 to call to order the meeting of June 16, 2014 for the Arlington Redevelopment Board. We had a couple hearings on the agenda for this evening at first. We are going to, or I'm sorry, the first hearing was in respect of the environmental design review to amend the special permit for the town to construct parking spaces at 594 to 600 Mass Ave. This has been withdrawn without prejudice by the applicants on that one. So we will not be having a hearing in respect of that at 7 o'clock. We have another one that's scheduled for 730, the environmental design review hearing to reopen the special permit to reface signs at 82 Mystic Street, Valveline. That's scheduled for 730 and we will be doing that at 730 as it is a hearing. So what we're going to do instead is right now on our agenda we have for 8 o'clock the Certificate of Completion for Arlington 360 and we're going to move that up to 7 o'clock as well as the other items if we get through that one prior to our hearing at 730. So I think, oh well, I know all of you have received in your packet the draft certificate of completion. As you might recall we did a completion memo about a month and a half ago now and what we realized after the fact was that we needed something a little bit more formal with respect to the completion that could be recorded. So what we've done is we've had Jonathan Bouquet, Foley Hoag put together this Certificate of Completion, it's been commented on by Arlington 360 and the Certificate of Completion is for the residential component of Arlington 360 of the Sims project so on the hill not the assisted living only on the residential piece. You should have also received an email from Carol today that had a couple of changes that had come from Jonathan Bouquet as well after discussing the Certificate with Arlington 360's Council. So with that I think I'll open it up to any questions or comments from the board. I have a couple of non-substantive comments or stylistic points. I think it's fine as drafted but these I think are corrections. In the third line when we talk about sort of the history of the LDA the word originally appears there and we're saying has originally amended on three different occasions so it strikes me that we probably could read better without originally there. The next comment is very minor and it's still in that first paragraph but the third sentence from the bottom just after the date December 13th of 2011 we've been using the rest of the document has a comma after the year so just to be consistent I put a comment there. Then slightly more substantively in the second paragraph end of the fifth line it references the foreclosure deed and I think that we really want to use the word to instead of buy because the foreclosure deed ran to the redeveloper it wasn't the redeveloper foreclosing a mortgage but the redeveloper bought so the foreclosure deed went to the redeveloper. This is probably as far as I can see. I don't have anything beyond that. Andy? And as was I so I'm in favor of this as well and Carol just from a timing perspective I think what we can do I don't think any of those changes will affect the imagination of the completion certificate so what I would suggest is that we I think let's move to approve it as amended by Bruce's three comments and three small changes and then we can make those changes administratively afterwards. There was a comma after 2011 in the first paragraph and took the originally out. Out of the third line. Actually I'll mark it on this. The one I signed and then that way. Exactly. Okay very good. So let me do that and I'll do it a little bit more neatly than I did here. Okay so those three changes are made. So what I'd like to do is even though we did approve the memo, I would like to make sure that we approve the more formal certificate of completion. So I'll entertain that. I move that the certificate of completion has meant to be approved and that the chair be authorized to sign on behalf of the board. Seconded. Great. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Okay. So Mr. Carrick, do you swear that the substance of the certificate is accurate and truthful and that you're sending this voluntarily? I do. Personal knowledge? No to me. No to you? Yeah. Actually when I take the state law. No. No. No. Everyone likes the seal. Everyone thinks the idea is packaged by condition. You're a notary as well? Yes. Good to know. You'll be a notary as well. I've never done that for some reason. Is the Eli's decision still going around for signatures? It's just waiting for Christine. Okay. Okay. All right. So I'll make those changes or Amy will on the front page. And it's good to go. Great. Thank you. Okay. Moving on. Next we're going to move to the meeting schedule. Do you want to talk about that Carol? Or should we do the minutes first? Let's take a quick water. Oh sure. Hold on. Okay. What's up? I'll be right back. Excuse me. I forgot to do it on the way in. Yeah, well how far are we trying to go on the meeting schedule? I brought it last week and I did it last month and I didn't bring it this time. Okay. But I don't think we have any proposed dates in August. We don't have to meet in August unless we do hearings. We have a hearing scheduled to line 9th for signs at 30-15 Mill Street. 