of completeness factor. I don't think that there's anything else I just want to look real quick now. That was it. Thank you so much Rachel. Great. Thank you so much, Jenny. I'll now move to the board for any questions. Again, reminding that we will save discussion for once public comment is complete. We'll start with Ken. Yeah, I have one. Well, let's start with this question. Are you renting below the basement that is beneath not your average shows. Is that what you're referring to? Below your, below the new back now. There's, there's space below the not your average shows had their kitchen and storage down there. So I noticed you got a stairwell going down there off your entry. Is that part of your rental space or is that the landlords space? That space would end up being controlled by Chase but only because there was an egress issue pertaining to that. So for that stairwell to be effective, it had to be relocated and that would reduce and also the basement would have to be gutted out so that we would not be violating any path of travel requirements. So the answer is yes, you guys are renting it's part of your lease. It ends up being within the control of Chase. Yes. So there is enough space if push on the show to have a more concerned with the long term bicycle parking. I can understand what you're saying about having enough temporary parking there, but a long term employee parking is something that I think you should comply with. And I'm going to question that. And then along the front of the building. The windows that used to be the restaurants windows. Are you keeping those windows there with all the millions and everything else in there, or are you going to change that to match better. The windows you proposed put on the driveway side. Because right now, if I look at it, it looks like two types of windows. The number of the windows that are on the massive side are single glazed and a number of them are insulated windows. So the goal was to replace the ones that are single glazed with new. I'm more concerned about the millions. When you when you look at the windows right on. Yeah, there you go. Perfect. See those windows that have square millions all over it. It doesn't go with the character of what you're trying to portray a long mass app and along. I don't know what the side street is but the driveway side, those windows are more commercial windows. And this looks more like your restaurant or residential kind of window. And it doesn't have the same scale as the other windows. Can you Jenny scroll to the other elevation they have. Yeah, you go. You see the scale between the two windows, what you have on this on the driveway side, that looks like commercial bank. When you look at the other elevation it does not look like a bank. It looks like something is left over from what was there before. Would you guys consider changing that those three windows out. Definitely I mean we can make that so that it is a common character throughout. So it looks similar all the way around. I don't have an issue with you guys removing the awning. I do have an issue with the blade sign you got there. I don't think that's in character what we have. I don't know about mass have that's in that area there so I'm, I'm going to be probably against the blade sign. Can you relocate that sign to the, we call that great band off to the side I think you still see it the same way. It just, it just be horizontal instead of vertical. You following me. I'm sorry sir no, if you wouldn't mind elaborating on that. All right, you got a blade sign there right at the corner of the building of mass F and that driveway. Yes, sir. If you were to take that blade sign and just rotate it 90 degrees and put it right on that band you got going across there. We're going to be going to an arrow right there about we may be centered about that window. You would still still be seen, because that because at that point in junk it's curved. That street's curved you're going to see it. So, there's no character of blade signs in anywhere along that mass have that I see and I think I want to keep the character of signage similar along that. Okay, we'll take that comment. And is there is there not a way of relocating that atm and putting a lift in the, in the rear vestibule so you can accommodate handicap access from there too. Well, as you're probably alluding to there are a couple of steps that lead up to that rear door. Yep. And so, there's a landing there that is shared with the tenant above. So, putting a lift into that small footprint would probably be very challenging with how does the tenant above access that is it through the hatched area that you're showing. No, if you look at the image that's on the screen right now under this sort of dark tower element there's a door on the left side which is approximately where Chase's door would be and then the door on the right side accesses the tenant above. That's what you're saying. So, you. So, putting a ramp out there is this next to a possible you saying yes sir, there's simply not enough room to fit one into that space. Not without impinging upon the parking or the sidewalk. Okay, I can, I can see that. All right. That's a good answer. Those are all the questions I had right now. Thank you, Ken. I'll move to Jean next. Thank you. Yeah, let me start by saying that I agree with Mr. Lau about the signage. I agree with this rate about the bicycle parking. There's, there's no excuse for not providing a short term and long term bicycle parking required by the bylaw. Similarly, I think there has to be a way to make that back to our EDA compliant. If you are going to expect a number of tenants to come in that way I'm not sure where the handicap accessible spaces are on the street, but they're in front of the bank. So I think that it's incumbent upon the bank to figure out how to make the backdoor ADA compliant. Maybe you get rid of the one parking space and put a ramp there. I'm not saying you have to do that. But that's clearly one possibility that might work. My bigger problem is the problem that misery mentioned about whether this bank is essential essential or desirable at this location to the public convenience or welfare. And whether there's an already more than enough banks in Arlington Center so that what we don't need is a bank taking the place of a restaurant and I'd like you to address that if you please. Well, clearly I'm here representing a bank client so their interests are to be present within Arlington Center. This space happens to be available so that's why they'd be seeking to put a bank in this space. Obviously, it's your charge to defend the character of the center so if that's how you see the rule then I believe that's your opinion. Okay, I think that answer says a lot. Thank you. Let me see if I have anything else. That's it. Great. Thank you, Jean. Melissa, any questions for the applicant. Thanks Rachel. So, could you speak a little bit then to the decision like the market share and the decision for locating a 4000 square foot bank presence in Arlington Center. Can you guys hear me. Yeah, Mr. sides, I'm not sure if that's something that you could that you could answer I think Melissa was looking for understanding a little bit more from the bank's perspective about such a large branch in in Arlington Center and the Democrat I'm assuming you're looking for kind of the market share and the needs of the community and how that was assessed is that am I stating that properly for you. You are Rachel. Thank you very much. Absolutely. Yeah, go ahead. Forgive me, I thought she was asking for you to scroll on what was on screen. So, obviously chase is looking for representation within this community it's a great community to be you all live there you understand. What Chase brings to the table is within this footprint they can host community events. They frequently run different training sessions for the community. They do host events where local speakers can come in and speak to finances procedures banking products that are available things of that nature. So, in that respect, they do believe that they offer a unique perspective on banking that maybe isn't present in the center currently regarding the size of the space. Unfortunately, that's the size of the space is available I don't think the landlord wants to subdivide the space. And I don't think chase would be able to fit as much of the amenities that I just described to you within a 2000 square foot or less footprint. Does that answer your question. Um, it's yeah it's thank you it kind of shares what your, your kind of vision is for the space. I guess I'm curious of how they're determining you know they want representation in this community. And I'm trying to understand what kind of percentage of kind of almost kind of that market share they're trying to capture they feel like they're missing. And I think it helps me put in context. It seems to me that there's been a shift and there's a growing presence of banks here and I'm wondering, is that the trend going forward, as we've seen in other communities as demographics and income changes. I'm fortunate I don't feel that I'm very prepared to speak to that. I'm not involved in the demographics or the decision making process on which properties the bank pursues. They're architects, not their financial planners. Okay. I think, at least from my perspective, I am concerned with kind of the, the access in use or how it starts to aggregate in a certain area and especially along main streets. So I think it's supportive of the change of use in this situation. Thanks Melissa did you have any other questions for the applicant. Not at this time. Okay, thank you. I do have one question for you if you actually Jenny you could stay on that prior slide. And if you could. Sorry, the one with the corner rendering. Perfect. Yep, that one right there. Oops, the one here I'm sorry. Um, could you could you walk me through and mark the whether these, whether this is clear glazing or whether the glazing will be filmed or blacked out at any of the windows that we're seeing at either the primary Massachusetts ad size side of the building or the secondary side. Yes, it's all clear glazing within the rendering we didn't have the interior modeled so we weren't able to accurately represent that. Great. And then another question I have, although we'll probably get more into that in discussion. Would the bank be amenable to either to number one, looking at instituting onnings. And then if we decided that the onnings in terms of bringing back some of the pedestrian scale of the building was something that we wanted to pursue. And then the other amenity for the neighborhood that I believe was removed. There's a number of street, the seating that is along the current facade which I know is regularly used by the public so we're either of those two before we get into our discussion later, either of those two items something that you believe that the bank would be amenable to entertaining. Those are two comments I can definitely take back to the client but on the topic of the onnings. Yes. As you're all well aware in the central area of town here there are quite a few onnings so I think Chase was looking to distinguish themselves with the somewhat unique branding and signage, rather than using the same signage tool as some of their adjacent neighbors and competitors. Sure. Okay, but with the with the street seating be something that they would be open to considering what would you be willing to take that back to them. I would definitely use that as a take back item I know they've been somewhat resistant to it in some other communities but with this being an upscale community I think some of the concerns they have in other communities wouldn't be pertinent here. Okay, great. Thank you. I'll open it up to the board members for any further questions before we open this for public comments. Jenny. Not, not as a board member obviously the street seating I think is a good comment it is actually the town street that that that is the right of way it's not they must have put out those benches, but they are technically in the right of way that's just a point of clarification. They also had planters though, just looking at the old photo. And so I would put into the category if you could also check on not just the street seating but the planters, I think that that does add a little bit more to, you know what's happening on the facade a little more, you know more of an invitation. Thank you for letting me comment. Thank you Jenny. Jean Melissa or Chris or excuse me Jean Melissa or can are there any other questions before I move. I'll reserve my comments to a discussion later on. Okay, great. That sounds good. All right. So we will now move into the public comments period of this