 All right, take it away, Mr. Chairman. Chair knows the time is six o'clock. I call this meeting of the Amazon Board of Appeals to Order. My name is Steve Judge, and as ZBA Chair, I want to welcome everyone to this meeting. We'll begin with a roll call of ZBA members and panel for this matter. Steve Judge is present. Mr. Craig Meadows. Present. Mr. Gilbert, I know he's absent. Mr. Henry. Here. And Mr. Slaughter. Here. The quorum is present. Also attending the public hearing tonight is Ms. Christine Brestrup, Planning Director, Mr. Rob Wachilla, Planner for the Town, Rob Mora, Building Commissioner, and Guildford Moring, Director of Public Works. Pursuant to Chapter 20 of the Acts of 21, extended by Chapter 2 of the Acts of 2023, this meeting will be conducted via remote meetings. Members of the public who wish to observe the meeting may do so via Zoom or by telephone. No in-person attendance of members of the public will be permitted, but every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings in real time via technological meetings. The Zoning Board of Appeals is a quasi-judicial body that operates under the authority of Chapter 40A of the General Laws of the Commonwealth for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, convenience, and general welfare of the inhabitants of the town of Amherst. In accordance with the provisions of Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A and Article 10, Special Permit Granting Authority of the Amherst Zoning By-law, this public meeting has been duly advertised and noticed that Rob has been posted and mailed to parties of interest. All hearings and meetings are open to the public and are recorded by town staff. It may be viewed via the town of Amherst's YouTube channel and the ZVA webpage. The procedure is as follows. The petitioner presents the application to the board during the hearing. After which the board will ask questions for clarification or additional information. After the board has completed its questions, the board will seek public input. The public speaks with the permission of the chair. If a member of the public wishes to speak, they should so indicate by using the raised hand function on their screen or by pressing star nine on their phone. The chair with the assistance of the staff will call upon people wishing to speak. When you are recognized, provide your name and address to the board for the record. All questions and comments must be addressed to the board. The board will normally hold public hearings where information about the project and input from the public is gathered, followed by public meetings for each. The public meeting portion is where the board deliberates and is generally met an opportunity for public comment. If the board feels it has enough information and time, it will decide upon the applications tonight. Each petition heard by the board is distinct and evaluated on its own merits and the board is not ruled by precedent. Statutorily for a special permit, the board has 90 days from the close of hearings to file a decision. For a variance, the board has 100 days from the date of filing to file a decision. No decision is final until the written decision is signed by the sitting board members and is filed in the town clerk's office. Once the decision is filed with the town clerk, it's a 20 day appeal period for an agreed party to contest the decision with a relevant judicial body and superior court. After the appeal period, the permit must be recorded as a registry of deeds to take effect. Tonight's agenda, approval of minutes from the August 24th, 2023 meeting of public hearing on ZBA FY 2023-18 ASD Shutsbury MA Solar LLC request for a special permit under section 3.340 of the zoning bylaw to construct a 9.35 MWDC 4.4 MWAC Ground Mounted Solar Boatage Array, spending 41 acres on 102 acre site with an accompanying battery energy storage system that three parcels of land owned by W.D. Coles, Inc. identified as MAP 9B parcels 11, 12, and MAP 9D parcel 27. On Shutsbury Road, RO Outline Residence Zoning District. Frontage and access to the subject parcels of land is located between 187 and 201 Shutsbury Road. This has continued from August 24th, our meeting on August 24th. ZBA FY 2024-04, Charles Dana and Rokie Zong request for a special permit under section 3.3211 of the zoning bylaw to convert an existing owner occupied duplex structure into a non-owner occupied duplex with two rental units, five bedrooms in total at 62 Taylor Street, MAP 14B parcel 74, RG General Residence Zoning District. Following that is a general public comment period on matters not before the board tonight and then undertake other business not anticipated within the last 48 hours. Are there any public disclosures? I have one. I've submitted the required Mullins form certifying or a testing that I have viewed the video of the August 24th meeting. And so I have completed the requirements to be able to continue to participate in this matter. So no other disclosures. The first order of business is the approval of our minutes from August 24th. I reviewed the minutes and they seem in complete but I wasn't at the meeting. They do comport with what I saw in the recording. However, now I wonder if anybody else has any changes to the minutes from August 24th. These are great minutes, Rob. Thanks very much. They're done quickly and well and I appreciate it. It's important. So I would entertain a motion to approve the minutes. So moved. Is there a second? Second. It's been moved and seconded to approve the minutes. Any discussion? If not, we'll take a vote. The chair votes aye. Mr. Meadows? Aye. Mr. Henry? Aye. Mr. Sloveter? Aye. And Mr. Gilbert is not here. So the motion passes 4-0 with one abstention. Most of the amendments are approved. So the first order of business tonight is on the first application tonight is ZVA FY 2023. That's the Shoesbury Rose solar array. And the first thing I want to do is I want to thank Mr. Meadows and compliment him for the way he handled this last meeting. You did a great job and you better be careful because you keep doing that. You might ask me to do it more often. So. Thanks again for doing that in August. It allowed me to take a trip. It was great. So what I propose tonight is we do the following. The first order of business is Shootsbury Road. I'd like to have that on for no more than two hours. I don't think it should take that long but if it does I want to end it at two hours so end it at eight o'clock so we can move on to the other application. If that's done, we still have time. We can go back to Shootsbury Road but I think we'll probably be done. So I'd like to get that done out of the way first and then make sure we have time for the Taylor Street application. So we'll now continue the hearing on ZBA FY2023-18, ASD Shootsbury Solar LLC. There was a site visit there on October 3rd. We met with the representative of the applicant. We walked through the site, through much of the site along the access road, did a little bit of bush walking but not too much. We got to see the layout of the area where the solar arrays are going to be. We saw the areas where we have to have a space and buffer for water and for the concom considerations. We also looked at the type of vegetation that has been there. We asked questions about the history of the property and the ownership and what kind of trees would be replaced or would be taken down, the method of taking them down and would they be stumped or would they just be cut off? In addition, there were several other, those are sort of general questions about the property but there were questions which Rob, you created a document that was submitted that had several questions that I think are important for tonight and I want to restate those. One, where is the nearest wells located and how close will the construction be to them? The nearest wells meaning the wells that people use for their well water. So where are the nearest wells to the project? How far away will the closest tree canopy be to a solar array? What happens to the trees when they're cut down? How far will the project be from Adams Brook which runs I think outside the property but very close to the property in this downhill and how close will the solar array be to the steep slopes that leads towards Adams Brook? Were there any other questions or any other comments that people want to add in terms of the disclosure for what we did on our site visit? Mr. Henry? I think you covered them, Mr. Chair. Great. All right, so that was that. We do have to go through submissions. I'm using the draft project application port of October 6th as my guide for submissions. I've got, hold on. So since the August meeting, we've had a management plan submitted. These are applicants submissions. Management plan submitted October 2nd. A new battery energy storage system submitted October this year. Evidence of insurance updated in this October. Application change log, a transmittal to the fire department and a transmittal to the ZVA. In terms of storage and wetland reports, we've had a Goddard and Rad booklet dated October 5th and we've also had a record conditions plan was updated in September 27th. In terms of emergency procedures and maintenance, energy storage plan updated September 23rd. A pow-down emergency response guide, a pow-in, excuse me, pow-in emergency response guide and a pow-in, fire, off gas emergency procedures. In terms of the deconditioning documents, we received an updated draft deconditioning document, but not the final version. We talked about the site visit. There were a couple other documents received. We had a document from Jason Skeels that came in. And I think there was, was there something from that, was it additional documentation or a letter from the fire department that came in since or is that not, am I incorrect on all that? So there was Tom Engineer. Tom Engineer Jason Skeels. But there was also a public comment submitted too from Ira Brick. And that was said in today as well. There's also another public comment but I believe I include it in the packet. It was from Jenny Kaleck and one other person. They signed a letter together, but that's pretty much it, Mr. Chairman. You hit everything that has been submitted since. Okay, so since this continuation of the last meeting, what we wanna talk about today is why don't give the applicant a chance to review some of the changed documents if it's important or if board members have questions about some of the, they perhaps asked for some of these updated documents. They may have questions about them. I'd like to deal with that first. If there are any questions about the updates. We also understand that there's a, we received a document that talks about the work in progress. And so we know there's more documents that are coming. And if the applicant wants to speak about the process on that, that's fine. That would be helpful too. So talk about the documents and questions, follow up on the questions you had the last meeting. And then I'd like to get into the peer review process and what we wanna talk about and what kind of additional help we as board members feel we need and have that discussion. So that's where I'd like to handle the hearing this evening. Are there any other questions about that or comments or suggestions for change? All right, we'll do that. We'll do those things and then we'll have public comment after we dispose of the peer review questions. So who's representing the applicant? So there is a team that includes Tom Reedy. So I'm going to promote him first and then promote a few other people. All right, let's see who we got. Tom, is there anybody else from your team besides Steve, Corey, Andrew that you want promoted? I think that's it. I think that's good. Thank you. Yep. So Mr. Reedy, why don't we have everybody introduce themselves and gives our name and get that out of the way so we're not interrupting them later on. Perfect. As efficient as we can be, yep. Sure. So I'm Tom Reedy, attorney with Bacon Wilson out of Amherst here on behalf of the applicant. I'll turn it over to Andrew. Hi, my name is Andrew Chabot. I'm director of development here at Pure Sky, representing the applicant and joined by Corey McCandless, also representing Pure Sky. And you both live in Mr. Chabot, you live where? I live in Watertown, Massachusetts. And Corey, I don't know your last name. Yeah, I've recently relocated to Colorado. To Colorado, okay. But from Maine, so not too, too far. And your last name? McCandless. McCandless, all right, Mr. McCandless. Mr. Reedy, go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And so I think you had a great preface of what we hope to accomplish tonight at the hearing. This is a process, right? We're taking all comments that we're getting from town departments, town staff, public, seriously investigating and figuring out how that fits into the overall plan. So, you know, one of the big pieces there is going to be the peer review. And so that's why we're happy this evening that you're going to hopefully vote to have a peer review. And obviously that's at the applicant's expense. In addition to that sidewalk that you talked about the next night, we were in front of the planning board October 4th. We got some good feedback from them as well. And that helped to inform some of the design and some of the other comments that we got. We submitted that Friday, October 5th, and ANRAD abbreviated notice of resource area delineation which is meant to delineate the resource areas, right? Just like it sounds like. There was one, as you know, it had expired on its own terms. And also one of the conditions of that required us to go back out in the field and so that's what we're doing. We've had our wetland scientist reflag and it's essentially been the same. There might have been maybe three flags that have moved but they don't impact the project at all. We're still able to keep the project 100 feet away from those resource areas. It's currently with the conservation commission. They've got a sidewalk scheduled. It's in process. We expect the resource area delineation to be reviewed itself. So really just scientifically what is a resource area, what is not, and then that will help set the boundaries. Obviously if there's any material change to what those boundaries are, then we've got a decision to make either pursue a notice of intent through the conservation commission or modify the project to remain outside of it. So that's in process, but given what we've seen so far from our wetland scientists and that this has been peer reviewed before, we feel pretty comfortable with where those lines are. So that's in process. I don't know the hearing date yet for the conservation commission. I would expect it's upcoming in the next few weeks. And once we get that order of resource area delineation, then that will help to set the boundaries of exactly where those resource areas are. In addition, and I'm gonna turn it over to Andrew in a moment. Pierce Guy has been working on all of the comments that we've been getting from fire, from conservation, from Erin. I think she had the most voluminous comments specifically about stormwater. And so, I think with this stormwater peer review that will help to hopefully make the talent feel comfortable that this hasn't been designed accurately. So with that maybe Andrew, I'll turn it over to you to talk through some of the other submissions, changes, et cetera. And then ultimately, Mr. Chair, we expect to get this hearing continued, whether that's to beginning of December. I don't know, depending upon the timeframe for getting that peer review engineer and then getting in the material, getting the feedback. We've always found it works best when it's collaborative because that always gets the best project where the peer reviewer says, hey, here are the issues. The engineer says, let's talk about how to resolve them. So I don't know if that's sometime early December, mid-December, but that's, I think the timeframe we're thinking about. So just to put that out into the universe, but I'll be quiet and turn it over to Andrew. Great, thanks very much, Tom. And thank you all for having us here tonight and giving us the time to talk about this project. Yeah, I'm