9th or 16th? 16th because that's when we're doing the Verizon thing. Okay. That's right. At the moment I don't have anything until then. I am working on... No, it's July 7th. 7th. Okay. Sorry. Thanks. I was only going to wait a second. It doesn't mean you're going to win 7th. Yeah, exactly. That doesn't ring true because the 4th is a Friday. We may want to prepare a letter for either for the property owner. Thank you, Mike. Oh, sure. The Verizon property. Right. Either a letter to the owner or a letter to the zoning enforcement officer reviewing what the violations are as far as the special permits are concerned. We have to work with the attorney to try to summarize what the... To summarize violations. Okay. Do we, if the owner isn't going to get back to us on anything? Have we had any kind of correspondence with the owner at this point? Not since that hearing. No. Not in recent years. I mean, there are thick files of correspondence. I guess I'm skeptical of putting too much effort into anything unless we're... So now we're talking about... And maybe this is off track because it is a hearing. We should do it all in-hearing. Yeah. It probably makes the most sense. Anyway, but I guess my advice would be is I think the owner really needs to step up to the plate here. And if they're not willing to, I think I'd maybe let Verizon know that the owner isn't willing to step up to the plate and help them as their tenant. So that might be helpful to the tenants. I'll check in with Dan Klasnik. I'll let him know that this extension is on its way back to him. Yep. And I'll check in with him to see what... I'm just asking if he's made any progress with the owner because I think that's what the board had said the last time. And without that kind of help from what I heard and only seeing what I heard at the last meeting without getting into it. Okay. So just to finalize on meetings, though, I know next week is the joint meeting going forward? The joint meeting is going to be postponed. Okay. Until after some of the recommendations for the master plan have been drafted. Okay. I want to, since the word master plan escaped my lips, I have to remind you that the visual preference survey is online. It only takes about two minutes to go. Okay. Maybe five. But I'd be surprised if it takes that long. It's fun. And the event last week was pretty well attended. I found 75 people participated. Okay. So I hope you will take a couple minutes to do that. It's...do you subscribe to Town Notices? I don't want to put anyone in the spot. If you don't, you should. Because there's no excuse because the content is right in the subject line. Oh, nice. You don't even have to open. So if you subscribe to Town Notices, you will always be able to be aware of what's going on with the master plan, including the link to the survey. Okay. If you can't find a link to the survey, let me know. Okay. So no meeting next week, June 23rd. Right. Can you just let Christine know that? Yes. It's a reminder. There are... I don't think we're scheduled for the 30th? No. No? Nope. So July 7th. Would be the next meeting. Would be the next meeting. Okay. Okay. So July 7th. And then, I guess, play it by year after that. I don't think we have anything scheduled right now. I'll come from... I'll look at the upcoming meeting calendar and confirm. Yeah, that'd be good. You do have a couple of signs on the board already. I'm going to slide this down to you if you forgive my rudeness. That didn't work. Oh, right. So take a quick look at that and we can talk about that later, whether you think that's for... Yeah, we've been informed that the urgent care, remember we approved signs for urgent care about probably two months ago anyway, is not going into that space. Instead, it's going to be a Sherman-Williams paint store. At least that's the notion. That's right. I'm not a scholar. Okay. So the notion is that the signs have kind of followed what was approved for the urgent care. So the question is, can we staff administratively take a look at them versus bring it all back to us yet again? And I just have to talk to Carol about that. So I just need to do that and come back. So I think that's for... I'm going to talk about it. Okay, should we talk about minutes? We have the minutes of June 2nd, 2014. Let me start up, please. Okay, so I believe Daniel Plasnik, his last name is K-L-A-S-N-I-C-K. There should be correction about six different places throughout the agreement, throughout the minutes. And instead of saying that he's from Verizon Wireless, I think it's more appropriate to say representing a return for Verizon Wireless. The rest of that sentence is fine. On the back page, the paragraph that begins, Jonathan, think of 10-12 Quincy Street. The second sentence where he said, the great Boston Motorsports staff has plowed him out a couple times. And for which he expressed gratitude, because he was thankful about that. But that he has continued to feel the effect of the parking issues. And I'll give you a second, Carol. Go ahead. And then further down about the next longer paragraph, that begins with Wendy Hivert of 1517 Higgins Street. The third sentence that says, she asked that the board to please not make a decision. I would just strike to please. So the sentence would read, she asked that the board not make a decision that would result in this property on the making of additional income. Oh, and then one more. The one sentence paragraph that