docket. So any member of the public wishing to speak please use the raise hand function at the bottom of your screen. I will take the comments and the order in which hands are raised. Please note that it when you when it is you're trying to speak that we would like you to identify yourself by your name and address, and you will have up to three minutes for public comments. We will start with Chris. Thank you madam chair Chris already 56 Adams Street again can you hear me okay. Yes we can thank you. Thank you. Yeah, I appreciate the comments and the staff memo and the discussion that the board has had about the number of banks in the center currently. I think the staff memo mentioned for banks in addition to those four banks. I counted to credit unions and five ATMs, and I'd like to the board to focus or would ask the board to focus on section 3.3.3 g of the zoning bylaw, which says the requested use will not by its addition to a neighborhood, causing excess of the use that could be detrimental to the character of said neighborhood. And I would suggest in this case, it is detrimental. And it's detrimental not because banks are inherently bad I think we all we all use banks, but simply because there's too many of them. And the b5 zoning district is a finite resource there are certain uses that are only allowed in that district. If you're going to allow one use like banks to dominate the use of the district. It means you don't allow those other uses, whether it's restaurants or retail or other uses that are unique to that zoning district with that area. I would suggest that the applicant seek other locations in the town, perhaps outside the immediate center for this type of facility in order to allow sort of the mix of commercial uses that I would hope the board as the planning board sees desirable for the town center. Thank you. Thank you. The next speaker will be Don Seltzer. Thank you madam chair Don Seltzer Irving street. I have a question or two for the applicants. I'm curious as to exactly what is the business of this center is it just a bank, a normal bank or is it. Does it have more of a function beyond that. I believe that the applicant answered that earlier when he identified the classes and some of the education items that that would be programs at this location. Okay, I mean that would that's just a very occasional thing. I guess I'm what I'm getting at is it more of a financial investment center like like fidelity runs many of these in which they're regularly open in the evening and withdraw street traffic foot traffic there, or is it just a bank with other than these occasional special events and seminars and things is really just going to be closed at five or six o'clock every evening. We can, if you'd like to continue with your comments I will absolutely ask the applicant to clarify that when we get into the discussion section. I've done just one other question about how many employees are expected to be working at this location. Great, we will ask for that clarification as well. Thank you very much. Thank you. The next speaker will be Steve revela. Hello, Madam chair Steve revela 111 sunny side Avenue. So my understanding is that it takes us, you know, Arlington, typically 18 months to fill a vacant commercial space. I was rather surprised to see this one filled in two or three I was honestly expecting this space to have public art in the windows until sometime in the middle of 2023. It potentially filled in 2021 I believe is a pleasant surprise. Now I understand that there are a lot of banks in the area. And, you know, I think the EDR criteria are worried something to the effect of, you know, the use will not cause an excess of the use that is detrimental to the character of the neighborhood or something to that effect. And I'm not sure how one would judge when there are too many banks. Prior to this it was a restaurant and, you know, one could also ask well were there an excess of restaurants and has that been detrimental to the neighborhood. Ultimately, I see, you know, this is a really clean looking establishment at least from the renderings. You know, it fits. We happen to just attract a lot of banks and restaurants and perhaps, you know, preschools that's sort of that seems to be Arlington's bread and butter to an extent. I do agree with the comments about long term bicycle parking I think the applicant should absolutely provide that. I encourage the board to grant parking relief. And that is that is all I have to offer. Thank you madam chair. Thank you for your comments. The next speaker this evening will be calling planning him. Hello, calling him Kensington Park. This is a high foot traffic and bike path area at a major intersection of Arlington Center and that's far more suitable for a restaurant or local business use there's a parking lot there. And this is right next to another national bank. So, there's, there's the big swath of area that will be national bank and not local business vibrant restaurant. And that's what concerns me. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any other members of the public who wish to speak about this docket. None. We will now close public comments. And I will open this back up to the board for discussion. And I will start with G kin for any of your comments. I appreciate the board and the planning department, wishing this to be a restaurant. And, you know, it might be the highest and best used for it but how many empty store funds to have now along mass have that once was restaurants. I think wishing for something to happen, I think it's difficult because we're forcing something what we want and if, if economics doesn't support that I don't think we can keep on pushing that agenda without doing something about about that to encourage it. So putting. I don't know I just think that seeing all these empty storefronts along mass ad that used to be restaurants, and then wishing this place here to be a restaurant is unfair. That's my opinion and maybe different. And I can respect that but I strongly feel that, you know, if we start keeping businesses out of Arlington, we're going to become a bedroom community. And it won't be no, there won't be any business in there to have a good balance. And I think that's what we're trying to do here. And so also I think having it one more bank. I don't think it's that much, that much more it gives people more choices to go to a different bank, and so forth. Yes, Bank of America is right next door or pretty close. But, you know, what's Burger King about McDonald's or vice versa. I think having both their only helps encourage service better service and give people in Arlington choices. So I'm I'm strongly saying, let's not look at this because we want this to be a restaurant. I agree with some of the other comments about, you know, let's, there should be bike storage there. Let's change some of the windows there and and so forth. But I don't think the argument of saying it's not a restaurant they should look elsewhere is the way we should vote on this project. And when my discussion is a little more of the rest of the board members. Great. Thank you, Ken. I think for this sake of discussion what I'd like to do is focus on that subject first, and then move to some of the other discussion areas. Gene I'd be interested in your opinion on that particular subject. I think my thought about this is that Arlington should welcome chase to open a branch in Arlington. In a place that doesn't already have so many bank branches and ATMs within two or three block radius that there are other places in town where this could go that aren't so highly banked as this area is. And I think it's incumbent upon the applicant to tell us how this would not cause an excess of bank use in these few blocks. It could and it's not what it's good in the bylaw be detrimental to the character of the neighborhood in terms of foot traffic during the evening. In terms of choices other than just banks and how this is essential essential or desirable in this location to the public convenience or welfare. If there were had been another bank here and it was replacing another bank, we would have a better idea of the impact of putting yet another bank here, but we what we do know is what the area was like when there were restaurants there. And we know that this will not successfully replicate a foot traffic or just the vibrancy that was there previously. I, you know, I agree we don't know if a restaurant is going to move there or not. And if so when, but we do know that if this bank moves there they will not be a restaurant or some other establishment there that would be better for this particular neighborhood in Arlington so I'm leaning to say that it doesn't meet the criteria in 3.3.3 B and in 3.3.3.3 G for the reasons that we've discussed, whereas in some other places in Arlington, I think it might well meet those criteria. That aside, I know this is what would you just talking about. I think with the changes we discussed with the parking with ADA access and back. It's an improvement. Thank you, Jean. Melissa on the same topic. Well, I, I'm in agreement with Dean and a lot of what, you know, he said about the change in use. I've worked in a few different communities now and I think there's some consideration and maybe we could do some initial some kind of exploratory study, but it's not only just the number of banks. It's proximity to one another. It's linear square footage. It's total square footage. And I think it doesn't, the use itself doesn't kind of support the goals of the master plan with, you know, enhancing a pedestrian walkable area. Walkable doesn't mean there's just sidewalks. Walkable, you know, is not only just attractive, but things to go to things to see and interact with. You know, our master plan recommendations includes, you know, the center business district, having a mix of uses, not just one dominant use like a wall street or something like that. So, well, you know, I see our charge is ensuring there's a mix of uses. I'm not saying it has to be a restaurant either. And I see that there's, you know, once this bank is in place, the lease will minimally be for about approximately 10 years, if not longer with five year options. So this space, 4,000 square feet kind of will be gone to bank use. And then if banks still kind of remain a viable use into the future, you know, it will likely stay as that use it will not go back to any kind of restaurant. So, you know, we have seen this in other communities and my line of work, you know, initially it's five banks, six banks, and that's why I was curious about the market and what the trends are because before you know it, you'll have 12 banks. I was working in Lexington and there's 13 financial institutions in the center. And they've been struggling to figure out how to place the proper zoning to kind of stop it at this point. So it's just, I think, when we talk about those two pieces 3.3, 0.3 B and G that it's really critical that we understand what we're looking for what are our metrics for foot traffic walkability, and how is this supporting it or not. On the outside on the surface, is it an improvement? Is it not a vacant store? Yes. In the short run, it meets those, you know, desired outcomes. But I think for the long term, I think we would be remiss in allowing this change of use at this time. Thank you. I will go ahead, Mark, and ask you a couple of questions at this point, which one of the residents brought up because I think that those have bearing on this discussion. One was whether or not this is going to be marketed as a financial or investment center, in addition to a typical branch bank. And if you have any information, you can share with us on that. And if so, would the hours of operation be outside of normal banking hours? I think that those would both have bearing on this discussion. To respond to that, this would be what Chase, I guess, would refer to as a retail banking center. And as such, isn't a financial management office or financial planning office. While certain aspects of their services are probably dovetail into that, like personal lending, home mortgages, things like that. And also, you know, maybe introducing customers to financial services. That's not the explicit intent of the bank. Okay. Thank you. And would be for the retail banking center, could you do you have information on what the hours of operation would be for the typical hours of operation. Okay, relatively standard banking hours 30 to 5pm, you know, 9 to 12 on the weekend on Saturday rather. Okay. So, we can certainly get into a lot more of the specifics about the proposal, however, what what I'm hearing is that there are two of the four members of the board are currently not in favor of the use of use which would prohibit us