happy to explain what we've been working on since we last met. On the sixth, we did submit the documents you have before you. Those documents were partly those that were requested to have formerly AMP Energy Upload updated to reflect pure sky energy. There's also a few more documents here, such as the new web application survey, as Tom mentioned, that was carried out in the interim and then the record conditions plans were updated to just show those results, which as Tom mentioned, really didn't result in the substantive change there. We've also updated a couple of details on the energy storage safety mitigation plan, two of which are coming from the manufacturer and a few that were revised on our side. One thing to note, I wanna be very clear about is that the batteries have now been reduced in size by about half. So that is one change we've made and that's primarily to save on capital expenditure costs to still stay in compliance with what were required to do the SMART program in the state, but to something that's gonna be a little bit less upfront costs for the projects to bear. So that has been a change that is recorded in the best narrative. To indicate it's a two hour battery now instead of a four and a half hour battery. So that's a big change. What was a main focus for us was to try to do as much progress as we could on the transmittals. One of which was from this board and we were able to get through those questions and provide answers and submit those along with the fire department. But as Tom also mentioned, the one from the Conservation Commission is taking a little bit more time and we are actively had some conference with a representative from the concom to try to chat about some of the things we can modify and what we can do to make those changes. Those are nearing completion but aren't complete yet. And then in line with a hopeful peer review process, we thought it might be more effective for the board's review to in conjunction with a peer review or to work on all these potential changes at the same time before resubmitting anything. So there's fewer versions to review just for ease of management. And that really includes the site plan, any stormwater changes if necessary, the operations and maintenance plan, phasing plan and project narratives. All those are effectively really kind of referencing one another. So any changes that might be required of the site plan will certainly reference everything else. So I wanted to make sure we didn't send more than one version over if anything didn't need to be modified. So I can pause there and happy to explain in detail any of these other documents that we have provided will provide. Please let me know what questions I can answer. I have one quick question. I noticed the energy storage risk mitigation strategy was updated. Can you tell me what the changes are in that strategy from what was, or maybe it's best to explain the strategy and at the same time, tell me how it's changed? Sure, sure. I know Corey, you were closer to this than I, so maybe if you could just, who would mind explain some of those changes? Yeah, absolutely. So the important thing to keep in mind with that document, Mr. Chairman, is that that is a very high level document intended to provide guidance on what to do in certain scenarios. In terms of concrete response steps and procedures, those are more captured in the emergency management plan, which is comprised of documents from the manufacturer as well as any sort of training that we can provide to the fire department that is something that they had asked for and we're more than happy to oblige to that. Getting back to the risk mitigation strategy, we removed the chemical suppression system. There were some concerns about the type of chemicals that would be sprayed in the best container just internally to quell any fires that would pop up or to stop thermal runaway from happening, which is a common, not a common thing, but if you do have a situation with energy storage, it's really thermal runaway. So those chemical suppression systems are meant to, they're designed to prevent, well, not prevent it, but to keep the batteries next to each other cool if one does start to become abused electrically. So we did remove it because there were concerns about if that were to get into the site and out of consideration for groundwater, we didn't wanna compromise integrity of that and we're confident that we are not doing so. With the removal of the suppression system, the best container is still NFPA 855 compliant. So they come with and without those systems. And so we can, we're proposing to have one without. Without the foam suppression, foam suppression. Yeah, correct. And so this document is, you're right, it's very high-level, it doesn't have much detail and there will be more detailed instructions in other documents, right? Correct, yeah, it's meant to be very high-level. Yeah, this is 30,000 feet, got it. Okay, are there other or other board members have questions about the documents or about requests for information from last meeting? Yes, Mr. Meadows. One simple one, something I mentioned last meeting, I noticed in the narrative that they're still got or provided indicated for your screening. Thank you, that will be updated in the final project narrative and the final site plan. We, one thing we are considering is to modify that to the holly or some other pollinating tree. And then learned recently that holly is also a favorite food of deer. So it can be pretty inadequate screening if it's totally eaten by deer. So we're investigating what other screening might be available for that. Thank you. Any other questions or requests? I didn't have a question. If I remember correctly from the site visit, is the intent to cut 41.5 acres of trees? Yes, the project area and ancillary kind of margin for shading purposes is about 41.2 acres. That will have to have trees removed. But the project itself is a quarter of that, 10.5 acres. The project representing the panels, if you put them all next to each other, yes, that represents about the 10 acres. But to remove shading concerns from within the array itself, the rows are for their parts. So they're more distributed, but the array itself, if you didn't have to do that spacing, it's about 10 acres, yes. So is it absolutely necessary to cut that many trees for the small size panels, so to speak? For this design it is, yes. Okay. And those trees are being cut to reduce shade, is that the only reason? It is so that the facility can be cited on the property, but also along some of the margins on the site plan where you see kind of a gap between the trees that we left and where there's no array to be placed, that exists there because we couldn't fit the array there and do it in a safe way or next to, it'll be too close to resource area or just to leave that open for shade purposes, yes. And we also needed to widen and build up the access road that needs to be, I can't remember, it's 15 or 16 feet per ever source standards. So some of the trees do need, they will need to be removed just so that we can make way for an access road that is compliant with the ever source standards. And then next question is more than I do have some follow-up. Go ahead, follow-up questions for us. Sorry. So initially with 40 acres being cut and the panels themselves being a quarter size of that, would they be centered within these 40 acres? I'm asking because I'm trying to, after doing the walk-through, and I know we discuss boundaries, but I'm trying to think, would they be centered within these 40 acres? Just so I understand the question, meaning the array would be in the middle of the 40 acres, I'm understanding that correctly. The way the panels are situated now and they're oriented in rows running both south and they're largely within, yes, the center of the parcel. There are surrounding parcel that's being left untouched, but for the space we have available that have a way to resource areas, that's where the panels will be located. There's a few, I guess you could view it as not one contiguous area, it's a few sort of broken up areas to avoid what areas, but they'll all be situated within the parcel, yeah. Would it be helpful to have a site plan shared on the screen so that we could view where those panels will be? Would that help you, Mr. Henry? Not necessarily, I mean, they were very good when we did the walkthrough. I'm just trying to get some further clarifying. I do have the map that was presented as well. So understanding that, I don't think, where are the batteries? Are they all centralized to one location or they throughout the 10 acres? How are they centralized away from neighbors? That's a good question. So some models will have batteries distributed everywhere. Our proposal has them located in one location in the equipment pad. That is, if you look at the map, it's sort of the gray square, kind of in the middle south section off of the access road. That pad is about 811 feet from the nearest abutting residents. I'll pause and maybe we can ask those questions. Mr. Sloveter, go ahead, Mr. Sloveter. No, I unmuted. I just wanna clarify something from Mr. Henry's question. I think you said that the area covered by the panels is 10 acres and does that refer to the surface area, the total surface area of the panels? Or are you referring to the total footprint of the entire project? Because you referred to spaces between the panels. So is if you add all the panels surface area together, is that 10 acres or and what happens when you add the spacing between the panels, how much is the total area taken up by the panels? That's a great question, great clarifying question. So yes, if you put just the surface area of the panels themselves, it is 10.3 acres. When you distribute them in a way that's needed for the system to operate properly, that takes up about 41 acres. Well, slightly less than 41 acres because of the shading area. So slightly less than 40 acres because they have to be spread. So you're clear cutting 41.2 acres and this project is going to occupy essentially the entire space. Correct. I mean, give or take enough room to put up a doghouse. So other than that, the entire area that is clear cut for this project is going to have solar panels on it. Well, yes, that's largely correct. Okay, thank you. Thank you, the 25% coverage was completely throwing me off. Okay, thank you. I wanted to ask the same question, Mr. Sloveter, but I'm confused about the answer. So I'm going to try this a different way. So if we take the panels themselves are 10 acres, right? Correct. We're looking at the footprint of where the panels are located and the batteries. That can't be 41 acres because you have space between where that panel is and clear cut areas. You cut trees down to give you a margin for shade. So that's not nothing. That's some number around as a border. So you don't have four. I don't think you have 41 acres of solar panel footprint because you have, I'm looking for the solar panel footprint and the battery footprint and how big that is. Does that be sense? I understand, yes. So that's accurate. Yes, the panel surface area is that 10.3 acres. The total area that's within the limit of disturbance is that 41.2 acres. But you're right, there's going to be some area that won't have panels on them. And what we can do is we could find that answer out. I don't want to say something off the top of my head. Right. Let's get that number because I think it's going to be substantially less than the 41 acres because you've got to have, you have a buffer between the footprint and the closest tree. That is accurate. And a portion of that, I think I have that figure. The access road is about 0.8 acres of access road and then 0.28 acres of gravel path to the third basin. So yes, we can get more clarity on that for you. That would be helpful because it is sobering to think about a 25%, only 25% of the clear cut area with these solar panels that is kind of a remarkable figure to me. These are single access tracking panels. And so those do require a little bit more room. I believe it's 15 or 16 feet in between each row of panels because they need to accommodate shading for each other. Mr. Wachilla, I think if Steve lost or Chris Connolly from Burden-Terra, if they're on the meeting tonight, those are our engineers who have helped us create these plans and they would very likely have these numbers a little bit more readily available than we do. Do you see them, Rob? Yeah, so I just sent Steve a panelist's invite and he should be joining shortly. And I'll let Steve cover this, but he did shoot me a quick message on the perimeter area of the panels. Looks like it's about 20 acres or so. Hi, Steve. Mr. Wachilla, can you give us your name and address for the record? Sorry, my connection's not that great. My name is Steve Wachilla and what else do you want? Just your address for the record. I didn't hear again, sorry. Where you live? Where I live, okay. Eddard's, Pennsylvania. All right, that's fine. Thank you. Thank you. So you're gonna give us some information about spacing between the panels. Maybe the way for me to best think about this is how wide is the panel and how much space does it need between it and the next panel? So the panel area, yeah, the perimeter of the panels is 20 acres. If you add them all together, as Andrew said earlier, they are spaced out they're placed sporadically around the site. Access row widths are roughly 15 feet, just over 15 feet between each row of the trackers that go north-south. And then the follow-up on what Ms. McCandless said, there's how much space between the panels? In acreage. You'll probably have to figure that out later, but just how many feet between one row of panels and the next row of panels? Feet between the rows. Oh, we only got the tail end of that, Steve. Yeah. It's just over 15 feet between each north-south row of panels. Okay, all right. Does anybody else have questions about the panel siding and the amount of space that's covered? Mr. Slover, any more questions on that? Mr. Henneck, not the space, and I do have follow-up questions. Sure, go ahead. So I understand that the applicants will pay for their own peer review. May I ask who's doing the peer review and what projects have they done before that have been up and running and for how long? So as of right now, we don't have anybody picked, and usually the way it works is we would do requests for quotes and different firms would reach out to us, giving us price estimates for each topic of peer review that we decide tonight. So that's kind of where we're at right now. And usually for other projects, the board would sometimes have the applicants reach out to the town to make sure that there's an exact dollar amount that has to be paid up front, and that's called a deposit. And usually they pay that amount to us so we can use that money to pay the consultants for the peer review. So that's pretty much where we're at right now. We don't have any... We have a list of firms in mind, but I prefer not to bring that up right now and just consult that at a later time. But right now, we're at that stage, but we're still pretty early on in that process. Okay, thank you, Rob. The other question goes to the monitoring. I understand that there'll be sensors and there'll be cameras. Is this gonna be remotely monitored? Is it gonna be locally monitored? Yes, this will be remotely monitored from the equipment pad. There'll be a camera situated there and other monitoring devices to ensure the equipment's operating properly, safely, if anything goes wrong. Someone can be dispatched right away to deal with any issues that might come up. But the question is, where is your monitoring center? This is outsourced to a third party. I don't know that they've necessarily been selected yet, but they'll typically monitor the facility as they do for other facilities. And then if there is an issue, they'll make a dispatch to a pure sky representative and the local emergency services personnel. And how far away from the site would be the local emergency pure sky representative? I don't know if there's anybody living in the area. I live in Watertown about an hour, 45 minutes away. I know our construction