begins, Mr. Pizziven's moved to continue the hearing. That should be to 2014, not to 2104, because of one of the records that I don't perceive being on the board for 90 more years. Speak for yourself. No, you might still be here. I hope you'll both serve as long as you can. That's Bruce's amendment. I'll move to approve as amended. Second. All in favor? Aye. Yeah, and he's abstained. Bruce, the 730. I know. 6 minutes away. All right, well, we have a couple minutes and then we'll get started. I've got about just a couple short minutes. We can get started on the 730 here. We can't take up adjournment quite yet, so it would be the only other thing on our agenda. I'm going to call to order the hearing, environmental design review hearing to reopen the special permit to reface signs at 80th and Mystic Street, Bellevue Lane. I believe the applicant is here. If you want to come up and tell us about your plan, that would be great. Yeah, I guess you're solo. I was going to pick up. My name is Peter March. We have the signs, 60 Old Bay Road. I'm Barry Gluck. I'm with Henley Enterprises, where the franchisee is developing instant oil change based on Newton math. The quest that you regard this as the level of what we're looking for on this site and the four pages, the last one of which is a Google Earth plot with a very simple hand-going sketch. Essentially, the building has signage on two sides and it has an unlettered warning on the third side, and we'll obviously discuss all three of those. They've been to our knowledge on the building for something like 20 years, and in that time, Bellevue Lane has changed its corporate logo and changed its look. We're also in a state of moderate disrepair. Obviously, as time passes, signage gets cracked and crazed and the lettering on signage is not what it used to be. In this particular case, we're looking to replace those signs with something that reflects the new Bellevue Lane logo, but also that there's newer in terms of some of the technology that we're going to use. So if we were able to start with what is marked side A, essentially that is the side that appears as you'd be heading roughly southeast down Mystic Street. It's the part of the building that customers go into to have their oil changed and they obviously drive through and exit on the other side. The current sign is an warning type sign. It's attached under the software and it has internal fluorescent light. No, it's not a warning. I'm sorry, it's a big point. It's not a warning. So it does have an warning type frame to it. It's a fabric material. So essentially what we're looking to do is to replace that in its entirety. It's the fabric that's being replaced. The existing frame, all the dimensions are exactly the same. So we're simply stretching the drop in. So we'll pull it off the existing frames. So what you see is essentially going to be this is going to be replaced. The Bellevue Lane logo has changed and what we're currently at is around 60 square feet for that sign. We're looking to drop that by a roughly 15 square feet to an aggregate of 45.7 square feet. What that will do is it'll conform to the Bellevue Lane image a little bit better. Obviously because we're renewing the signs it'll improve the look of the site. And from a planning point of view it'll bring us close to the conforming size of 40 square feet. It's not entirely at that but it is a legally non-conforming structure. I'll ask a question on this one. It's still not illuminated, correct? It's not illuminated. Nothing is changing in terms of the physical structure other than they're going to take off the existing fabric and put it in. Great. Any other questions from board members on this one? This is slight change of color. Is that right? No, that's more clean. It's the other one's 20 years faded. Yeah, okay. That's more printer issues than the color. The other one really is faded and pinkish because it's so weathered. And then there's the little boxes on the plan here around the lettering. I presume that was just to help with calculating the square footage. That was correct. The box is not going to do that. It'll just help you work out how long you have to have the square footage. Can you tell us a little bit about the fabric? Yes, it's a typical morning fabric. It's a product called Cooley. I apologize. I didn't mean to bring a few split but it's essentially the same fabric but it's actually on the audio. It's dried by a little warning of some sort. You'll see that. It's a fabric. It's a plastic material. It's good longevity. Good color retention. It's been in the framework of 20 years, I guess. It's faded. And the actual lettering on the front is final as well. Okay. Great, thank you. So that was the first part of it. The second part... Sorry, I just want to make sure Andrew and Andy... No, that's fine. The second part would be what a style of side D on the second drawing. Now, these are essentially travel letters with plastic faces. And what we're looking to do is replace the faces and also convert the neon inside the letter to LED. And the more substantive substantive change I guess is that you view that part as mere maintenance. The more substantive part is changing what is currently a sign box essentially to a D logo. It's actually a logo and again that conforms to the evolving image. So essentially it's the same square