from, from moving forward. We have a couple of options to go forward. Melissa and Jean would having a representative from the bank to speak to specifically and oh Jean you had questions about community engagement and some of these. Some of the training sessions, banking education, et cetera, that Mark had started to speak to would hearing more about that from a banking representative. Have any bearing on your support or non support of this use at this location. Probably not. Okay, cause they can make, they can say that's what they want to do. But if it doesn't pan out, they're not going to do it. Okay. I think I'm aligned with can in that I have concerns about turning away what I see to be a strong business who is interested and amenable to investing in a building here in the in the center of town I completely understand and and I'm also concerned about the lack of the proximity of the number of financial institutions so close to each other and the size and scale of this financial institution next to some of the others. However, I'm also, I take the comments that Steve Reveleg brought up as well in terms of, you know, what arbitrary number is is too many at this point it, you know, without clear clear guidance it to me seems like a more arbitrary decision that that we would be making absent of specific data on to your point Melissa linear footage and a full proximity map. However, I also want to be mindful of the applicants time and if there are two members of the board who are not going to be able to be supportive of this in terms of a change of views, then we can either wrote on that this evening, or ask the applicant to come back with more information or the department to providing the board to provide the board with additional assessment information in terms of the current distribution of these types of institutions throughout the center and throughout the massive quarter. So Jean I see you have your hand raised. Yeah, I will you said in the direction I'm going, what I think we can do is a couple of things one is somebody from the bank come back and directly address how they would meet those two decision criteria that we've raised which is 3.3.3 B and 3.3.3 G. And at the same time, as the staff, if they could do a little bit of the analysis that you talked about Rachel, but also see if there are any studies or reports that have been done not in Arlington but, you know, nationally regionally that looks at this issue so that we can get a better picture about whether other places have faced this and if so what's happened. So, asking the bank to do something and asking the staff to do something and then continuing this to get that information. And, can your thoughts on that approach. I'm encouraged by that approach. I think, I think we can, I think we as a board have to talk a little bit more amongst ourselves as hoping to get this done maybe at our retreat and say look what what are we trying to do for Arlington and how we how we how we go about doing this. I mean, you can't just say we want this this and this we have to actually put in motion steps that encourage this. So they would happen. I don't think a bank would go into a an area that's highly dense, and there'd be too many banks they just would not do that. I think they're still common sense there and I think they're invested quite a bit of money to do that. Or, let's say, there is so much. So many banks that could be supported in this neighborhood. So the banks that have better service can survive and the ones that don't have as much service, or, it's not the right word but I'm saying businesses, you know, won't be able to survive and so we so we get better businesses in our neighborhoods. So we're actually with competition, encouraging a better source. I mean, that's what America's about. I mean, it's a little bit of a competition you can't just dictate what's going to be there and it's going to be there I just, I don't know I think, let's head down that way. I don't. I don't think that's the way to go for it. I'm, you know, this is one of the topics I'm fairly passionate about, you know, about how we go about encouraging the growth along Mass Ave. I mean, it's very important to me, and how the city, how this town sorry, how this town is going to grow in the near future. Are we going to be a bedroom community, or are we going to have some sort of balance. I mean there's all this talk about trying to balance it and we did all this research about the industrial zone and how we do all this encouragement all that stuff there. Well we have someone who wants to come in and invest in our town already and was telling them to go away. Well, I just, I don't mean to be aggressive against my other woman I respect you guys I just see that this is a sign that's heading the wrong way. And if Jean says we need to be some sort of compromise, I'm okay with that. And let's have the bank come back and see what else they can. But I'm just feel strongly that if we tell chase to go away. It has other replications of other areas, or people wanted to invest in this town. And I just, I'm not gonna say anymore. Sorry I didn't mean to cut you off there can. I do want to move the discussion along I see Melissa it looks like you had something that you wanted to to share. Yes, have we talked to the property owner or does has Jenny or Ali been engaged with the property owner. We have tried to be engaged with the property owner, especially with not your average shows closing, but have not been able to, you know broach this particular topic. Rachel, I just want to say I want to after says finished, I want to come back and make a clarifying point. If you if you could now that I think would be appropriate because I was going to start wrapping into some requests for for the next for the next time that the applicant comes in front of us so I think this would be a good time. Okay. So was there anything else. I'm sorry. That's okay. I just think that it's not the tenant and necessarily coming back and explaining why they will, you know, be a good tenant. I want to hear from the property owners who what other interests has been in this property. And I think that's interesting to me. I'd like to hear what maybe Ali Carter would say about the use in terms of it fulfilling kind of the street activation, the walkability and mix of uses. I think we have a intent here for, you know, guiding us into a way from this use is really to enhance the comprehensive like vitality of the center. It's so easy to go to a short term, you know, fix on this. And I think we have to stay committed to the bigger goals of what our community wants for the center. Jenny. So first I'll just say that Ali Carter and Daniel Amstutz and Kelly line and I'll help to contribute to the review of this project so we do have her voice somewhere in that memo as part of a contribution to this conversation. This space becomes vacant and particularly during the pandemic Ali was very active in engaging with as many people in the business community as possible to understand their needs and the issues and particularly when there might have been a transition coming up. So that's what I was referencing with regard to this property we did try to broach it but didn't have the information. And I think as one of the community members noted during the public comment. I think it was around very quickly after not your average Joe's closed or or announced that they were closing is probably a better way to put it. So the clarification that I wanted to make is I noticed that we've been referring to 3.3.3. I believe is what keeps on being discussed but I want to direct your attention to 3.4.3 E, which is very important to any denials of permits and I believe this is this rarely comes up with this board but I want to make sure you for all of us here talking about this and for the applicant as well. I'm going to just read it the board shall not deny a special permit under this section 3.4. Unless it finds that the proposed use does not comply with the environmental design review standards listed below which is all of the standards to such a degree. That such use would result in a substantial adverse impact upon the character of the neighborhood or the town. So I just want to make it clear that it is not just about the use. It has to be broader than that in order for this board to deny anything. So just please keep that in mind that when you're utilizing 3.4 to stay in the section. So I think that with regard to thinking about the criteria for the review and any sort of clarifiers that you're looking for not just 3.3 that of course is an important component to the special permits that you operate primarily in 3.4. I hope that that helps. Thank you, Jenny. Can I have a clarification of my understanding was we would be operating when they're both 3.3 and 3.4 in making this decision is that right. 3.3 is actually findings. That's the findings 3.4 is where you're making you're basing it on decision criteria that is set forth in all of the that part below 3.4 3.4 3.3 is titled decision criteria and it says that special permit shall be granted only upon or in determination and then it gives you the a through G. So my understanding is we have that set of criteria to apply. And in addition we have for criteria under environmental design review. They have to meet both of those criteria to go ahead. Yes, all of the findings they have to be expressed as findings that these are met. I'm not trying to make it more complicated. I'm trying to say that if you are moving in that direction, which I don't know that you are, by the way, but I want to make it clear that it, it can't just be about the use and the excess of the use that needs to be I'm glad to have town council provide more guidance if needed here, but this doesn't come up very often. Yeah, I think maybe we should have a conversation with town council. It may not be a conversation, but I will, I will request town council's guidance and bring that back to the board the next time that you meet. Thank you. I'm glad to have town council provide more guidance if needed here, but this doesn't come up very often. Yeah, I think maybe we should have a conversation with town council. I'm glad to have town council provide more guidance and bring that back to the board the next time that you meet. Thank you. Thank you. So, I think that we have some clear requests for the applicant as well as for the department with regard to the use itself. I think they are efficient with the applicant when they return because I know that, speaking for myself, you know, being so supportive of this. If we, if we do move in that direction, I'd like to be able to help them help address any, any, any items that we'd like them to look at with regard to the proposal and the building themselves itself rather. I know that we have some requests and specific items that were identified in the memo that I'd like the applicant to look at with regard to overall signage, and count. There were some specific requests that were made during the question section, specifically regarding signage as well as street amenities planters and and seating and a study as to the accessibility at the rear of the building. And finally, the inclusion of interior long term parking. Are there any other items that I may have missed windows like the building or the applicant to take a look at can windows along mess up. And the windows thank you the windows along mess up. And, and the long term parking is bicycle parking. Yes, I had that yes. Okay. Yep. So consistency of windows at mess up. Richard, can I bring up one more point. Please. Right now we're one number of four. We should be a boy number of five so they wouldn't be this deadlock. Yes. When is that because this thing's presented already. The new board, the new board member cannot vote on this. It's going to be the four of us making the decision. And that was chase made aware of that, saying that there's only four of us and not five. Jenny, I'm. I think the place is aware of the, of the requirements of getting a spot of being granted a special permit, which is for board members. And also understands that there are four board members currently. And we do not have the fifth member yet. And though the fifth member may join in the coming weeks. They will not be able to vote on this particular project, the stock it. So. What I'd like to propose is. Mark, if this is, if this sounds reasonable to you to identify a time for you to return together with a representative from the bank to specifically respond to how the bank. Is planning on addressing the criteria that Jean mentioned in 3.3.3 B and G to expand upon the. What you started to speak about with regarding community events and training education access and use of the bank beyond traditional retail