manager lives down near the south shore. So it would be somebody... It sounds like Mr. Henry's question is more about emergency responders. Is that correct? Are you interested in... It is other than the fire department, like someone specifically from Pure Sky. Are there no one local? Yeah, so we would work with the fire department and the emergency response services in Amherst to establish if there is going to be a local pure sky representative, who that will be. If not, we will work with them on the emergency first and first response procedures. Well, and to... The fire department. And then more directly into your question. No, we don't have anybody but any pure sky reps who are currently living in Amherst or any surrounding towns. And can you just give an estimate as to how far or how close is the nearest pure sky representative? I'd say probably about an hour, 45-minute drive. Okay. The monitoring, the remote monitoring, are there any remote monitoring companies, like within the Commonwealth or in neighboring towns, or is this like, I don't know, I think Cori said you're in Colorado, you're in Watertown, I'm somebody else's in farther away. Are there any monitoring companies local to the Commonwealth or in any of these neighboring towns? Those that monitor specifically PV facilities, I'm not aware of any that are specialized that are located in Massachusetts. That's certainly something we can look into. I know that we've used in the past has been affirmed a belief called also energy. They're located in Portland, Oregon, but they monitor, I would believe, hundreds of different facilities across the country and have a distributed network of service personnel. I'm not sure if there will be selecting them for this project, but that's one example. Understood. Other questions? Mr. Meadows, Mr. Sloveter? Nothing. I had a question about, at the last meeting, there was a number of questions about the fire in New York. At the time, the response from pure sky was, we really can't give you much information because it's still under investigation. Well, endeavor to provide that information to you when the investigation is complete. Has that investigation been completed? And do we have that report? Was that part of what we received that I just didn't notice? That is not something that has been sent over to my knowledge that hasn't been completed and shared with us, that's something we can share. As soon as we have it and are clear to be able to distribute that, that's something we plan to do with the fire department right away. Fire department, okay. And do we know, do you know if the, I think it's West Chester, not West Chester, it's a city in New York. Have they completed their investigation or their, and so they're just compiling the report and we should have it soon or is it still a ways away? My understanding is the investigation has concluded the report is being compiled. The preliminary results for showing that it was something with the enclosure way it was set up there. That is something from the installation itself. I don't know the details yet, unfortunately, I haven't seen anything, but that's my understanding. And so that's something we will receive well, hopefully before the next meeting that we have on this. Understood. Yeah, we will check in with Allen to see where that's at. If you could endeavor to get that, that would be helpful for the board's deliberation to know about the results of that investigation. Yes, sir. Mr. Chair, may I ask some follow-up to your question? You sure can. So if I understood correctly, the issue was around the battery storage system. Has this applicant reviewed what the issue was in New York and how is your battery storage system going to be different from New York? We do not yet have the official results from that. I just heard kind of a conjecture of what it might be or what they believe to be, but we certainly absolutely would make sure that whatever those issues are would be resolved before moving forward with a product like that for this project. I appreciate that you don't have all the facts from New York, but my question is, just by hearing what happened in New York, is your design similar or the same to the New York design? Currently, the product that we were proposing for this project is the same model that was used in New York, but before we would implement anything like that in the site, we would make sure that any fixes found from that root cause analysis had been addressed in any kind of product redesign. Thank you. Staff, Ms. Brestrup or Rob or Rob, do you, anybody have any other questions before we start to talk about peer review? I don't have any other questions at this time. Me neither. Board members? All right, you know, I think what would be helpful to the board, Ms. Brestrup, if you would just run through the peer review process. I mean, I know that number one, the applicant pays for it, number two, we decide the board decides the topics, right? And then we give it to the staff to try to identify, to create a quest for proposal at RFP, and then you guys decide the, I think it doesn't come back to the board to decide the actual peer review agents or firms, but just go through it and give everybody a sense of how it operates. Yeah, so the board determines the areas that it wants to have studied. And Rob Wachilla and Rob Mora and I put together a recommended list of areas for your consideration tonight. And once you decide on which areas you wanna have studied, then we will determine the appropriate way to hire these engineers or whatever kind of experts they are. They can be engineers or wildlife experts or water quality experts or any of the array of things that you might have concerns about. And then we reach out to people who are expert in those fields. We may need to put out an RFP, but I think that depending on what the scope of work is, if it's less than a certain amount, we may be able to choose the specialist just by contacting one specialist or we may have to contact three specialists and get three proposals and prices. And then once we decide as a staff who we think would be most appropriate to do the work and what the amount is, then we reach back to the applicant. In this case, we would reach back to Mr. Reedy and we tell him, this is the entity that we would choose to do this work and this is how much it's gonna cost and this is the entity we would choose to do this work. This is how much it would cost. And then Mr. Reedy and the applicant provide the town with money that we keep in escrow accounts here. And then the town hires the consultant, whatever field that consultant happens to be in and that consultant works for the town really for the zoning board of appeals, but for the town. And they do an examination of what the thing is that you want to have examined and provide a report which is considered the third party review report and then those are presented to you. So those would be examinations of many of the different things that on the list that we came up with today. And then we use up the money that is in escrow and if we need more money then we reach back to the applicant and ask for more money to supplement those escrow accounts. Generally speaking, I think that, well, I shouldn't say, I shouldn't estimate but it's not a huge amount of money normally because what they're doing is they're reviewing the work product of someone else. They're not producing the work product so they're not doing the stormwater management report or they're not doing the phasing design there analyzing what pure sky has put forward to see if it makes sense, to see if it's within the industry standard and if it's done safely and correctly according to engineering practices, et cetera. And then, so you get the reports and then you can do with them what you think you should do. Does that explain it? It does for me. Is there any questions from board members about that process? Okay, great. That was very good. Thanks, Ms. Preston. So I think it'd be helpful to see the, I know we all have, there were several suggestions for peer review in the last meeting, but I think that we should start off with your list and then we can look at each of the lists the staff compile and we can look at each of those and decide whether that's where we want to go and we want to add more to that or not or if there's something we don't need. So Ms. Chair, I can screen share and show you that list just so we can all take a look at it together. That'd be helpful. Yep, all right. So, okay, everybody see my screen? Mm-hmm, yeah. Awesome. So I guess I could just go through each of these topics real quick and just the justification for including on this list. So the first topic is site design. This one's more general, just to get an idea of the site layout and make sure that it's sufficient enough and also abides by what's needed for the paneling in terms of setbacks and pretty much everything we discussed prior to this to make sure that it's all accurate and incomplete. Not saying that's not, but it's always good to double check. Construction phasing is the next one. So there were some concerns brought up about the phasing. So areas that will be including this are a tree removal because they're proposing it within like 20, 30 days in certain areas. There's two different phases in the construction phasing narrative. There was a phase A and then subsection phases. So there'd be like a phase 1A, 2A, 3A. And each of those numbers are a different geographical area on the site. So phase A portion would be removing and clearing outland. And then phase B would be installing the panels and the access road and the equipment pad. So under construction phasing all three of those topics would be observed and analyzed. The next area is impact to wetlands. And there is reports of a possible stream has not yet been confirmed but possible stream along the access road. But that review, it was included just giving idea that we're thinking about it but it might be wise to potentially put that one on hold because they're still at the review with conservation commission. And it's possible conservation commission might also impose their own peer review on that topic as well. So just to keep that in mind. The next topic we have is their stormwater management plan. And having that looked at and there's three different areas that would be including this as well. So you have during construction and usually what you'd see during construction are your erosion and sediment controls as well as evaluating the stormwater pollution prevention plan, otherwise known as a SWIP. So it's one area that'd be looked at. The other area would be post-construction which is the evaluation of the stormwater management and performance plan. So basically what exists after they're done constructing for stormwater runoff mitigation. And the third, which should be its own category, I apologize that it looks like it's subsection C right here but impacts the water quality, groundwater quality. And there were some concerns from neighbors about their drinking water being affected from this project. So it'd be wise to also consider that as a topic as well. And to have an expert look at that and see if this project will impact groundwater. Next we have glare study. There have been concerns about glare resulting from these large scale projects. We think staff think that it's wise for the board to consider that as well. We have barrier storage as a possible topic including placement, access, fire safety and hazardous materials containment. Seeing that the applicant has reduced the size of their barrier storage on site. The board, it's up to you as the board if you wanna consider that one as a topic, we could definitely remove it or keep it up to you. And then Chris, I don't know if you want to explain the last two. You're more familiar with the attorney review during this process as well as the third party construction monitoring which we'll to give some updates on that. Yeah, so legal fees for land use attorneys are allowed as part of this chapter 44, section 53G. And what we're thinking about is having an attorney from our town attorney, but it could be another attorney as well. Come to the public hearings and hear what the topics are and advise the board on conditions and make sure that the board remains in compliance with chapter 48, section three, which gives some exemptions from zoning regulations to solar installations. So just to make sure that you're abiding by whatever regulations you need to do to stay out of trouble and not subject yourselves to an appeal based on the conditions that you impose. And then the other one is during construction, we think it might be a good idea to have a third party monitor the construction to make sure that everything is done appropriately so that you've got your proper erosion control and sedimentation control and everything is being done according to the plan. So that's another thing that you can consider. You might also consider imposing that as a condition, but I don't think I'm not sure that that would be covered by chapter 44, section 53G if you made it a condition to have a third party construction monitor. So it might be better to just sort of put it into this mix here. And then when construction actually does occur that you could hire the third party monitor at that time. And Steve, we can also, this list is not permanent. We can take stuff out. If the board feels that's not necessary to have it peer reviewed. As Chris mentioned, we could have third party construction monitoring as a condition if the board feels that's a lot easier to manage and have the applicants work with the town after the fact to arrange that. And then of course the legal fees for the attorneys to help with conditioning on this project that's something to consider as well. So I guess that's pretty much it from our end in terms of presenting this. I'll leave this up. The board members can discuss as you will. And yeah, take it away, Steve. One quick question for Ms. Brestrup. Normally I'm not worried about going beyond our mandate and our on conditions. I've gotten pretty good with that, but there are significant differences in what we can do with the solar fields than we would do with a normal. And the flexibility we have with a normal special permit application and under conditions we impose and that's caused by state law, right? And if we're not very familiar with it it might be pretty good to have somebody kind of watching over who's very familiar with the limitations that are in state law for the ZBA to impose conditions on a solar array. So that's really what that's all about, right? That's correct. Yep. Yeah, that's not a bad thing to do, I think. And the area, Steve, that you might see overstepping during this process, I didn't mean to interrupt you. Go ahead. The area that you might see the board possibly overstepping if at all would be in the conditions portion of this whole process because other towns I've seen conditions go pretty extreme to where they lost an appeal to the applicant because of that. So I mean, that's something to keep in mind as well and that's the benefit of having the legal review during that process of the hearing. And would the newly identified peer review topic number five cover everything from potential groundwater effects from construction also to if there is some kind of leakage from a battery, post-potential groundwater implications for local residents from the lithium batteries or the oil or whatever the kind of substances that are in the batteries themselves that may affect water quality for their wells. I mean, I want to make sure that that is something that's reviewed, is that contained in five? Is that contemplated to be contained at number five? You can spell out what you want to have reviewed. So if that's something that you're really concerned about that is something that we can have include there. Yep. And really again, what it's doing is saying these folks are either are or are not using industry best practices is really what we're looking at here. Right? Yep. Okay. And Mr. Chairman, just to further clarify, so usually when we do these RFPs, if we're doing that route, we'll include as much detail as possible. So we'll