banking functions. And to also address the list of items that I just identified that had been identified for the facade and signage treatment of the of the building when you return. Do you have any questions for us regarding those specific requests. I do want to revisit what was just being discussed regarding the number of board members and what does happen in the event of a deadlock. The proposal would not be approved in the event of a, of a deadlock. Okay. Thank you for that clarification. Absolutely. So is, do I have a motion from the board to continue the hearing with the request that we just made of the, of the applicant. Jenny, I think we need to identify a hearing date. The next meeting day is September 13. So it's up there September 13 or September 27. If they are coming back on the 13th I would need materials from them in that is that would be responsive to this discussion by, I would say the eighth of September. If that does not work, then we can look at the 27th. Those are the options. Okay, Mark, do you have a preference and speaking on behalf of the bank. Being that we do need to integrate a member from the bank team. I don't know what their schedule would allow so my inclination would be the later of the two dates but I'd like the ability to check on that beforehand if possible. Jenny, if we, if we schedule to the 13th and then push that to the 27th, or go ahead and schedule for the 27th, and if we need to push that out further do so at that time. I think I would, I would suggest that you continue it to the 13th, and that the applicant notify me with a request to continue. If they are unable to meet that deadline that I noted, which was September 8 for providing me with materials. If they're unable to meet that deadline and wish to continue, they'll let me know. And we will then continue on the 13th to the 27th. Does that sound agreeable to you. Yes, thank you very much for your flexibility. Absolutely, thank you. Okay, is there a motion to continue this hearing to September 13. Tom. Is there a second. Was that working. I second. Okay. I will now take a roll call vote. Jen. Yes. Jean. Yes. Melissa. Yes. And I am yes as well. Thank you. And we look forward to seeing you again on the 13th. Thank you very much to the board for their time. Thank you. I just had a question for Jenny. Is it common to invite the property owner to these meetings. It is not common. No, we often invite the applicant and there is not. Unless the board specifically requests the property owner, that is not the commonly do. Because most times tenants are actually requesting things like signage, for example. And now we do not typically require that. Okay. That's fine for right now. I'll think about my questions on that later. Thank you. Thank you, Melissa. Thank you. Thank you. Great. We will now move to docket number 3, 3, 4, 8, 8, 33. Massachusetts Avenue. Which is. See the reopening of a special permit docket number. Excuse me, 3, 3, 4, 8. For 851. Massive. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you to begin. Thank you, Rachel. Well, I've been. I want to, I'm putting on the screen the decision related to this property because it doesn't relate to anybody on the current board. That's, that's where I'll start. So this decision was made in 2009. The decision was made in 2009. The permit is for the CVS, which is next door, which is 833 Mass Ave. On the property is a building that is considered another professional building on the site at 821 Mass Ave, which is also known as the Atwood house. And in the decision that was made for this property in 2009, there was a special condition number five, which I have on the screen, which notes that the Atwood house. I'm sorry. That's what I meant to do. The Atwood house shall remain at its plant present location. And I will keep doing that. On the site. I don't know why this keeps happening to my screen one second. Basically that it says that the applicant will actually maintain the property in its condition. And to also come forward with a proposal to the board. This was, of course, that would have been in 2010. And that there would also be, if there was going to be any sort of demolition, which could be potentially proposed. That that would have to happen. And that would be a, I don't know why this keeps happening to my screen in one second. But I think that that would have to happen within their, there could not be any request to move or demolish the house by amending the special permit at that time. Within 24 months of the date of the issuance of that permit, the special permit from 2009. Obviously a lot of time has lapsed. And so much time. So much so that the house is now in very poor condition. It has been more than a decade. And so, as you may recall, we had CVS return to us last summer. Seems like a long time ago now. They came back to us to amend their signage. And when they came back, we decided that we wanted to reopen a conversation about what was going on with 821 Mass App, which is part of the same site. So as part of that decision, we were able to eventually approve after a number of hearings, but we decided that we wanted to have a conversation with the property owner who is Jeff noise. And talk about what exactly were his plans for the property to try to continue that conversation. And so on the screen, I'm sharing with you the most recent of the correspondence from that process that went on last summer, which was to vote to unanimously at that time, close the hearing. But we requested the following actions. The first of them was that we wanted the property owner to apply for a demo permit within 30 days. And that didn't happen. The second one was the property owner shall apply for an EDR special permit following the expiration of the demo delay. Or earlier, depending upon what happened with the Arlington Historical Commission, that of course also didn't happen. The third point is if the property owner did not choose to file a demolition permit, that they would actually return to us with a renovation plan by a specific date. So those were the requirements from last summer. None of those things occurred. What ended up happening though was a, an unfortunate set of, I would say a cascade of situations that was meant to lead into a demolition permit being filed. And had been the applicant at that time had been working to get a demolition permit filed, but essentially failed to do it in a timely way as I've noted. And then also proceeded to, while they filed it with the Arlington Historical Commission, and they were provided a date for the Historical Commission public hearing, which is required when a demolition permit is filed, proceeded to begin with the demolition. And the demolition was associated with remediation work that they also were doing on site, remediation specifically of asbestos, which was found not just inside the property, but was also associated with the siding. So the property owner, there and to do that without a building permit. So there's, there's two parts to a process of remediation. One part is filing paperwork with the state, which was properly filed, but the second part is pulling a building permit in order to do the work that they were planning to do. They did not do that. And I happened to be driving by the day that that was happening and reported it, and we were able to do a stop work order, which is what then led to the property being shut down, the job being shut down, the folks going off site. And of course the, the where we're at right now, which is a fairly a pointed a letter that was sent by myself and Mike Champa, who is the interim director of inspectional services, outlining a number of bylaw violations, both town bylaw as well as the zoning bylaw, and the cost of those violations, at least for the week that the, that the, that the situation was still in place. And they had not yet rectified and closed down the, basically what was a construction site without a permit. So we find them, they paid that fine. And they also then proceeded with permit hearing with the Arlington historical commission. They went to that hearing, the historical commission ordered them to do what they now have been doing, which is to put Tyvek on the property to protect it. And they also are apparently in the process of investigating how to put in a security system, which would basically monitor the pro, the property 24 hours. So, so that second hearing, which is sort of a continuation of what are they going to do with the, the siding in the windows and sort of putting it back into what it was before, which is to be in compliance, frankly, with what that special condition says in the environmental design review decision. That won't happen until September 7th, which is the continuation of the historical commissions meeting and discussion about that. That said, I think it still begs a conversation by this board of what you want, what your expectations are about what will happen at the property next. If they are to in fact, based upon, you know, per the directive of the historical commission, essentially put everything back to the way it was before with the siding and putting the windows back in. Is there an expectation therefore that you want them to return to this board with a renovation plan, or is it something else? And I think that it's really imperative for this board to go back to those three bullet points that were the sort of actions from last May. And talk about what you want to see happen next. We also have, of course, Bob and Nessie, who and also the property owner Jeff noise, who are here on the zoom call. And we also have the attorney who represented CVS. In 2009, any of these people would be available to answer questions or have a conversation. Additionally, Joanne Robinson is the chair of the Arlington historical commission and has also joined the zoom. So I think I'm going to pause there. I've given a lot of the background. What brought us to today? I want to see if there are questions. Great. Thank you very much, Jenny, for that overview and for your work with continuing the process of moving this forward. It's much appreciated. So I'm going to open this up. To kin first for any questions or to start the discussion. I would like to hear. From the ownership. Either from Robert or. Jeff noise. Jeff noise. What. What happened. You know, they must have. A reason why what they did what they did, or was just a pure mistake or. Or what. And then I like to hear what they, what they plan to do with the building. When they were last here, they told us that they could not physically. Fixed the building up. It's too far gone and didn't make economic sense. And they were going to put another building up. And they still plan to do that or things have changed. So I'll turn that over to attorney Nessie. To answer that question. Yeah, I must say that I. I'm not going to say that. I'm not going to say that. I'm not going to say that. I'm not going to say that. I'm not going to say that. I'm not going to say that. Attorney who's tried many cases in court. I cannot take exception to anything that Jenny said. She stated it very factually. And I would not raise an objection. If I was in a courtroom to what she had to say. That having been said. Yes. A mistake was made. There was a miscommunication. Not only was it a miscommunication. But there was also a miscommunication. And I believe that was the. Is the contractor that would finally. Able to be engaged by. Mr. Noyes. For the purpose of pursuing the demo app through the fruition. What happened here from the time we were here. A year and a half ago was. We were not able Jeff was not able to get someone to pursue COVID hit, that interrupted things as well. He then did get a couple of people to pursue it, and they did not bring it home either. Finally, he got Mr. Randall. And Mr. Randall got on board, and he had all the good intentions in the world, but he did not know that in fact, with respect to doing the demo app, historical commission aspect was mentioned right on the app. He did not know that the matter first had to be approved by historical. He thought that what you had to do was take the app all the way through, health as well, go through the health department. And to do that, he had to take care of the asbestos issue as far as the building is concerned. A wrong conclusion on his part. There was a miscalculation there. He did go ahead, as Jenny said, he contacted the state with respect to any local permit. He thought that the local permit would await what would happen after the demo app had been approved. So again, that was a miscalculation. Some mistakes were made. Just a few comments about the building itself. And Kenneth's right. We've been before the ARB on a number of occasions with a number of proposals. And my client had finally concluded that he would not be able to retain the building in an appropriate way and develop it so that he could do it and make the profit with respect to what he was doing. That was the whole point of going ahead with the demo app. And indeed, if you look at the old 2009 ARB decision, even that decision made the comment that the building was not significant. That comment is right in that decision. That having been said, we were told at the Historical Commission meeting what we had to do to at least get the building to a point where it got wrapped. We have done that, okay? Jenny is right. We are working with respect to the security aspect of this as well. I'm gonna suggest to you that, and I talked to Mr. Randall about this and Mr. Noyes, that to bring the building back to where we need to bring it back. And we have to do that. I'm going to concede that. We have to do that no matter what we do. According to Mr. Randall, the cost to do that could approximate as much as $150,000. Why? Because we have to put the siding on. We may have to do special windows with respect to what the building might have looked like back then. Again, a building that the ARB said in 2009 wasn't even historic, okay? But we are prepared to do that. When we appear before the Historical Commission at the next meeting, we are going to tell them that we're prepared to do that. But we're also going to indicate that we want to continue to pursue the demo application and come back to the board with a proposal that basically would encompass the building coming down. Now, we acknowledge the fact that we haven't done this the way it should have been done. We acknowledge the fact that we're going to pay a price for that. And the price for that is going to be that Mr. Noyes will invest $150,000 approximately to rehab the external aspects of the building, not the inside, the external aspects of the building because historical has no jurisdiction over the inside of the building. And once he's done that, if he's going to pursue the demo app, all that is going to come down. So the $150,000 that he's invested in the building will disappear at that point. So that's pretty much where we are. And again, I can't contest what Jenny has said. She's right on point with what she has said. We probably should have done better. We did not do better. We apologize for that profusely. But we want to go forward at this point and we want to go forward with a proposal that not only makes sense for the town, but also makes sense for the client as well. And that's pretty much what I have to say. And any additional questions for Attorney Nessie? Yeah, I would like to reserve a question to after one of the board members spoke. I do have a couple of questions for Jenny. Do you want to reserve those for Jenny or do you want to ask her those questions now? I can't ask them now. I can wait till the other board members speak. Why don't you go ahead and ask whatever questions you have and then we'll go through with the other board members. Okay. Jenny, is it was not right right now or is it totally what I'm asking for not proper? They're going to have to spend this money. And if their intent is to go ahead and demo what this house to build whatever project they want to do, that money that's lost there, that seems like a waste to me. Can we make a ruling or is it within our power to make a ruling that will accept them not doing that but donating that money to a housing fund? Well, I think that would be a little beyond powers of the board and outside of your jurisdiction. I also think that it is up to the Arlington Historical Commission to determine what needs to happen at that property because of the significance that they've deemed of that property. And I think that, you know, if they are requiring specific type of siding for the windows to be returned to the way that they looked before, those are the requirements that would need to be met. Additionally, you know, they've created a condition that is essentially exposed the building to the elements, which was the part of the reasoning for completely putting Tyvek all over the property. That is not the way that the Historical Commission wishes for the property to look now or in the future, obviously. And so I think that next Tuesday night we'll hear more about what ends up happening with what's being proposed and what the commission will ultimately require. And that cost would have to be borne by the property owner ultimately. It's a, these are the standards of what has happened and they've taken a risk. And unfortunately, this is the price of that. It just seems like a lose, lose for everybody. I'm just wondering, can we make a winner out of somewhere where we maybe get, you know, that to me is one affordable unit that someone can live in Arlington. Yes, they made a mistake and, you know, they're willing to step up to it, but, you know, let's not just throw this away. I don't know. We have the Arlington Affordable Housing Trust Fund is established and they could choose to donate the property to that. They have a lot of choices actually before them. They have not yet disclosed what exactly they want to do with that part of the property. They could choose to subdivide the property. They could choose to with, of course, making clear that we need access to the 10 spaces in the back that go with the property, but there are other options that they have and that this board can certainly explore. I wanted to give the board as a group an opportunity to talk about these issues and certainly, you know, entertain what you're talking about as part of those ideas, but ultimately this is in the hands of the Historical Commission first. I just wanted to make sure that you all had the opportunity to talk about it because of the specific actions that have been requested of this particular property owner last year. Any additional questions, Ken? No, nothing else. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Gene, questions, comments? Yeah, I think it's more of a comment than a question, but maybe a question will come out of it. When the board back in, I think 2009 issue the special permit for CVS, the first sentence about the Atwood House says the Atwood House shall remain in its present location on the site, which it has done. And reasonable and diligent efforts shall be used to maintain its present condition to prevent any damage from the elements or otherwise until it's reconvenced. Well, we sort of went through this a year or two ago when we had them in front of us and they hadn't done that. And it had fallen to more of a state of disrepair. But now they've taken even more steps in violation of that special permit term from 2009. So not only have they violated the sort of historic commission and the demolition permit and all that piece, they've compounded the problem that they created by violating the special permit by continuing to violate that part of the special permit. I have no idea, maybe Jenny, you can fill us in, what we can do as a board about these continuing violations. And it's not simply, what we heard last time was in an estate and nobody was paying attention to it, which might be true, but isn't really a good excuse. And now we have them having again violated the permit. And I just wonder what our ability to do anything as a board, I don't think we can do what can suggest. So though it certainly is a compelling suggestion, but I wonder what we as a board have the ability to do at this point. Is that a question for Jenny? A question for Jenny, yes. I think that there's sort of the, we've entertained this sort of middle ground of trying to talk with the property owner for a number of years and trying to have them remedy the situation by devising and presenting a plan that we could adequately review. And that is in keeping with not just the points that you made, Jean, with regard to the decision, but I think the public's trust that they would follow through with any of that in, say, 2010. So we've, that's long, long past at this point. So the more extreme action could be a revoking of the special permit because they have not kept up with a condition in the permit. That's, of course, that's more extreme. So the middle part is that we've, they, you know, they've made a violation. They're in the process of trying to correct something. Maybe in this new middle space, there's an opportunity for some other discussions to really get something to happen. I think one issue is that they have a long-term lease with CVS, which is a major retailer having just finished a different conversation with a different major retailer of a banking of financial products. I think that this is somewhat appropriate. We don't want to necessarily discourage major retailers from coming to Arlington or from keeping them. But I think that this actually is a condition that is, that erodes the long-term lease agreement that they have with CVS right now. In that there had always been the promise that there was going to be something that was going to happen with this property. And that, that does come back to the redevelopment board and does have a responsibility that lies with the redevelopment board to encourage the, you know, something happening at the property per that special condition. If they're unable to proceed with that, then the, you know, we have yet to hear from their, from the property owner that they, they refuse to move forward with that, with any plans. They just keep on leaving us in the sort of in between. So I think the board has to make a decision. Do you want to keep on going in this sort of middle ground of discussing the possibilities and seeing what happens and having them come back perhaps to a future date or are you, are you wanting to go in a different, in a direction that is very clear and finite and essentially, you know, gets back to the actual issuance of the special permit, which frankly put into that, that agreement that they have to do something with this part of the property and they have yet to fulfill that condition. So I think, I think you have, you have a sort of a spectrum right now. There's doing nothing, which has been for a long time. There's this middle area where we keep on entertaining the possibilities. And then there's the more extreme, which is revoking a special permit that has eroded the trust of their ability to fulfill the responsibilities that have been outlined in that special permit as per this particular condition of doing something with the entire property. May I say something. I would actually ask, first, Jean, if you had any specific questions for the attorney in SC or you'd like to hear his response. I'd like to say a little more, but let's hear his response. Okay. Please. The, maybe a suggestion in terms of going forward. Could be. And again, our intent would be to get before historical, proceed with the demo app. There's no reason in the world why we could not. And I've been talking with Monte French. You may recall Monte French is the architect that brought a couple of different proposals before the ARB. I've been talking to Monte French and Monte is poised to get back involved with respect to coming up with a development plan. I don't see any reason why I could not be talking to him about perhaps getting into that even now. In terms of thinking about coming up with a plan, of course. Jenny's right. Historical comes first. We have to deal with them first. Okay. My anticipation is that once we do appear before them, whether on the seventh or some future date, that the demo app will go forward. Okay. And we'll be then in a position where we can come in with a development plan for the board. That's what I would like to see happen. You know, this situation has gone on far too long for any good it may have done. That's a statement that was said in Parliament. About Chamberlain. Back in 1939. I'm resurrected. With respect to any situation as far as CVS is concerned. I would simply respectfully suggest to the members of the board. That there are legal issues there that I don't think we want to get into. I don't think we have to get into. Chapter 40. Section seven is one of them. And that is a building permit has already issued. With respect to CVS. If you look at chapter 40, a section seven. That statute provides that once six years have gone by. And the building has been constructed. With respect to the permit that the use of the building and the building itself cannot be disturbed. I don't want to get into that. Okay. I don't think we have to get into that. I would rather think positively. And move forward in terms of coming up with a plan. That we can talk about and try to make something happen as far as the site is concerned, which again. It's laying fallow the way it has for too many years. So I have to sort of. I don't know