include these different areas to focus on within the impacts to water quality topic or same thing with stormwater management and the other topics as well, just to make sure that we're as specific as possible if nothing is missed. Got it. Okay. The people have questions about Mr. Meadows. I see your hand. Yep. Isn't as much curiosity as anything else, but I'm wondering how they came up with the decision to use a tracking and monitoring system tracking system for the solar as opposed to a stationary. And what the difference between a similar, basically size system in a stationary system as opposed to a tracking would result in as far as a footprint. And knowing that a tracking system is logically more likely to have mechanical problems, which is their problem, not the town's problem, obviously, but what prompted them to use this type of system as opposed to a stationary system. And I don't think it's within our purview to ask, but I am very curious. So that's more, that's kind of a question for the applicant as opposed to a peer review topic, right? It could be either way. If you had an engineer who do the similar analysis on a stationary system as opposed to a tracking system, if we're looking to see what the footprint might be with that type of system, it could be peer review or it could be simply a question to the applicant if they chose to answer it. I'm happy to answer that, Chair, Judge, if that'd be helpful. I think it's start, what I was going to suggest is we could put it on our list for the time being and not, but let's get an answer first. Let's get an answer. Sure, no, it's a very good question. It may not be sufficient, but let's find out. Sure, no, it's a very good question. So it is true that with a, I guess, the terminology is fixed tilt versus single axis tracking with a fixed tilt system, which is obviously doesn't move. There are more panels. So you have more generation potential because you just have more panels in the location. So they can be tighter together. That is a true statement. For tracking, however, even though you're spreading them out further apart with fewer panels, you're actually getting more production, more energy than you would with the fixed tilt system. That's just because, I think as I said earlier, it kind of tracks the sun over the course of the day rather than a fixed system, which you're only getting maximum efficiency during a narrow band of the day. So that's the short suite of it, but I'm sure we could dive in deeper if that's helpful. It would be pretty much a formulas that you could, it could be created to give you the answer to that, right? Because it'd just be a single point versus an arc. And you can tell, it shouldn't be that expensive of a peer review to be, to understand Chancellor Mr. Meadows question, I wouldn't think. Is that right? I would assume they've already done the analysis. Agreed, yes. It was the analysis previously where we've looked at both solutions, both options. Can you remind that to us? Yes, sir, we could work something up. It was more of just internal file sharing. We didn't do an internal report, but we can certainly, we can generate something to provide. Yes. I think at the end of the day, the important takeaway is that if we were to go with a fixed tilt system, it would require more space to generate the same amount of energy that the tracking system would. Mr. Meadows, would that satisfy your interest or would you like to have it reviewed by somebody else? No, if I could see their analysis, that would be fine. I have plenty of people that can look at it. Great. And then if it's insufficient, we can always come back and it's important, we can always come back and look at it again and seek a peer review if needed. Are there other questions or comments about this? I do, Mr. Chair. Oh, good. Mr. Hand. Under number five, I believe right in the packet, there's some of the butters who use geothermal for heating combined with their wall. Can we add that to number five impact on geothermal? Sure. And on number nine, can somebody help me understand why this would be outsourced versus using talent resources? For the third party construction monitoring? Yes. Chris, you want to answer that question? It's a lot of work. The site is very big. We have really one person who does monitoring for stormwater and wetlands issues and we have one or one and a half people who does monitoring for electrical. And we have a couple of people who do inspections but we don't really have enough of a staff to devote significant resources to this project over a period of time. So having a third party monitor would provide the town with a better oversight of what's going on. Understood. Thank you. And also, Evel, just to add on to that, the conservation commission does this with a lot of their projects too. So they'll have a third party reviewer go check out construction or whatever project they're associated with. Okay. One area that there was a lot of questions about the last meeting I noted was on security and fences and monitoring and cameras. And I don't see any peer review of that. I haven't noticed that any board member has raised that question during this meeting. Are people interested in sort of best in class real time monitoring of the site after it's been constructed for damage, hail, animals, vandals? I don't know, are people interested in having better information and monitoring of the site post-construction or are you satisfied where it's at? Because that discussion took place last August. I'm not looking to get to it, I just wanted to make sure we didn't miss it. I think that that is the applicant's problem. If they have a situation where they get animals disturbing their system or they have a failure in the panel or they have an inverter or two that go bad or they're not getting transmission. I'm not certain where the transformers are for this but if they have those problems that's they're losing power and it doesn't affect the town whatsoever that just affects their profitability. Got it. I don't have security concerns questions either. I do have a comment because I read some of the statements from the public and some of the concerns were that in current state a lot of people utilize the force for walks and hikes and their animals and I imagine if this is approved and it's up and running that will change for these neighbors. And I know from the site visits that there will be a road that goes in there and is the intent here after if this is approved and up and running are these residents now going to have no trespassing signs posted or how does that change what they do now? Yeah, Mr. Chair, if I may. Yeah, that's a great question. Thank you, Mr. Henry. It is important to note that this is private property and it is made available at the discretion of the landowner. We will need to have signs posted because of security concerns, warning, high electricity, high voltage, and also contact information for if there is an emergency. So there will be some signs posted along the gate where exactly those will be need that will be part of national electric code as well as what the board decides. Some boards will decide to have signs posted every 50 feet along the exterior fence. If the board would prefer to just have those signs located near the gateway and then close to the equipment pad, as long as it's compliant with all codes and standards, that's fine with us too. But again, this is private property and it is at the discretion of the landowner whether to allow a butters and the public onto their property. I'm not sure if that answers your question or if I'm frozen. No, it does. Thank you. I think there are people listening so I think it's, so thank you for that answer. Okay. Well, it looks like we have, so I'd like to get a sense of the board regarding these peer review topics. These look like reasonable requests on our part and there are things that are beyond my knowledge and a peer review would be helpful. Oh, I had one, I just thought of one thing. I'm sorry, Adams Brook, the Brook that runs outside the property. Where is that going to be on, where is the, and who has responsibility for making sure that this does not affect Adam, the water quality of Adams Brook? We had, that was brought up in the ciphers that we didn't get an attitude to that, maybe, and I don't want to lose that. So I'm going to ask that question now. Who has responsibility to ensure that Adams Brook is, their water quality is not affected either through construction or post-construction? As you answered that question for you Mr. Chairman, I put it in impacts to water quality. That'd probably make sense to include in that area as well. And the stormwater management plan portion, I believe they consider runoff that goes towards Adams Brook in their analysis as well. So it'll be kind of covered in those two areas, but in terms of water quality, it probably should be added to number five unless Chris, you have some other suggestions. No, I agree with you. And generally that's concomitant would deal with that in general, but this would be something that we would, for this particular project, we could get the information through this. Because you may not, the concomitant may not have jurisdiction depending on the situation with the NRAD. Got it, okay. All right, so I am comfortable with this list. I'm comfortable with this list. One more question. Oh, yes, Mr. Henry. I'm sorry I didn't see you. I've got to increase my size so I see it with your hands up. There you go. So I'm gonna purpose this question with saying, understanding that this is not your choice, but to the applicants, looking at this list, do you think it's unduly burdensome and or do you think there's anything that you'd like to add on to it that could help your case? I can feel that. No, I think this is a pretty comprehensive list. I think the comment was made earlier that I believe a good chunk of these for the Invect of Wetlands will be covered through the, potentially through the concom process. So if there can be efforts to remove redundancy, I think we'd appreciate that, but I think whether it's through the concom or through the board, we're happy to address that. And one other thing to know is we would really appreciate to have our engineers, Steve and Chris worked directly with the peer reviewer just to maintain efficiency and to make sure that nothing is lost in translation. So we would just like to make sure that we can have that line of communication, understanding that everything would be communicated to the board. Yes, just in case there were any clarifying questions and any resulting modifications that need to be needed, it would be very much helpful for us to have it not be a purely siloed process so we could adapt quickly and accurately, please. It doesn't sound like that's a problem. All right. So unless there's any further discussion on the peer review topics, I would like to entertain a motion to approve these lists of peer review topics and instruct the staff to begin the process of obtaining peer review on these items for our further consideration. Do I have a second? So moved, Mr. Chair. Is there a second? Second. Can moved and seconded. Any discussion? If not, the vote occurs on the motion. Chair votes aye. Mr. Meadows? Aye. Mr. Henry? Aye. Mr. Sloveter? Aye. Mr. Forgot it. It's not here. We have one absent. So the vote is four, zero, it was one abstention or one absence. The motion carries. Mr. Gilbert, I'm sorry. I'm a little slow today. So we now have, we completed that. The next order of business is public comment on this application. And I would like to, so members of the public wish to speak on the application itself, on the project. They can, this is the time to do that. Please keep your remarks. First of all, raise your hand or if you're on the computer, raise your hand. If you're on a phone, press star nine. When you are recognized, please give your name and address for the record. All comments should be addressed to the board and not to the individual board members or to the applicant. And please keep your comments to about three minutes. And so Henry and Stat will help us identify who's up. Mr. Wachiller? So the hand that I saw go up first was Renee Moss. So I will go ahead and give speaking privileges. Hi everyone, can you hear me? Yes, we can, Ms. Moss, go ahead. Hi, my name is Renee Moss and I'm at 277 Shootsbury Road. And this is just going to be a quick comment. As you went down your list for peer reviews, I am struck by the fact that there was nothing about an environmental impact study or environmental impact review and also a noise assessment, a noise review. So I think that those would be extremely important and especially in Conway where there was an array put up, there was a real noise issue after it went up and actually the grid had to disconnect the whole array because of the noise for all the residences that were nearby. So in either case, I think that those two were sort of glaring to me that those were left out of the list. I think that was a short comment. Thank you, Ms. Moss. I see we have another one up. Rob, would you bring in Ms. Eagman? Judy Eisman, I'm going to allow to talk. Yes, can you hear me now? Yes. I'm Judy Eisman. I chair the planning board in the town of Pelham. Our board met this morning and we have been talking about this project for a bit. We have the major concerns of what I propose is that I write a letter to the board, the ZBA, outlining some of our concerns. But like Mrs. Moss who just spoke, I was concerned that you had no environmental impact as a peer review need. And let me just say the CAPS program which is Conservation Assessment and Prioritization, something out of you, Moss, ought to be looked at. This particular section of Pelham, which this project abuts, is extremely important to wildlife habitat and is a high priority area for prioritization and for protection. And so I think that along with studies that have recently been completed by the state and DOER, MESS, Audubon and Harvard should be something that you would want to look at in terms of areas of studies that need to be reviewed. And the final thing is the idea of best management practices. Stormwater just isn't enough. As it happens, it was my son's property which was destroyed by the solar array built without enough monitoring on site during construction and following it. And so I have a firsthand understanding of what can happen on steep terrain when things aren't done absolutely correctly. And so as to the BMPs, I think what we need is some better management plans, not just the current best management because the best manager plans for this kind of work in forests doesn't take into consideration what goes on with the solar array. And so my concern there is that you have to look at this as a new kind of project. The old best management practices really are insufficient. That's all I will say right now, but I think if it is all right with you, I will address a somewhat lengthy letter that the planning board in Pelham is preparing and I will send that to you as soon as we can get it done. Yeah, consideration, okay? Yeah, thank you for your comments and we look forward to your letter. Thank you. Thank you. So we have one more person with our hand up, Lenore Brick. Apologies, great. Hi, everybody. Thank you for your due diligence here. I would like to echo what the prior two speakers just said. I agree that we need more of an environmental impact peer review. I agree that this is a very new kind of project. And just to keep a couple of things in mind as you review this, we're in a very interesting point in history with our understanding of climate science, changing, evolving, and the priorities at the state level are evolving. So know this little piece about chapter 40a, section three, is that it is currently being challenged at the state level because it's an archaic law when people were thinking about aesthetics and solar rooftops and not even, you know, which is crazy, but besides that, not even thinking that there could be a large ground amount of solar installation by clear cutting a forest that was not even in anyone's radar. And that, that law was, that exemption was added to the Dover amendment in 1985. It's being