what random thoughts on a middle ground. Has Jenny. One is. I think it would be helpful to have this on our agenda once a month. And require them to come once a month to give us an update. On what they're doing, because I think one of the problems. And we didn't anticipate. To have them come once a month. Ignore or fell to carry out. Adequately. What we said a while ago. And is to have them come once a month. And give us an update. The second is. And, and this is a little more extreme. The building fell into disrepair while it was in the ownership. Of the owner. And. Maybe the building could have been saved in a better way. If. There weren't all those years. When the building was falling apart. And not maintained at all. Maybe what we want to see is when. Is due to come back. With a proposal not to reuse the entire building. But to keep. The front and the two sides exterior. And the lawn in front. As it is to allow you to. Redo the inside, build out in back. But. Maintain. At least that facility. Because I think something has to be done rather than eventually. You know, what we learned is the building is torn. Is going to be torn down because it's too far gone, but it's too far gone. Because your client, Mr. Nessie. Allowed it to become too far gone. So those are my two. Somewhat unformed thoughts. About. Directions that we can go without. Necessarily pulling the special permit. Of all the. Interesting legal issues. That's it. No problem with recommending that. Approach to my client. And having a discussion about that. Mr. Benson. Thank you. I'll just while we're. Rowing ideas on the table. I'd also like to. Discuss whether it might be. An option. To discuss the timing of the issuance of any type of demolition. Permit. Given again. The. Jenny characterized. Which I think. Is of the violation of public trust. I do think it's important that the owner comply with. What is being requested by the historic commission in terms of restoring. The exterior. Siding. And windows because. We have this has gone on so long. We have no more. Believing right now how, you know, that this is going to be resolved anytime in the, in the near future. And so that we don't have. An empty lot. Following demolition. Should a demolition permit be, be issued. I think it's. Something that we should discuss. As to whether or not that demolition permit. Can be. Issued. Or can be restricted. The issuance of it. Until. Approved. Plans have been. Plans have been presented to you and approved by. The redevelopment board. So Jenny, I wanted to see if there was any. Possibility. Of that type of. Restriction. Again, given. How much destruction has gone on. Already in this property. And how little any of us want to see. The vacant lot sitting. Along that staff. In the future. Or so the, the by-law doesn't allow it to happen exactly that way. So there, there is a demolition delay. That is under the purview of the historical commission. They actually can grant one for up to. Or. Make that delay for up to two years. This is something that I believe they are going to discuss again. On September 7th. Next week. More conclusively. With a directive to. The property owner about those next steps. But at this point, it's a demolition delay. Nothing, nothing would be granted by the historical commission at this time. And I don't believe that they're going to entertain anything. And of course. Ms. Robinson is here. And can answer this more succinctly, but I don't believe that they're going to entertain any sort of demolition permit until they put the pet, put the place back into the way that it looked before. So I think that that's really effective. And of course that could take. Time. Right. But there's no opportunity. To the timing though. Of like rough. Approximately when those things might happen. If, if you want more. Sorry, that would be, that would be great as the next step. Joanne. Robinson. Would you be able to speak to the, the timing of. The demolition delay and the next steps for the historic commission. I can't speak for the whole of the Arlington historical commission. And I think we will have that discussion in a week. But. The first order of business was to return the exterior. And after we have, you know, settled on that. Then we made, you know. Still. I mean, it would be, it would be. An unusual thing. For us. Not to consider the two year demo delay. Because. And so we will consider it. But I can't speak. As to what the historical commission will do. Understood. You know, I'm, I'm just simply here. As a representative. I'm the chair, but I cannot. Tell you what their decision will be. Completely understandable. Thank you. That's helpful. Rachel. I just want to note that Mary O'Connor, the attorney who represented CVS is also here. Yes. Thank you. Let's see. Before we turn this over to see if Mary. O'Connor has any. Specific thoughts to add. I do want to make sure that Melissa has an opportunity to share her thoughts and any questions she might have. For. Any of the representatives who we've been speaking to thus far. So thanks, Rachel. So, um, I'm just curious to property owners. Online with us. Um, and. Can we ask them just what. The thinking is, because I guess I'm coming to this late. I've read through everything. But so was the idea to just demolish it and sell the property? Or could I have a sense of what you wanted to do with the property? Can you hear that? Can you hear me? Yes, we can now. We can hear you. Um, nothing has changed from our original. Plan to redevelop that. Portion of the property. I don't know. As Jenny mentioned, we had a cascade of unfortunate events. We hired one person who took six months and then. Determined that they could not finish the demo permit. We hired another person that took six months and determined they could not finish the demo permit. And we finally hired a non-local contractor. Who was able to get it started. And I believe. Has maybe one signature left. Um, and unfortunately. There was no malicious intent to. Further destruct the building. It was purely to reduce the amount of damage. It was purely to reduce the amount of malicious intent to further destruct the building. It was purely to remove asbestos. Right. I guess what's your goal? What do you envision? What's your beautiful vision for the site? So all we've been trying to do this whole time is, is to redevelop it into a mixed use business center with, with living units on the backside. And we've been trying to, we've been trying to, we've been trying to, we've been trying to, we've been trying to, we've been trying to, we've been trying to create scapes. Pulling the building up. You know, up to the sidewalk, like all the other buildings, trying to, to just. Make it a usable functional space for the residents and employees and. You know, living quarters. Okay. And, um, Sorry. And Jenny, do we have that proposal on file? Is that something that's beyond schematics or. Oh, sorry. We've been looking at a couple of things that have been on the board last year. Okay. And it's also in that docket. Um, on the, in the novice agenda. Okay. It's a, it's basically a, oh, sorry. It's basically, I think it's been said that Monty French. Was hired. So they did hire an architect. They worked on some, some designs. Um, and we started those conversations. Okay. Okay. And then just going from that, just so I understand, I'm sorry, I have this little repetitive for folks, but the special permit revoking that, what are the implications of that given that this, I know that, you know, Robert has some thoughts on, but in terms of the existing CVS, like, how should we be thinking about that as a board if that was an extreme decision? That's to Jenny, Jenny, because in terms of the recommendation, you know, I know that there is these different levels of decision or pathways you could go. So trying to understand that one. That would be a more challenging pathway to choose for some of the reasons that Mr. Nessie stated. A lot of time has passed at this point. It would be very challenging and it wouldn't necessarily have any sort of detrimental impact immediately to CVS. It would more be about, you know, some sort of future use of the site potentially. But because of the nature of the special permitting process, a future tenant would likely have to come back and go through the same special permitting process. So it's more of a, I think what we're trying to figure out is how do we, how do we get into making essentially what we're all talking about is we would like them to do something with this part of the property. That's the bottom line. Right. That is what the town desires. That's what it desired in 2009, but perhaps not as forcefully. I think now we have, you know, achieved a full decade plus and it's time to see real action happen at the site. What more can we do. So, revoking a special permit is interesting, challenging, probably not the, that does not necessarily lead to an immediate action. But I think what I what I've heard you and other board members say is you're looking for more of that immediate action. That might require some other brainstorming. Okay. Okay, thank you. So, Jenny, you had mentioned that Mary O'Connor is here as the representative for CVS. I'd like to give you attorney O'Connor I'd like to give you an opportunity to speak on behalf of the tenant. Thank you chairperson members of the board. I did represent CVS in 2008 and 2009 on this special permit. I will not repeat what Mr. Nessie said about chapter 40 a I do not think the board has the ability to revoke the special permit to revoke the certificate of occupancy and building permit that was granted to CVS. But I will tell you that CVS is also deeply concerned about the condition of this property. And it was in process before this board when I read on Mr. Sprague's column what had occurred at the historical commission. I alerted CVS about what was going on and arranged a phone conversation between director rate and CVS corporate and myself. CVS has put the landlord on notice that it is reserving its rights. You can imagine that CVS has made a tremendous commitment of money in that property and has maintained it. And they're not particularly happy being next to that what that what that site looks like now particularly their drive in customers have to look at that when they pull in around the back. They want to see something done here and they have alerted the landlord that they will reserve their rights and perhaps take action against noise realty if something is not done. So, you know, CVS I would suggest you provides a very important place in our community, especially during the pandemic. It is the only drive through pharmacy in this town, and it is, it employs a number of high school students as well as other people in town. I will say that most of the people on this call including myself are residents of this town, and it is a tremendous eyesore to drive by there and see the condition of that property. And I CVS wants to see something done there and wants it to be at the exterior to be restored and ultimately something done there. Thank you for listening. Thank you that was very informative I appreciate it. Let's see so I'll go back through and see if there are any additional questions from the from the board before we open this up from public comments and then we'll continue our discussion following public comment. I'll run through again in order and start with Ken to see if there are any further questions of any of the representatives who have spoken before we move to public comment. No, I don't have any comments I just that I think Jean's idea is a good one. Just to clarify. Yeah, to come to present this one monthly, what the direction is until we have an approved decision. I think that is a good way of just keeping keeping them on the ball. Great. Thank you, Ken. Jean, any additional questions before we move to public comment. No, I may have some things to say after public comment I'd like to hear from the public has to say. Great. Thank you, Melissa. Nope. Okay. So at this time, we will open this discussion up to the public. Any member of the public wishing to speak please use the raise hand function. I will call on you in the order the hands are raised. I'll remind any member of the public speaking to please identify yourself by first, last name and address, and you will have up to three minutes. As you noticed in the discussion before if you have any questions for the speakers, I may elect to collect those and ask them for efficiency at the end. But I will take those as they are raised. So the first speaker this evening will be believe it was John Warden. Thank you, thank you, madam chairman can you hear me. I can thank you. John Warden 27 Jason Street. A couple of comments. One I just like to say is to the historical aspect of this house that's really something historical commission has jurisdiction over and just remind you that the Dr. Atwood who lived and practiced here was at the forefront of Arlington's endeavor to deal with the previous pandemic over 100 years ago. The, the question about hundreds. Mr. noise having to spend $150,000 to put the house back where it should have been. It reminds me of the story, perhaps apocryphal of the fellow who killed his mother and father. And when it was before the court he pleaded for mercy because he was an orphan. You know, he let the house of the noise family let the house fall into disrepair and now having let it decay for a dozen years and say well we got to tear it down. It's too expensive to fix it. You know, that's a self inflicted wound and we should not give that any credence whatsoever. Finally, I want to revert back to the, I think it was the last meeting last meeting of this board pre pandemic and 1219. And at that time, the proposal was made to move the house forward towards the street and to build a another structure behind it. And those of us at that meeting felt well that seems a little bizarre but if it saves the house, it's probably worthwhile. Mr. John at with the grandson of Dr. Atwood was one of those at the meeting as was I and many other people on the way out of the meeting. This was in just before I think before you present board members were there on the way out of the meeting. Mr. Atwood, Mr. Nessie and himself came down the stairs and we were chatting for a minute on the back steps of the annex and Mr. Nessie said, you have my word on this, the Atwood House will not be demolished. And so I took that as the word of a member of the bar and member of this community as something one could count on. When the next hearing came up in May of 2020 and the demolition and the whole that whole big monstrosity was before us I was just blown away. So I don't know what to believe and I don't know what, frankly, what we should believe anything that Mr. Nessie says if he is now retracting that statement, that commitment that he made to me and Mr. Atwood. Thank you. Thank you. I would ask members of the public that we be careful to reference items that are on record, rather than calling into question the professional credentials of others. Again, for items that are that are not on record. The next speaker will be Steven Revlak. And chair Steve Revlak 111 Sunday side Avenue I just have a brief question. Among the board's powers, this board's powers is the power to act as a planning authority is the power to be a special permit granting authority, and also the power of a redevelopment authority. I'm hearing Rachel. Oh, thank you. Thank you can Steve. Yes, the your sound is very well I don't know if there's a way to. How about I talk louder. Fantastic. Thank you so much. So among the board's powers, you have the ability to be a planning authority. You have you are also a special permit granting authority, and you are a redevelopment authority. I'm wondering if anything could be done by as an end as a redevelopment authority, you have the power to execute an urban renewal plan. I'm wondering if there would be any merit in declaring this site the site of the Atwood House blighted and using an urban renewal plan to remediate it. Thank you madam chair. Thank you very much. The next speaker will be Don Seltzer. Thank you madam chair Don Seltzer Irving street. Just a little weather fact during the month of July between the time that the house was this stripped of its siding and before the historical commission could need to take some action on it. Arlington had 12 inches of rainfall. I also want to just bring up a very small bit of the special permit going back to 2009. It's not very significant, but it does say something about credibility and excuses. One of the provisions of the 2009 special permit I believe was that there were to be some landscaping in front of the CVS building some planters or something. I'm not sure the details. Two years ago when the board called the owner back before it to answer for some things. One of the features that came up was a reminder about these planters. And I believe it was assured at the time. Yes, we will put those plantings in as promised in the special permit. And I don't see them there. I don't see how COVID might be an excuse. I don't see how miscommunication with a contractor can be an excuse. I just make this comment as something to consider when listening to promises made this evening. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any other members of the public who wish to speak on this docket this evening. Seeing none we will close public comments and I will turn this back to the board for discussion. I believe that Jean had put forward the suggestion that we require this, the, the owner to return monthly for updates to the board which can you identify that you supported. I don't see if Melissa, you were also in agreement. I think that that certainly is a step in the right direction towards identifying some accountability and regular monitoring and oversight by the board but I'm interested in your thoughts on that as well. That would be fine with me. Great. I think that that that option gives us the opportunity to, to identify additional next steps. Once we also hear the outcome of the historical commission meeting and should action appear to stall again, that gives us again, a regular check-in point for us to move to potential next steps such as suggested by Steve Revolac and others who have weighed in on this call as well. So I'll run through and see if there's some additional discussion beyond that particular recommendation that we want to have before continuing this to a future hearing and I'll start with Ken. Oh, I think that's, we should find out what's happening after the historic commission's meeting. That's the key. Great. Thank you. Jean. I mean, I like the idea of having them come back once a month in the short term if they end up with a two year demolition stay I'm not sure we need to have them come back every month. That's a great point, but we can certainly put them on a monthly until further notice. The other thing that I'd like Mr. Nessie to speak with his client about since his clients are going to have to spend north of $100,000 to restore the facade anyhow is to take a look at whether the proposal that they presented to us could be modified under those circumstances so they can preserve the facade of the building of part about how they would be going forward at this point because while Melissa wasn't here but we decided we would not consider their proposal for the project because they had to go through the historical commission first so we didn't have a chance to look at it, but I'm not sure that we all would have liked it very much. I think if Mr. Nessie would be willing to speak with Mr. Noyes about you know since you're spending so much on preserving the facade maybe bring it up to code and revise the proposal so that whatever comes back preserves the facade. Certainly willing to discuss that with Mr. Noyes Mr. Benson. Thank you. Thank you anything further Jean. No. Okay. So, what I would like to suggest is that we continue this. Next to a September date which will be the first of our monthly updates, which will go on until further notice. So, Jenny, working at the timing, it would probably be best for us to do the later date in September so that there is time for the team to continue the historic commission react and provide, provide, provide you with an update prior to that meeting so that would be the 2027, 27. Attorney Nessie does that work for you. That does work for me. Okay. So we have a motion to continue the hearing to September 27. Second. Your second. Second. We will take a roll call vote can. Yes. Jean. Yes. Melissa. Yes. And I'm a yes as well. Back on the 27. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay. So that closes agenda item number one. Public hearings. I'd like to suggest that we. Let's see for agenda item number two, I believe that we do have the Envision Arlington Standing Committee member. We have a nominee here with us this evening. So I'd like to suggest to the board. That we, that we meet him. And that we defer the other item, the committee appointments, we're still waiting for our fifth member to appear. And I'd like to defer that to our next meeting when hopefully that person would be in. The meeting. Unless there's any objection from, from any of the board members. So if you could speak now, if you do have any objections to that approach. Okay. So Jenny, would you please introduce for us the Envision Arlington. Standing committee. Nominee. Certainly. And there's dragon. He just, he just put on his video. And I would like to defer my recommendation to have jagged in the, assuming the one of the seats on the Envision Arlington. Standing committee. He, this is a while ago now, but he expressed an interest. And he ended up attending a master plan implementation committee meeting. And he has also been attending the presentation on the sustainable transportation plan. Connect Arlington. And has also been intending, I think some of the Envision, various Envision Arlington meetings. From what I have seen. And I know that he remains interested in just, we just need to go through this formality of officially. Designating him, which is to accept my recommendation. For his appointment. And I would like to thank him. And I would like to thank him for the timing of, of his service. Great. Thank you, Jenny. And welcome jacket. Would you like to say. Would you like to say anything about. The position and your, your interest in that position. To the board. Thank you, Madam chair. And board members. Happy to be here. And I appreciate the opportunity to represent the board and Envision Arlington. Thank you very much, Jenny rate. And also getting them up for help with helping me get oriented. It's, it's an interesting time for Arlington and I've been a long time resident. I've lived in Arlington since 2002. And my kids are still in public school here. And it's a great place to live. And I've been very interested to follow the, the formation of master plan and was curious. You know, what happens after 2020 because, you know, that's when master plan. We had the, we had the vision 2020. And, you know, I think the world has changed in the last year. Arlington is changing. You know, there are many important topics, certainly around the, the, the economic growth, the land use development, which is in the purview of this board, but also other topics that I care about, such as diversity, governance, civic engagement. You know, I think these are, these are really important topics for me. And so it's great to have this opportunity to work with the other board members and participants and Envision Arlington. And yeah, I think really continue to build up this community. So thank you. Great. Thank you very much. I'll run through the board members to see if you have any, any questions. No questions, but thank you for working on this. Gene. Yes, I'll just add my thanks. Thank you very much. I was on the standing committee for many years and it was a great experience and I hope you have a great experience too. And same, thank you, Jagged for volunteering. It's great to have you. Great. Thank you. And may I ask you a favor if you could pronounce your last name for me so that when I motion, I, I, I want to make sure as somebody with the last name that is constantly mispronounced, I'd like to make sure I get that correct. Thank you very much. I appreciate that question. So my name is Jagged. The idea. Okay. The first name ends in a soft T, but I won't hold anyone. Okay. If you allow me, I do have a question. Please. So as, as you look ahead to what's, what's your strategy and your agenda. What are your expectations. For. Which board member would like to discuss perhaps, Jean, I know you've sat on the, on the board. Do you have anything specific you'd like to. Not to put you on the spot. You've put me on the spot. But I will say, I will say a couple of things that I found. And that you might consider. It brings a lot of other voices in that are in. You know, necessarily. At the table. And what those voices can play back. In the report. That. Envision does every year in the survey. That it does every year. And in the, in the various. In the advisory committee. What are they called subcommittee? So. That. That they do. Can do really. Important work during the time. I was there. I helped start. Spy pond committee. And the. Arlington reservoir committee. And sustainable Arlington. And all three of them have gone on. And really added a lot. To the town. It brings a lot of new voices to the table, but people can also choose what they