challenged right now. And it could, it could be struck from our legislation. And so to be influenced heavily by the fear of a lawsuit would be a shame, right? If that's, if that's a big piece of your thinking. So just keep that in mind that that's happening right now as we, as we speak. So keep in mind that the state is looking very differently at these projects than they used to. I wish that the state would have subsidized and maybe they will landowners to steward the land for climate resilience and biodiversity. That hasn't happened yet. That they would support solar developers more in installing on built landscapes that more funding is needed for that. That's also an effort that's happening at the state level just to know, just for you to know. And I'm wondering with the peer review process, this is probably not possible, but interesting to entertain that are there soil scientists and forest ecologists that can determine the impact on the soil health that is inevitably going to kill the soil microbiology, because that's what is going to happen such that after the solar arrays are decommissioned in 25 years, that land will not be able to support a healthy forest ecosystem for generations to come. And that's our responsibility, right, to be stewarding this land. I know it's private, but I would hope that that landowner would have support in stewarding it in this way. I'm working hard at the state level with my fellow organizers to do that. And in this era of really immense flooding and drought, how the loss of these trees are going to impact the health of that, of the land and the surrounding land, because just like people, trees need community to fulfill their potential. So those kinds of thoughts as you think about all of these details that you're thinking about. Thank you. Thank you very much, Ms. Brick. Mr. Wachillo, who do we have next? Michael Lepinski. Hi, my name is Michael Lepinski, 167 Sheetsbury Road in Amherst. And thanks for coming by the other day and visiting the forest. I would say that there's been an interesting development here. Over the past couple of days, and it was kind of glossed over a little bit tonight. And I think it's the fact that the applicant has done a 56% reduction in the proposed number of batteries they were going to use. I was thinking that maybe they did that because they were, because they were planning to use these batteries that tend to be more dangerous than the flames. And they were trying to reduce the danger of that happening by 56%. But that wasn't the case. It seems like they're doing it for financial reasons. And you should let that sink in. The fact that this company is coming to you. And basically telling you, we've got financial troubles. The troubles are so great. That we've had to reduce the batteries on site by 56%. Well, if that's a budget cutting measure that they're planning to do, which in the long run is severely going to affect their income. What other budget cutting things are they thinking about doing that could affect the safety of the project that could affect it actually getting finished in a way that would be an acceptable project for the town of Amherst. That's a big change. 27 very large battery units, even though they are fire prone and reducing them to 12 is a huge change. It was just sort of presented nice kind of a matter of fact thing. Imagine if they came next week and said, we want to do a 56% reduction in the number of solar panels or a 56% reduction in the number of trees we're going to cut down. All those are major impacts too. And you have to wonder what's coming down the line. If the company is basically saying to you, we have budget troubles with this project. There's a reason why they do. It's a poor site for a solar facility. It has been from day one. They know it is. They're trying to fudge as much as they can to make it work. And but it's not a good site. If you took a good look at the site on your visit last week, you could look and see, this doesn't make sense. I have just one question to wrap things up. It's the same question I've asked that the last few meetings, how many trees are going to be cut down to put in 10 acres of solar panels? 41 acres are going to be cleared. 10 acres worth of solar panels are going to be put. I understand it's the surface area, but all that's irrelevant. That's how much surface area of solar paintings. I want to know how many trees are going to be cut down on this 41 acres site to put up 10 acres of panels. Thank you, Mr. for your comment. All right. So. Sharon Wiesenbaum. Hi, thank you. Sharon Wiesenbaum, 86 Henry street in Amherst. I just want to echo and mirror what everyone has said previously about the landscape. I just want to build a little bit on. What Lenore Brick said. About the archaic. Dover amendment. And the changing landscape. Of. Of large scale solar development. Through clear cutting forest. And point out that just recently. Peter sham. They didn't want to allow clear cutting up their forests for a solar development. And they were sued for saying no, and they won in land court. Really simply because they were clear cutting forest in order to put up this solar development. So it really is a changing landscape. And I think it's really important for Amherst officials to know that because. I think it can reduce our fear of lawsuits. And then I also wanted to ask, I know that. These solar sites are frequently. Sold. And in fact, in shoots, Barry. The we lock site has been sold three times since it was built. So I was listening to the plans. The safety plans that pure sky has in place. But I know that in shoots, Barry, once it sold all the commitments that the company made who wanted to build it. Suddenly we're gone. And many of those commitments were never followed through on. Once it was sold. So I wonder about Amherst. Taking care that there's a long-term plan in place. In case these. Sites are sold that we can't just rely on pure sky. We have to have a plan in place. If the site. Is. Unfortunately. Built. And then if it is sold. So thank you. Thank you very much for your comment. Rob, I think we have one more. Yep. Jacob Hirsch. Hello, thanks for letting me make a comment. I live on flat Hills road in North Amherst. I was very surprised that you're not asking for a peer review for a traffic engineering. How are they going to get all of those trees out of there? They're either going to take a right and go through shoots, Barry, on a dirt road, or they're going to take a left and go along residential roads through Amherst shoots. Barry road has erosion problems in a couple of spots. And I'm sure those huge logging trucks aren't going to help it. So I think the town whose roads are not in the greatest shape should protect itself by doing some sort of. Road road where study and traffic study. I also think that you should ask for clarification on how they're going to get the trees to the woods when they cut it, the single access road, which is 15 feet wide, how many trucks are going to go over that every day and for how long to get the trees out of there. I don't understand that you're going to be able to do that. I don't understand that you're going to be able to get the trees out of there within the time of the phasing that you. That you showed on the plans last week to the planning board, but at any rate, please consider that because that has huge impact on the neighborhood and on the town streets and other neighborhoods. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Okay. I don't see any other. Okay. All right. We typically give the applicant if they wish to respond to the public comment a chance to do so. You can either do that now or you can do that later at the next meeting. If you need to collect your thoughts, it's up to you. Oh, thank you for the opportunity. I'm sorry. I don't want to miss some of those questions. I'm happy to respond in the future meeting. Okay. Thank you. So we have those questions down. Rob, will you just kind of. Over the next couple of days. To those questions to the applicants so they can. Answer some of those questions. We'll do. All right. So I don't want to let them go unanswered. We have the opportunity. All right. I don't, there's nothing else for this matter before us and I'm going to go back to that. I'm going to go back to that. And if you review vote, we have public comment. And we've gone through the new material that's been submitted. It's going to take a while before. The next. The material we need to review next will be available. And the con calm and the conservation and the. Matters is going to take some time to, to. The process. That's going to take some time. Some time in December. We only have one meeting date in December. I think. That's right. Isn't it only one? Or do we have two in December? So as. I'm trying to think. So we have. In terms of regular meetings, Mr. Chairman, or just all meetings at the zoning board meetings. So in terms of meetings in December, we have two scheduled. In December. In December. I think it's going to be on Thursday because I believe the third Thursday might be Christmas time. That's 23rd. I think. So the first one. I am not going to my calendar in front of me. Yep. So actually. So it's looking like it's the 14th and the 28th of December. Those are the two meetings for December. Do we have things already scheduled for those? Not yet. No. Because the 40 B meetings are going to be on the seventh and the 21st. Okay. Let's look. The 14th and the 28th. Do you have time? Does the 14th give you enough time? Mr. Shabbo to get the information. That you're going to provide to us. Yes, sir. I think that. To. Just frame what you are all expecting for that meeting. If the expectation is to be totally done with all the peer reviews, I am not sure. That was going to be my next question. I doubt we can be done with the peer review at that point. Okay. Then we can absolutely be working towards getting more. To you. But some of the things that are a little bit more. Engineering intense, like the site plan storm our plan. The interaction with the peer review reply. There's any modifications to be needed might take a little longer. So we can certainly provide anything that has been completed. By that. Is there enough, is it going to be enough. To warrant a meeting to the voting of a meeting on the 14th. I would say. I think. What do you think, Rob? I mean, it may not be enough to do. And there's a, we've got other stuff that we need to. To work on. Just thinking about the process of get of doing the peer review. So if we were to submit a request for proposals or quotes. That might take about three to four weeks by itself. Because when you give people time to respond to us, then we have to review the different quotes and then choose consultants and. Do a bunch of contracting stuff and then get payment from the applicant and then pay the consultants and have them do their work, which typically would take probably about a month. I would say. Depends on the size of the topic they're investigating. So if possible, I would suggest maybe either late December, early January. As a next meeting date, that probably would be the move. And I believe the first meeting in January is January 11th, which is not a holiday that I'm aware of. If it pleases the board, I think that if we were opting for a late December date, we could endeavor to get as much done as possible and make this a number one priority for us to get, get you what we need. You know, the difference between that early, that early December date and the late one is two weeks, which one week of which is the holidays and tough to get. I mean, it's just being realistic. There's just not as much work that gets done. At least I know I was never able to accomplish all that much during those holiday times. At least this was a fraction of what you could normally do. And I know you, I know you would like to get this done as quickly as possible, but I think it's a real waste of time to put us out there before you. You have a chance to review the peer review things unless there's a number of other issues that we have to address at that meeting. And I don't, I don't see that there are enough issues to warrant a meeting by itself. Maybe the January 11th would be the best use of our time. And then we're not doing it. We're not having two meetings when we can maybe get it all done on one. Okay. Are the board members have any other feeling contrary to that? I'm looking at the January time for, continuing the hearing until that date. It seems to make sense. Doesn't it? Mr. Meadows. Oh, you were. I am out of the country from the 27th of December through the 14th of January. Let's see. Okay. Let's look. 14th of January. I am out of the country from the 18th of I leave on the I leave on the 18th of January. I'm out of the country for two weeks. So, Mr chair, would it be wise to do like a check in on the 28th of December, just to see where we're at with everything. Gives the applicant time to respond. Give us updated documents. A staff can update you on the peer review process to see where we're at so far. Just keep the board informed and the public informed too. What do you think about that? Yeah, we can do that. Otherwise we're looking at February, right? Yeah, at that point, that's what it sounds like. I think Chris might have something to add to. I just wanted to acknowledge that Mr Meadows won't be able to attend, but he could watch the video and submit a statement that he's watched it. So he won't be available on the 28th of December. Oh, yeah. Oh, okay. Oh, you're you've gone on the 28th as well. Yes, I got it. I got it. Yep. Okay. So you're gone for both the two days and just the 28th and the first January. Correct. That you're going to be gone for both. You come back on the 14th. If we need to have an under the mounds rule, can you miss more than one me? No, no, just one. And so far we have two members on this panel who use their one yourself and John Gilbert and Mr Gilbert. If we do this, Mr Meadows will either date either the 28th of the 11th. Mr Meadows will have missed one as well. Let's pick a date. So let's pick the date that gives us the greatest likelihood of having a productive meeting. And both of which have Mr Meadows absence, which is unfortunate. And I would choose the January meeting because I think that there's a better chance of having more material available to us and there would be in December 28. That's what I would choose. So the next question is January 11th or January 25th? I'm gone on the 25th. So it has to be 11th. Okay. And Craig, you said you're gone on the 11th. Correct. So Craig will have to use his mounds rule on the January 11th meeting and that could still work and give us enough time to have some reporting done. Hopefully a lot of the reporting done for the peer review. And the applicant has plenty of time to get us any updated materials that we requested from them. And Mr Meadows, do you have a lot of time in February that you're going to be gone? Does this take you away in February? I don't know at this point. Yeah, I know it's early. But I'm trying to avoid a second meeting where we'll lose you. Well, I know in April, I'll be out of the country also. I hope we're not still doing this in April. I would hope not. I hope. All right, so let's go for the 11th. And I think it's the best we can do. That also gives us the opportunity if there are other things that we can clear up on the 28th, we can do that, you know, other. Special permits. You can do that on the 28th. Okay. I would entertain a motion that we continue this public hearing until January to six o'clock on January 11. Is there a second? You might want to specify the year, Mr Chairman. I probably do. I can remember that it's going to be 2024. Thank you. I got the time I just didn't get the year right. Okay. Is there a, do I have a motion? So I move Mr chair. And a second. I can. Any discussion? No discussion. The vote occurs on the motion chair votes aye. Mr Meadows. Hi. Henry. Hi. And Mr Gilbert is absent. The vote is four zero one. The motion carries. All right. So we put the first item. Behind us. Thank you guys. Everybody from pure sky. We appreciate your. Good time and attention to this. And we'll be back in touch. One comment before they leave. Yes, of course, Mr Henry. Yes. Thank you. So I appreciate understand that the issue of New York is still being looked at. But given the fact that. Your project and your design is somewhat similar. Come January. I would hope that you have more response than we don't know. It's still ongoing. Even if it's still ongoing. I'm putting the owners on you guys to get us more information than you don't know. Yes, sir. We will do that. Thank you. Right. Thank you for your time. Really appreciate it. Yes. Thank you. Mr chair. Thank you. Board. Have a good night. All right. Great. Thank you. Have a good, have a good evening as well. All right. The next order of business is ZBA FY. 2024. That's zero four. Charles. Dana and. Rokey. Zong. Request for a special permit under section three point three two one one of the zoning bylaw. To convert an existing owner occupied duplex structure into a non-owner occupied duplex. With two rental units. Five bedrooms in total. That's 62 Taylor street. Matt 14. The next order of business is ZBA FY 2024. And the next order of business is general residence zoning district for a maximum of 32 tenants. Five bedrooms in total. At 62 Taylor street, Matt 14. The parcel seventy four. Residents. RG general residence zoning district. There was a site visit this week, which I couldn't attend. Mr. Slogatter. I know you attended it. Can you kind of summarize the site visit for us? The current owner there who showed us around the exterior. And she explained, we only looked at the exterior because there will be no interior modifications or additions. So we looked at it was quite a short site visit. We looked at the, we walked up the driveway we looked at the back of the house where there is parking for three cars, a little tight and a little onto the grass and not delineated, but there was only one car back there. And then we walked out front and we looked, we looked on the street and asked the number of questions about the neighboring homes, the house next door, one house next door is a single family home on the other side. The woman who met us, who seemed very helpful, and very nice, didn't know if that was a multifamily house or not, she said. And there were a couple other buildings on the other side of the street one that we know is multifamily because it's been before us on another application. And there were a couple of other houses it's a relatively short block so there were, it appeared to us to be a number of other multi multi family units. But it was a it was a quick visit because there's only one thing that as far as I understand. And Mr. Henry was the other one there so he can certainly correct me if I'm wrong. There's only one thing that they're asking and that is to change the classification from owner occupied to non owner occupied. So, there wasn't a lot for us to look at. Thank you. I compare with everything Mrs. Silver says. All right. And Rob, was there any questions that we had to ask or asked that we had to put in the record no. Not particularly I mean I have. I had a couple written down but it was mostly about asking which properties nearby to family or multiple multi families or two families and which ones are rental properties so most of the ones nearby or multifamily I confirm that like 10 minutes ago from looking online. I'm trying to confirm which ones are residential. I'm having trouble figuring that one out. But you would assume if they're multi families they're most likely rentals I still know the owner occupancy status of them. I know the the one across the street that we already looked at was owner occupied convert dwelling with the two rental units inside of it already. It's not it's not currently owner occupied. It's not but they're they just got approved for it so we approve we approve that based on the new the new unit would be owner occupied. Yes, that's correct. And did you find out what the property when you're standing in the street facing the property in question tonight, what the property to the left of that is. So, let me take a look, and that's the property on the corner of Gray Street and Taylor Street if I'm not mistaken. One immediately next door to it. Yeah, it's immediately it's immediately to the left as you're facing the house. Is that actually on the corner the street is pretty short. I didn't realize that was the corner. Yeah, it's on the corner. And it's pretty big law it looks like there are access on Gray Street so the Gray Street property it looks like currently it's a two family. Occupancy status of that. It just says two family, they have a attached parking plan. And a rental permit so yes that building Mr. Soveter that you've mentioned. Which the address is 56 Taylor Street is considered a rental property to family so two units. Non owner occupied. That is correct. Okay. I may add just by observation off the street. There are many buildings that has multiple meters that will suggest that their rental properties as well. Great. Okay. Thank you. That's a good report gentlemen. Thank you very much. I want to run through the submissions. We've received from the applicant. An application form management plan. A management plan for additional information for apartments. A complaint response form a memo permission to use the payment for the application data September 18th. A project narrative lease agreement example of a lease agreement. Reference from the neighbor. Cheryl Harbison dated August 30th 2023. A quick claim deed. A plot plan mortgage inspection plot I guess with the parking shown. From ZBA 20. The plan was that ZBA 2013 dash 28. Floor plans and the landscape and lighting plan approved in 2013 floor plan of 2013 as well. We have us and we have the ZBA staff submission of the decision document the project application report. I just want to state for the record Mr. Chair that the ZBA FY 2013 dash I think it was sorry 28. Yes 28 that permanent expired. Back in 2017 when the current owners purchased the property. And it continued to be an owner occupied duplex for a while but then the current owners switched it to. Not owner occupied but weren't aware of the fact that the permit had expired. Just wanted to clarify that for the record. Yeah, the whole use of this property is a trail that we asked that we have to go through. All right. So, is there anything else that we should review before we have the I think we ought to have the applicant speak and then ask questions about the history of the use of the property. So, who's who's here for to speak for the applicant or is the applicant themselves here. So, Mr. Moore has been done. Yeah. With Mr. Mora, go ahead. Thank you, Mr. I just wanted to mention that 56 Taylor street that Mr. Sloper was asking about is actually owner occupied duplex. It does have a rental unit, but I don't find anything that changes the owner occupied. So I'm just listing that it is in in our records. So I believe it's owner occupied. Thank you for clarifying that too, and for correcting my mistake on that. So in terms of who's present Mr chair there is a few people I can promote the panelists. Just, if you are the applicant just, you know, accept the invitation I'm about to send to you. So, who is the applicant. And who's speaking for the applicant. All right. If your name and address for the record. I'm Charles Dana. Roxy. John, we're at four still corner in leverage. So we are the currently prospective buyers of the property. And we're continuing upon this outcome of this meeting in this permit. So the permit has been applied for our name. Most of that has been submitted through the current owners. However, great. So who is sincerely, you are the applicant. Do you want to just, I think probably would be best if we have the current owner described the use, the history of the use and then we can go to your request for the, because you want to buy the property and request for the non occupied duplex status. So it would be helpful to have some history of this before we go into your request. So, is that who is representing the current owner, or is a current owner on the call. We have Margo and Angela, which is who is who. I think I think we've met with Angela. What's that? Did you meet with Angela. Yeah, we did. Okay. So, Miss McCann, Sarah, can you speak to the sort of the history of the use of ownership and use of the property prior to the, this proposed sale. Sure. And I apologize for not being able to put my video on. I'm traveling to Maryland. Right now, but I am able to use audio. So I hope that's okay with everybody. Just give us your address. Please give us your address for the record. The address is 62 Taylor Street in Amherst. Is that your address? You're not currently residing there. Not currently residing there. My current residential address is in 39 Shattuck Road in Hadley. Great. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. So my husband and I purchased the property back in 2017. We utilized it as owner occupied. And then over the course of a few years, and we also had some family members staying there. Occasionally over the course of time, we decided to utilize it as a rental, not realizing that the previous permit on the house had expired and we're not familiar with the process. So I applied for the normal rental fee or the normal rental application. I don't know the proper terms to it. I've been working with with Rob on the application and we have paid past fees for the rental of the house. My husband and I decided to sell the house. And as part of the sale is when we realized that there was not a permit on it and therefore that's when we applied for it after accepting the offer of sale. All right. Before we go to the new owners, are there any questions for the current owner? I think we understand the situation. I just had one question for the current owner. Do you own other rental property in Amherst for the current? I do, do not own rental properties in Amherst. Okay. Mr. Dana and this, can you say your last name for me? I mispronounced it when I introduced you. I'm sorry. Okay. Do you wish to please make your presentation? Yeah, sure. So we moved to the area from Chicago just over a year ago. And we had a rental property in Chicago and not happy being that far away from our property. So we've decided to sell that property and invest in something locally. So we can be close to our investment and maintain it. We both have, well, I have a background in architecture. Rosie is an architect here in town. And as I'm working in the background of public health. And so our interest in the property is to make it, make sure it is maintained as a safe property. So we have some structural improvements and electrical improvements on the property as well. The electrical right away. The structural is not. And any sort of eminent issue, but we'll be updating that as we can. I'll also say that we've looked at a number of properties both in Amherst and around and have been a little disappointed in some of the properties that we saw. So we're looking to be good stewards and make sure that we maintain a good property for tenants that's not, you know, that goes above and beyond, I think, what is needed by the codes. I don't know if there's anything else you're looking for from us, certainly. Currently, there's currently five tenants residing in the building. Is that correct? Like Angela, perhaps respond to that. That is correct. And you are proposing to keep the same number of tenants. Is that correct? Yeah, that's correct. We'll take over the leases that are there. We've met with, I believe, all of the tenants and hope that they'll stay on. And renew. All right, so it's three and two is what you for the two units three, three, one and three in one unit and two in the other unit. Is that correct? Yes. Okay. Good. All right. But then what I want to get from the new owners, that's what you want to keep the same mix three and two, not four and one, but three and two, correct? That's correct. I guess I just want to make sure that we have the same understanding that my understanding is that there's what it's a four bedrooms and the first floor unit and two bedrooms in the first floor unit. So, but the, the, yeah, I noticed the same thing too. And that's why I'm asking the question because I'm in the application. We're talking about five tenants. And in the floor plan, it looks like there's four bedrooms in one unit. And so I just was not sure what if that was a study room. If it was a, if that you tend to have four there or not. Right now you've got five and you have three parking spaces as the additional person. You know, I just, I just want to know what your, your plans are. So, Mr. Chairman, I did notice the materials that were sent to me, including the management plan. I did say that it was five bedrooms and then the three and the two like you mentioned. So, if that's not correct, we could always update those documents or acquire that they're updated and brought back at a future public meeting or something like that. That would be fine. I just want to make sure that I want to make sure that the plans are accurate. And that the management plan matches up with that. So that was the reason for the question. Mr. Chairman, if it will be helpful to clearing confusion too, I think that, you know, maybe we should instruct the potential buyers on the importance of the management plan, the complaint response plan and any other materials that were submitted and how the board uses those in the special permit process and how they are required to operate within the confines of those documents that are submitted to us too. I don't know if you want to give some background on that to them. That is how we make our just one of the important ways in which we make our decisions on the special permit applications. In this case, we have a special permit application for something that's been in use as a rental property, but it wasn't correctly permitted through just an oversight and nobody's saying anything other than that. But the way we make a decision about this and we approve the special permit is dependent on some things, including the management plan, lighting plan. The management plan includes the maintenance of the property, the trash, the complaint response plan is really important. And for these you'll need to have a, you know, you need to identify somebody to either manage the property or to be the for whom the complaints go. All those things are important and you have to live up to those. It's as a condition of your special permit application. So that's the reason for the questions. And you even have to live up the layout. I want to make sure also that one of the rooms, so that's the background. And so one of my questions was one of the rooms looks to me like I think it could be used as a bedroom, but it's not designated as a bedroom. And so if in the site plan, I want the rooms are supposed to be used as designated on the floor plan. And I'm sure as an architect to understand, that's not news, right? But it's really number one, it's hard to read the floor plan, but it looks like one of the where I'm looking for it right now. One of the rooms in the front of the build the front of the lower unit looks to me like it could be used as a bedroom. And that would be an excess of a number of people that there is the first floor apartment. You want to put that up on the screen? Yeah, I'm about to do that. Excuse me one second. Here you go. All right, so this is the first floor plan. It's really hard to read like you mentioned. Oh my goodness. Yeah, so that's the first thing we're going to need and we don't this doesn't have to delay the app, the approval of the application. But we'll need a better plan submitted to the town so we know what these rooms are how they're designated. Okay. That's a yes. Yeah, absolutely. Okay, so go through the front entrance what you enter into I suppose a vestibule or a foyer right right there that's what that is. Yeah, that is a common stare. The house is original front entry. And how it's currently used is that's not the primary entrance the primary entrances where that hand drawn arrow is on the towards the. And so you enter into more or less a kitchen, kind of a little area in front of the kitchen. That is the kitchen