think are the right ways to move the town ahead. So I can't necessarily predict that, but it's what I hope you're able to accomplish. Great. I'll just add that I think it's a really exciting time with some of the plans in the studies that are currently in the process such as the housing implementation plan update and the open space and recreation plan updates. And I, I'm really interested to see how when those recommendations come forth in vision Arlington and some of the other groups in town, take some of those recommendations and find unique ways to to to move those forward beyond, you know, obviously this group and several other groups are going to be looking at how do we integrate some of those into our community and in many other ways as well. I think you guys said the best but it's just looking at how to help encourage this diversity, this growth, you know, and see what what do people want in, you know, that don't normally speak. There's, there's quite a few people that tend to speak, you know, quite loudly what they want. I think you have the opportunity to reach out and see what other people want and get their opinions I think that's something that you should try to encourage and get a more diverse opinion of people living in a cross town, not as active as some. Melissa, any thoughts, any additional thoughts. I think, you know, and you kind of coming from where I come from into my community and economic development background to thinking how envision Arlington and some of this has sub sub committees could think of things as, you know, short term things that you can kind of see, like actions you can take in the short term as well as your long term big policy goals as well. But, you know, what are those small incremental steps that can get to the goals of the individual sub committees, and then the larger goals to, you know, of engagement and you know, reaching out to all our stakeholders. I think that's really important because you know the vision Arlington sometimes gets a survey and then big lofty goals, but we really want some practical stuff that we can see that we can say hey, we did this and it's made a difference and even if it's, you know, small smaller and also thinking of how policy doesn't have to be created new but sometimes peeling back policies allows for more creativity and that's hard to do peeling back versus adding on adding on and where that can be. Great. Great. Wonderful question. Thank you. Thank you. And one last one. You know, at what frequency and what form. Would you like me to report back to this board. Great question and something that I'm hoping we're actually going to be addressing at our upcoming goal setting session I think that we haven't. We haven't had very specific requirements and requests of our of our committee members in terms of what format and frequency we'd like them to report back so that's actually on my agenda for something that we are hopefully going to be addressing in the month of September so I'd love to get back to you on on that that works for you. Absolutely. Thank you very much. Great. All right. So do I hear a motion to accept the generates recommendation for that idea for the representative on the standing committee for indigenarlington. So motion. Your second. I'll second. All right, we'll take a roll call vote. Yes. Jean. Yes. Melissa. Yes. And I am a yes as well. Congratulations. We look forward to working with you. Thank you. Likewise. All right. So with moving. All right. Back to my agenda. So with moving the other committee appointments to our next meeting that will close agenda item number two. Now move to agenda item number three, which is the housing plan and open space and recreation plan updates. Jenny will it be you or Kelly who will be providing those updates. I was planning to, but Kelly of course is, is also here and can, can also answer any questions I've provided a memo. I'm glad to answer any questions. I'm glad to answer any questions. I'm not really outlining the updates at this point in time. So I would just offer that either, you know, you are welcome to accept my report to you. Or if you have specific questions, I'm glad to answer them or Kelly as well. Of course. Great. I'll run through the board and see if anyone has any questions. Can. No questions. Jean. I have wanted sort of my broken record question. So I would say include a proposal for how to. Enhance, let's say inclusionary zoning. The housing production plan hasn't gotten to the part of talking about goals and strategies yet. So I do, I can't answer that at this point in time. It's, you know, we could do some additional work on that, but it has not specifically come up. So I have not, I have not moved that forward at this point in time until we get into the phase of working on the goals and strategies, which is the next phase of work. Yeah, that makes sense. Thanks. I think it's, I think we made a commitment at town meeting that that's one of the things that we would be doing. That's my. It's not broken to me. It's a, it's a good thing to go back to. I think it's, it's a good thing to go back to. I think it's, it's a good thing to go back to. I think it's just the timing of it. I think is. Is very important. Great. Thank you, Jean. Great question. Melissa. No questions at this time. Great. I don't have any either, but I want to thank you for putting together the memo and for all of the engagement that I see across town on both of these items. It's been wonderful to see the surveys and the forums. And I think it's a great opportunity to get back to the table as well. So thank you as the consultant for such a comprehensive. Approach to both of these plans. You're welcome. And thank you for that. And the, the housing plan implementation committee actually meets on Thursday night. At seven 30. And the consultant will be there running through the housing needs assessment. So I think it's a great opportunity to get back to the table. And just sort of listen in and maybe ask some questions. The materials for the meeting are posted. And so you're welcome to. Join that or follow up with me if you have additional questions. I forgot to put that in my memo. Great. Thank you. Yeah, you're welcome. All right. So we will now move on to. Item number four. Which is the. Business development update and opportunities. So Jenny, I believe this is back to you. Yes. And it's, it's actually an agenda item that was requested by kin. And I, and at, on a bit of short notice. I, I agreed to put it on the agenda because I think it's, it would be good to at least start a conversation. Mostly I kept it on the agenda because I would like a little bit of, and I'm happy to talk about this in depth. I would like to talk about it. Perhaps if you have specific questions that I can then work on answering, we can talk about this during our retreat. On the 11th. I thought that that would be the most appropriate thing to do. I'm, I'm happy to talk about this in depth. I'm also sensitive to the time. And the, the, you know, couple more items on the agenda. can you should maybe provide a better introduction to why you asked for this to be on the agenda, although we have sort of heard a bit here and there about this topic during this meeting based upon reviews of special permits, but that would be helpful for my own benefit and perhaps the board members. And then I would ask the board to ask me, ask questions that I can then work on a bit in preparation for the retreat. Sounds great, Ken. Yeah, I just, if you had time, you probably have this probably more or less together. What are the empty shops that we have right now? And I wouldn't like to talk about why they're empty and why they're not being filled. If we get a chance to maybe talk to a couple of brokers or some of that and see what they are running into as far as requests, I mean, are they showing these sites to people and say, oh, well, if you build these too old, I can't accommodate what I want. It's too small. The zoning restrictions are too high as far as parking or whatever that doesn't make sense for them to open up business here. Just want to get a better understanding of all these things there so we can talk about it and see what we can do about making some changes or encouragements which allows them to be here. I can just say quickly for now, the vacancy list is always on the town's website. All of the information about our vacant property inventory is on the town's website on the economic development page. But in terms of getting more specifics about each property, I can do my best by talking with Allie Carter about this. Most of it is while it looks vacant or unoccupied at this time, it's sort of in the middle of a process. Steve Revolac in his remarks at some point earlier mentioned, usually it does take some number of months to fill a space. That's why it looks like it's vacant, but there's actually something in process. I did, I do have some very basic statistics about vacancies, but I can talk more about that if it's something that's of interest to the board at the retreat. Talking with commercial brokers, I'm not really sure about that one. Are you asking to bring a commercial broker to talk to the board? Or can I just ask for clarification on that one? I'm not sure I understood. I'll leave it out to you, Jenny. I mean, if you, in your duties, you do talk to a couple of brokers, you can report back to us. Oh, sure. Or if you feel like, no, while we talk to a couple of brokers, I'll leave it to your judgment. We just want to get here from them. Is there difficulties in leasing up the space? Or what comments are they hearing from their clients? That's all. Do you have an overall sense from the brokerage community? Yeah. Okay, okay, that makes sense. I understand now. I've also asked Ali to prepare for an update to the select board in October to give them an update on the economic development, just sort of in general, all of our efforts, how we've been dealing during the pandemic and sort of the results of all of that, as well as some of the current sort of barriers and conditions to economic development in Arlington and also some of our recommendations. So that it's a little out of order, but I still think it's important for the board to talk about this. But also I would, when we have that scheduled with the select board, it might be helpful for some of you or all of you to attend to hear more about that and to also be able to engage with Ali if you had questions. Great. Thank you. You're welcome. I'm glad you brought this up, Ken. So I'm glad we're talking about it. So Jean or Melissa, any questions for Ken or Jenny on this item or anything that you'd like to see prepared prior to our retreat in September? No from Jean? Melissa? No. Okay. I'm not at this time. If I would suggest, I guess, because this is, as it was posted on the agenda, it was a little vague. So I would say if you want to give it some thought and if anything, if something pops into your mind that you are curious about or you want to know more about that I could try to answer and bring to the retreat, I would ask you maybe to just think about it a little bit more. Happy to do that. Sounds good. Great. Thank you, Ken and Jenny. We'll now move to item number five, meeting minutes. And we have two sets of meeting minutes to review. The first is from June 7th, 2021. And I will see if anyone has any any corrections or additions and I will start with Jean. I did not have any. Okay, Ken? No, Melissa? No. And I did not have any changes either. So is there a motion to approve the June 7th, 2021 meeting minutes as submitted? So moved. Second. Take a roll call vote, Ken? Yes. Jane? Yes. Melissa? Yes. Okay. So we'll move to the second set of minutes, which are June 21st, 2021. We'll ask for any additions or corrections, Jean? I had none. Ken? No. Melissa? No. And I had none either. So is there a motion to approve the June 21st, 2021 meeting minutes as submitted? So motioned. Second. I'll take a roll call vote, Ken? Yes. Jean? Yes. Melissa? Yes. And I am a yes as well. So that closes our agenda item number five, which is meeting minutes. So we'll now move to open forum. So this is a public open forum. A member of the public wishing to speak and address the board. We'll have up to three minutes to speak. Please use the raise hand function in the bottom of your screen. I'll give it a minute to see if anyone would like to speak this evening. Okay. Seeing no one, I will close the open forum. And I believe that is our agenda for this evening. So if there is a motion to adjourn, I will entertain that. Motion to adjourn. Great. Is there a second? Second. Great. Thanks. We'll take a vote. Ken? Yes. Jean? Yes. Melissa? Yes. And I'm a yes as well. Thank you everyone and have a wonderful evening. Bye bye. Bye. Thank you.