there. As you move through the door to your left, that's a family room space. And then as you move again to the door up to the upper right, that is the primary bedroom for that unit. The room to the right of the family room is also being used as a bedroom. And so, obviously, we would want that to be, you know, identify the such for going to be taken on this permit. So, right. So, you'll have two people in this unit, two times in this year. And that first one, I'm sorry, sorry. It is one tenant. It's a family I believe that is in there so one family. Yeah. Okay. Got to as opposed to one person. Mr. Chairman, can I ask a quick question? So I guess the applicant should state, you know, how many bedrooms you're intending to have in each unit. Just for the record so we can condition that to the permit. Right. Mr. Slobner. That is the space that is right under the word front you can currently used for. That's the common stair. So that also goes up to the second floor unit. Okay. One of the means of egress. So they could not be used as a bedroom. No, no, it's a stairway and hallway. Okay. Thank you. That was the question I had. It looked to me like that. Could be possibly used as another bedroom. And we, that's a problem we have in town is that. Sometimes inner rooms are used inappropriately as bedrooms to house students and then you have more than a number of. People living in the units and is allowed by the zoning file. That's what. Okay. All right. And then for the second floor. Since we couldn't get in, I couldn't see it. This is the best we can do to try to determine. So we have three bedrooms on the second floor. That's, yes, that's correct. So for this unit, the primary entrance is actually from the deck on the right hand side. Where it says porch. And so you would enter in there again into kind of the kitchen area. And as you move through and go into the living room. Off of that, you can see is the doorway to the hallway and the stairs as the second means of egress. And then to the right of that is where it says bedroom two is the larger bedroom on this floor. And there's another bedroom. It says bedroom one. If you travel all the way down to the other side of the kitchen is the third bedroom on this floor. And then there is the bathroom to the right of that. And there's a stairs up to another level. It's on the third level, which is also used as a bedroom. Oh, so you have four bedrooms in on the second unit. So Mr. Chair to clarify it says here, and this is a condition from that previous permit that use of the third floor loft as a bedroom is prohibited. Yeah, as per that previous permit. So I guess the board should discuss whether or not they wish to permit that loft area as a bedroom. That's something that should be discussed in the condition portion of of the discussion tonight. Okay. All right. And this is more do we need more. Do we need more detail to the floor plan to help you determine how the appropriate use of these rooms, or is this sufficient for your, your purposes. No, I think with the way, you know, things are being clarified and possibly with conditions and then the expectation that the new owner would bring a better quality floor plan. I think all that combined will be acceptable. Okay. I think it's going to be too difficult to have more have better drawings for us and more legible drawings, not better more legible drawings. Okay, good. All right. Mr. Chair, I think I had a question. Yeah. Who has a question and this is for. Yes. And this is from Mr. Mora. Does this third floor a lot me the crates here for a bedroom. That's a good question. I don't know because we, you know, as far as we understood it wouldn't be used as living space and accessible to tenants, so it would have to be inspected to really know that for sure. I'm looking for the old permit, you know, to see if there was any discussion in it, but I haven't come across that yet. So at this point, I'm not sure. Okay. I think we would need to know the answer to that before we can have a conversation about that third first base. Yeah. Yes. We don't know the reason that it was not permitted that living was was not going to be used as a bedroom by previous special permit. Does there have to, is there a second egress required on a third floor is is perhaps that why it was not permitted to be a bedroom. I've just, I'm aware of other properties where they're supposed to be another egress. No, not from the third floor itself. If it's part of the second floor unit. So the second and third floor together is a unit. The two means of egress can be from the second floor, not an additional means of egress from the law. There doesn't need to be a window there's ceiling height requirements smoke detectors carbon dioxide detectors is a bunch of things that that do need to be looked at to make sure that it does qualify as a usable space for a sleeping room. Okay, thank you. It looks like here there's, I think these are windows, mistaken on this floor plan right here. But I think bare clarification would definitely be needed. There's a window right at the where it says front. There is a window. I believe the others on the left side are really skylights. The large highlights that do open but they're not for egress. But it is a double hung window that meets the requirements for a bedroom. Okay. Do you want to keep the plans on the screen? Mr. Chair, or do you think? Okay. Unless anybody else needs to look out. That's all I need. Okay, so this is, this is more confusing and complicated than it normally is because of the kind of the history of the use. So your management plan. It says here your management plan has five total tenants so that one tenant is in the basement. That's one and four tenants in the second unit. That's what your management plan calls for. Correct. And right now there's three in the second unit. There's three renters in the second unit, or do you believe that the Angela is the. The loft currently being used as a bedroom. There was somebody staying up there and we requested that when we figured out that we didn't know if they were allowed to stay up there or not. We requested that they share room, but I'm not sure where that has fallen. And we do have somebody that's only going to be in there for another two months. So we figured that there was a short term lease. And we didn't know that until it became only three tenants. Yeah, okay. Well, you know, that's going to be a question for the town. I can't decide on how you're going to get, you're not supposed to have somebody sleeping up there. So you'll have to. Unless we change it for the special permit application, you don't have a liable bedroom up there on the fourth floor for the new owners. Right. Unless the special permit specifically permits it. So I do have one question, Mr. Chair. About a few things just of clarity sake. So the trash receptacles on site. There wasn't really any indication if they were screened from the public right of way. Do you know if they currently are and if they're not do you intend on screening them with like a fence or vegetation or just maybe placement. While they're not being, you know, on off days from collection days that is. Is this directed to us. Who ever wants to answer it. From our observations from the times that we've been on the site for our inspections. The garbage receptacles that the, if you remember the plan, there was the porch where you enter the, the lower unit, then they were being stored, you know, further deeper in the lot behind that porch. So they're not really visible from the street very well. If it's needed that they are actually moved around the backside of the house a little bit further. That's not a, that's only another 10 feet or so, then they would absolutely not be visible. So, if that would be sufficient. Almost always. We ask, we require trash receptacles to be screened from the public way. So, that would be your management plan. And it should be, and it could be a condition if it's not in your management plan. So, I believe Mr. Chairman might have added that as possible condition to this permit, but if not, we could definitely include it. But I'm sure they have any follow-ups. So, in terms of the parking area, I did put in that report previously that it was hard to tell if the parking spaces were within eight feet of the building itself. But after going to that site visit, it's definitely, it can be determined that the closest car is greater than eight feet away. So that's no longer an issue. And it was previously stated in the project application report. And I guess in terms of lighting, are you familiar with the lighting on site Charles or Rookie? And do you know if it's downcasts in any way? Like, is it light that could potentially spill over onto neighboring properties or maybe this is a question for Angela, current owner? Yeah, we're not familiar. Yeah, so out the lights that are fixed on the side of the house are pointed downwards just into the driveway area. Good. So one of the, one of the requirements for the new owners or the prospective owners is that lights be downcast, dark sky compliant as per our rules and they don't wash over to the neighbors. So that would be your lighting plan requires that you're going to do some electrical work is set. Is that correct? Yeah, we identified some active knob and tube on the interior of the house that will be remedied. So if you any new lighting on the end in the exterior lighting has to be down, downcast and dark sky compliant. All right. And it sounds like you're doing it anyway. So, and then you would want to cut sheets and show us what what those are or show the town. Okay. All right, I don't wonder if any other board member has questions about this application. I have one. Yep. Are there any intentions to do something about the driveway slash parking spaces because right now on the site visit was like all gravel and I can I can see some roughness there. Yeah, I think that's a little tricky. One of it is a shared driveway with the neighboring property which is the single family residents. And from what we've seen there's an arbor of ID hedge that screens. The backyard area where that parking is taking place from the, the neighbors property that hedge is actually as it appears. Well onto the 62 Taylor street property. So we're not planning on moving that hedge, even though it is essentially giving a lot of the land that would be potentially available to parking. We're kind of giving that that land is being borrowed by the neighboring property and its current configuration. We want to please the neighbor and their, their house, they're taking very good care of that property. And so we want to maintain the drive the road, the driveway that's there. It gets a little tricky when it's being used by the neighbor as well. If we were to pave it. We would have to look a little bit more into how that would actually work. And then we will be plowing that in as part of maintaining that during the winter will also be plowing the neighbors for I imagine as well. So I'm not sure if I answered your question, but that's kind of where we're our take on the driveway condition is right now. You did and I understand. But as I understand it now also the current occupant only has one vehicle. I have occupants where they're now more vehicle than current parking spaces. What is the plan for that? I'm not. Not familiar with the street parking there. I know there's oftentimes cars parked on Taylor street. And I don't know if that's a permit required. We haven't actually looked into that as of yet. We've been more focused on. The property that's going to work for us because of this permit issue, but happy to look into that further. Thank you. Mr. Wachill. So I was going to ask, do you know if the parking area has adequate lighting at the moment? And whoever wants to answer that, please feel free to do so. I haven't seen it in the evening. So, but the plans don't show any lights. The site plan doesn't show any lighting. I'm looking at this. I don't know if you can see this the submittal site plan. The date is the set 2017. There's no identification of lights in the back. I don't know if there's one off the back of the house that attempts to light off the parking area. You know, I'm just going to, I think that this I'm not opposed to the notion of fixing the problem with the use that making it a non owner occupied duplex. I mean, I think that's what it's been used as for years, even though through inadvertently it was not permitted as such. And there are certainly other non, there are other multifamily units on that house on that, on that road. And I think it can be done and not instill, we can still meet our requirements under 10.38 to make sure that it's not bad for the neighborhood, et cetera, et cetera, all the other things. But I feel like we, there's a lot of work that there's some work that has to be done to make us feel a little more comfortable with this application. And you may be a little more comfortable with what your requirements are in this town. And it doesn't have to take a lot of time, especially for two professionals to sit down with the staff and say, All right, I need a lighting plan. I need a management plan. I need to abide by that. I need to identify the rooms is how it's going to be used. And we have to tell you whether the upstairs bedroom is habitable or not. And come back to us and say this. And I think it could be done fairly quickly. I don't want to delay the sale is what I'm saying. I don't want to delay the sale, but I want to feel comfortable with what as chairman I want to feel comfortable with what we're committed. And that's not coming from a place where I'm predisposed against it. I'm just at kind of up in the air as to how it's going to be done, where the lighting is, what are you going to do about parking? What do you tell your tenants? How many people are going to be there? How many people can be there for a party? That's another thing we always look at is how many, what's the total number of people that can be on the site at any one time, et cetera, et cetera. In the college town, that's something you care about because you don't want to have 50 person parties every weekend. You want to have you guys control that. You tell us how many people. And I just feel like you need a little bit more to fill this in before I'm comfortable. Now maybe other board members are comfortable, but that's my feeling right now. And I bet that you could do it within a couple of within a short period of time, get the information together and we could come back and consider this thing fully. Mr. Meadows, what do you think? I'm in agreement with you. I'm uncomfortable in having a motion on this tonight, given the roughness of the application. I think it needs to be polished exactly as you're suggesting to include the architectural plans being legible, if not more finished. And in the planning department, I think can be helpful in getting this done. I don't think that we can really do anything with this application tonight. And I think, when is the, when is the transaction supposed to take place? It's contingent upon the permit approval. So it's a little bit happen after the permit approval. And you have enough time, your financing, did you have enough time to, or you have a couple of weeks? You have some weeks? Okay. Yeah, it's just all, we'll just set it a certain number of weeks after there is a approval. All right. So let's do this. Let's, unless it's anybody that objects, let's have you work with the staff a little bit more and deal with some of these things directly. And then we can process it. Yes, Mr. Wachilla. I just want to say the next date available, that's relatively soon as October 28th, that meeting, it's wide open. We don't have anything else that day. And that's a good date to move this forward to and definitely give you guys enough time to work on it to get this thing moving forward for you. Because we would hate to delay a real estate transaction. October 28th is a Saturday. Oh, sorry, not 28th. Thank you for catching me on that the 26th. My apologies. And that is two weeks from today. Yeah. So let's, so the things you're going to need, you're going to need a lighting plan, just, you know, it's not, I don't need a photometric plan, but I need what the lights are going to be, we need a good floor plan, identify the rooms, you're going to have to work with the current owner to look at the fourth floor, let people come in and see it. Or else, don't apply for that to be a bedroom. I mean, make up your mind on what you want to do on the fourth on the loft area landscape plan to make the management plan. It's all it's laid out in the rules is what you need to have there, but snow removal, lawn, trash, both the basics, right? Check on the parking. Right now you've only got three. We, you know, that's, that's okay. We, we can, we can permit that. But, you know, you've got to deal with that. And then you've got to have a parking plan and how do you enforce it? It's real easy. Do you give them stickers or do you tow it away or what do you do? Just, those are the kind of things the staff can work with you on that, but we'd like to see those things. So let's come back in the end of October and hopefully you'll have it done by then and we can reconsider it. Yes. Mr. Slaughter, you had your, you were raising your hand. I am not available on October 26. Okay. I don't know if that's a factor, but I've been on the first part of the hearing. So I don't know if that's helps or hurts. Let's see. What do we have? I think we should also ask. Sure. Go ahead. I was, I was going to say to the applicants. Is that sufficient time for you? I mean, that's only two weeks away. I believe so. Well, it's the next meeting is November, what, Rob? November 9th. November 9th. Are you available? Is everybody available on November 9th? No. No, I'm not, I'm not available on 26th either. So. Okay. All right. Mr. Henry. Either one of those dates will work for me. Okay. So we can't do it on the 26th because we won't have enough people for a four person vote. So we have to do it on the, the night. Okay. Yes. Mr. Chair, what if we, since Thursdays might be constraining for some people, what if we did like on a different day around the 26th or around the ninth? I don't know if that's doable. Just because, you know, we, we need for, we need all of you present in order to vote for this. All four of you, because a special, a special permit requires a super majority vote, which is four out of the five members. Oh, we don't have Mr. Gilbert here. Yeah, so I don't know if folks are busy on October 25th or October 27th, which is a Wednesday and a Friday, but, you know, I'm, I'm available on the 25th and I'm willing to do it and I am not here on the 27th. Okay. 25th. I can make the 25th work. It's inconvenient, but I can make the 25th work. I feel like we should give them more time than less. Yeah, I do too. I'm in Florida that week. And I'm in the week of the 6th of November, I'm in meetings in New Orleans. The last thing you want to be, if you could be in New Orleans or on a zoom for an Amherst special permit, I'm taking. Particularly because it's beatings. I think you're going to, they're going to be listening to jazz and New Orleans. So, so we, the difficulty is we have to set a date today. And then, so maybe the best thing to, so maybe the best thing to do is we don't know with Richard Gilbert situation is in his availability. So maybe the best thing to do is to set a date quickly. And then if we, in the means to set a date, we know we can't meet. Because all we all can't be there, say the 20 in two weeks, knowing that, but in that time, Rob will be able to go out to Mr Gilbert, get his time. You'll be able to find a date and we can set another date, continue it. And that at that meeting, so we can set a date for November 9th or November 12th or something that we can figure out a date that we can do this for you. Otherwise, I don't know how we pick a date with four of us here and we don't, and we don't, there's not a date that we have four people, because we don't know what Mr Gilbert's availability is. So Rob, what I'm thinking is we might do the, do it on the 22 weeks and then continue it and use that meeting. By that time, you'll be able to figure out everybody's calendar. And we set it and set another date that and then it'll be at least two weeks from that because we have to have your public notice, right? Or if three of you are present and Mr Gilbert can make it and he does the Mullins rule, you could still vote that day. So what if, how do we do this? We, we set it for the 26 at six and I do a lot of background work to make it happen on my end to see what John Gilbert's availability is and just go from there. Unless Rob wants it. Mr. Slaughter can't be here on the 26th, right? Right. Mr Meadows, are you available on the 26th? Mr Meadows is not, can't be here on the 26th. No. We know we, we only got three. So the only, the value of the 26th is that we could set another date at that meeting. Excuse me. The follow-up, Rob's suggestion, it sounded like the ninth that would work, that could potentially work. So if you continue to the ninth and you have everybody but Mr Meadows. We might be able to do it. Then Mr Gilbert might be able, or somebody else. I mean, you know, we could find another alternate member that could review the, this tape and catch up for that meeting. They don't have to be in the original panel. They have to watch this. Don't they have to watch? Well, we don't have anything that Mr Gilbert's not in this panel. That's true. He was in the previous panel. Oh, isn't he assigned to this panel as well? No. Not for this hearing. No. This case is perfect. Okay. There's four of us. Got it. So anyway, it's just like the ninth that could potentially work. And if not, then you can look for another date. But if we could get an alternate to serve on the ninth, then we can make it work. Okay. Got it. You only have the same panel going forward. Perfect. All right. So who can be here on the ninth? I can be. I can. I can be also. All right. We're hoping Mr Gilbert can as well. All right. We'll miss you. Or an alternate. Or an alternate. Right. Right. Yep. It'll work. Okay. So we're going through a lot of massinations to make it work. Okay. So what I want from you guys then is to work with the town. And get more specificity and meet the. What we need for the different requirements, management plan, lighting plan, landscape, what to do with snow, all that kind of stuff. All right. We's number of tip number of people. And figure out what you want to do with the loft. And a good site plan. All right. Mr. Wachilla. So just to make it less confusing for the applicants. I'll send you a list of stuff tomorrow for you to, to work on between now and the ninth. It'll be very detailed. I'm going to look over the materials we do have and suggested changes. Areas of improvement, stuff like that. Just to make sure you guys can have a more complete application. And one that's strong. And yeah, we'll go from there. I mean. I will also reach out to Mr Gilbert. And also if you have any comments or suggestions, I'll send you a message about the development of the project. So I'll do it. And if it's available, Steve, I'll find alternate. Just so we have a full panel for that meeting because everybody has really busy schedules. Unfortunately. And then yeah, that's, that's all I had. Okay. All right. Let's be done with that. So I entertain a motion that we continue this. Oh, we. Before we do. We have to find if there's any public comment on it. hand up but the hand is gone. I think the hand is back up. Yoga A in 1951 are you there? You're muted. Did you hit it? Yeah. There we go. Can you hear me? Yes. My name is Bob Tancredi and I live at 57 High Street. Yes. Just across the street from the end of Taylor Street. I can look on my porch and look right up Taylor Street. This is the first time I've ever attended one of these. I have to say that I just want to make a comparison to what the first topic about having that solar array in the woods to those of us that live around here and there are a lot of multi-unit homes, houses, buildings around here, but the majority of them are owner-occupied. So when we're going to take one of these houses and we're going to change it to non-owner-occupied, we all see visions of Main Street and you know down the end of High Street what Main Street looks like heading out to Pellum. Non-owner-occupied buildings. So all I'm hearing for you folks to make this decision is, you know, is the plan right? What's the loft like? What's the lighting like? What's the impact on the community, on the neighborhood? It's just like that solar array in the woods. You're changing the face, the feeling, the feel of this neighborhood by taking owners out of the neighborhood. Now, I'm sorry that that woman has been renting that place as non-owner-occupied for a number of years because of some technicality. Tough. That just points out why this shouldn't happen. Amherst doesn't know who's renting what to whom, what is owner-occupied, what isn't. The town should be striving to have owner-occupied rental units. Then you save the neighborhoods. You get young families. The only way that my wife and I bought this house was from the rental income from the house in the back. That's how we paid the mortgage and we were able to live here. Don't you want those kind of people coming to this town? I keep hearing you want more kids for the schools. You want young families. These owner-occupied homes are the way to do it, not just turning them into student housing. This whole discussion, you might as well just can confirm it because you totally missed the mark on what me and my neighbors talk about regarding this thing. Very cold, very cold. I'm sure nobody's doing this thing in your neighborhood because it sounds like you haven't been through it. Why isn't this happening to homes on Lincoln Street? I'll tell you because there aren't a lot of multi-family homes already there, but those homes are big enough to chop up into apartments, but they're too expensive for the investor. Unfortunately, we live in an area where the prices are down just enough so that they can be bought up by investors and be chopped up. That's not fair. We're the ones that have been paying taxes here for 30 years while running this whole town on its small tax base. Now, this is what I get. I get all these beautiful homes turned into apartments, apartment complexes. We don't need apartments that badly in this town. I was told by one of the politicians that was for building all those buildings with all those apartments because they flood the market and rental prices would go down. Well, that never happened. Those apartments are wicked expensive. The same person told me, well, now they want to try this. They want to try to turn as many homes into rental places. Okay. I know I'm way over my time. That's what I have to say. I'll be back because I know people will be back trying to convert these homes into rental buildings with no heart. Amherst is just going to be like students and wealthy or whatever. Again, my name is Bob Tancredi at 57 High Street. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Mr. Tancredi, for your comments. Okay. Okay. There's no other public comments. I would entertain a motion that we continue this special permit application to November 9th, was it? Yep. At 6 p.m. 2023. So moved. Second. Second. Any discussion? The vote occurs on the motion to continue this hearing public hearing. Chair Boat's aye. Mr. Meadows. Aye. Mr. Henry. Aye. Mr. Sloveter. Aye. Mr. Gilbert is absent, or he's not on this panel. The vote was four to nothing. Motion carries. So work with the town and we'll see you on the 9th. Very good. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Next order of business is public comment on any matter not before the board tonight. Nada. And lastly, the new business upcoming, normally that's where we talk about the schedule. So Rob, what can you tell us about the schedule coming up? Sure. So next week, next Thursday, we have the first of several 40B permit hearings for Valley CDC's project, 20 to 40 Ball Lane. Three out of the four of you are actually panelists on that specific hearing. And thank you so much for volunteering. Mr. Sloveter, unfortunately, you weren't including this one, but there will be more hearings in the future. And we know you love your 40Bs. And then after that, the 28th is currently empty. We don't really have anything going on. So we anticipate that one being a business meeting because we have a lot of agenda or a lot of minutes that have to be approved in a few topics of discussion from recent permits that Mr. Mora, if you want to address that or give us some sort of, I guess, idea of what we might discuss on that date, feel free to speak now or forever hold your peace. Go ahead, Mr. Mora. I'll take that, Rob, as you're suggesting that we come back and talk more about the duplex questions. So that would be just fine. We do that at that time. And then afterwards, November 2nd is a 40B hearing for the same Project Valley CDC. And then the 9th is this hearing continued, but also we might have two more permits scheduled for that date as well. We have a lot of permits coming in. So November might be a busy month for the board. Other than that, not much else happening. We do have a set meeting date list for those 40B hearings that go from the 1st and 3rd Thursday of every month between now and early January. We don't anticipate that project going beyond five or six meetings unless there's some complications that arise that we're unaware of. But other than that, Mr. Chairman, that is the schedule for the next few meetings. Thanks. Okay. Mr. Slover. I have a question of Mr. Wachilla about November 9. So that is a continuation of the Taylor Street meeting from tonight. Yes. Which I am sitting on. And then you said there are a few more. Am I, therefore, I'm only an alternate? So does that mean the Taylor Street comes up first? I sit on that and then my parole comes through and I get to leave. Or are you asking me to sit that night? I have not been, if I was a full member, I would just know I was on the panel, but what is expected of me on the 11th if you don't mind me asking? So on the 9th. On the 9th, I'm sorry. I don't worry. So anticipate that if a meeting is continued or hearings continue to that date, you're going to be on the panel for that date anyways for that hearing. It's usually assumed that anything new on that date you'll be included on that panel as well. The panel will remain the same for that whole meeting. If it was one of the situations where we would alternate substitute people out within the same meeting, that might make it kind of confusing and chaotic. But if you're telling me, Mr. Sover, if you don't want to be part of this new meeting, I just want to know what's expected of me. But we're going to need at least one alternate for that meeting, because Mr. Meadows can't be there. So we'll need at least one alternate. And if we can impose upon you to... No, I'm happy to do it. I just don't, I haven't been asked. I have one other question. Who is Mr. Gilbert? He was at the last Shoot's Bay Road Solar hearing. That's Mr. Gilbert. He's a full member. He's an architect. He works for Wayfinders, I believe. He's been on the board for... I thought, okay, I'm sorry. I'm a relatively young guy. I thought Mr. White was the... Philip White was the other full member. Philip, Mr. White is a full member. Yeah. Oh, okay. I'm sorry. He's not part of this panel. He'll be at the 40B panels coming up. I just hadn't heard the name. That's all. Okay. All right. That means that we ought to have a get-together, a Zoom get-together, so we all get to know each other, I think, Mr. Sover. That would make sense. There you are. Okay. All right. Thank you. Okay. Thank you all for your work tonight. All right. It's 8.52. I would entertain a motion to adjourn. It's now moved. Second. Aye. All right. The motion is not debatable. The chair votes aye. Mr. Meadows. Aye. Mr. Henry. The hander votes aye. Mr. Sloveter. Aye. All right. And we have one absent. So the vote is 4-0-1. The motion passes. Good night, everybody. Thanks for all your help. Thanks for all your work. And we'll see you again in the near future. A lot over the next couple of months. Good night. Good night. Thank you. Good night, everybody. Good night.