footage. And that's LED as well. Yes, that's great. And the benefits of LED are a lot. In terms of power usage and longevity and all that sort of stuff. Any questions on this one? Just to be clear, the letters will present with a white face. It's a white plastic. Exactly. Thank you. So again, the benefit of that is that it conforms to the evolving image of New York. But it's also really a marginal change. I don't think it's particularly on the rest of the question. And the last component is really not a I'm sure it's not anything that would necessarily be too conservative that we're really replacing the fabric on the part of the building that you'd see if you could see that he drove northwest up West Street. And that's just being pulled down to letting the fabric is being replaced. So I would argue that these proposals are very moderate in their scope. I mean they don't affect anyone else in the neighborhood. I mean I'd argue that they're very reasonable that need to be considered in the light of the change of corporate energy. Any other questions from the board members? I just have an observation if I may. I didn't say this to the board, but I do observe that the new logo is roughly five times the size of the existing logo. Between the V and the brand name. We hope that we hope that you look favorably on that given the fact that we are reducing the logo to the sign and you buy you know 25% essentially. One of the things that I have to deal with we are a franchisee is that we don't own the image. The franchisee or a Babylonian which is owned by Ashland chemical owns the image. So anything that is approved in terms of proportions would then need to go we couldn't just say okay well this is what it was so that's what we're going to do. There has to be the proportion and they are very very scrupulous about making sure that their corporate image is maintained and that includes sizes of things. So we couldn't you know the logos and by the way you'll notice that 20 years ago it was a very small valvoine and a very big instant oil change. The name of our company is not valvoine it's actually valvoine instant oil change and so it's important that they have that kind of weight to them and so that's why you'll see and as Pete had mentioned the wear footage of that whole sign is decreasing but it's more closely related to what the proportions that valvoine corporate would allow us to do. If we simply kept it the same size they wouldn't allow us to do it. Anything else Karen? I just want the board to know I did communicate with the sign representative to let them know that I had observed what I believe were some illegal signs on the site which I think have been removed and the hours of operation were outside of the hours of operation that were a condition of the special permit the existing special permit specifies that the hours of operation can only be 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through Friday and 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturday with no Sunday hours and the last item was it appears as though some of the landscape plants that were part of the original approval for the environmental design review may have died over time in 20 years I can see that that could happen but they were part of the original approval as conditions that the redevelopment board placed on the site. As soon as we became aware of the flags of the geological organization we happened to meet so in terms of hours I don't know but what I can tell you is if that was past many of our hours and we hadn't in any of our 200 service centers we've never been or at least not since I perform 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. we do not stay open to 8 p.m. it is generally speaking 7 30 or so depending on the town to 7 p.m. we don't stay open that way open on Saturdays and shorter hours on Sunday I just think it's important for the board to understand Mr. Glock and Mr. March to understand that's not currently allowed by the town's department that might be something you want to definitely look into that I will check with our operations and I think the other part of that is to take a look at the landscaping too just to see what was required back then because a lot of time I heard they're going and creating that plan even though it's 20 even though it's 20 years old maybe you just want to take a look at what's going on it's one of our, you know that it abuts one of the historic districts so that's why it's a little more important so you have the hours of operation that were it's right here and we can provide you with a copy of the special plan that you have of course everybody 8 to 8 is that at 8 to 5 so we're not the enforcing body but just so you know there is the zoning enforcement officer of course do something about that and therefore you might want to look into it and schedule it since that's not an area I would, of course we'll notify the correct people but it's not an area that I would be involved in typically is it possible that the hours were that that they went before board and had those amended and it wouldn't be reflected in these I just looked through the file and I couldn't find that check with your people actually type exactly exactly you don't see those given that amount of time it's not surprising that things might have changed operations at a moment like this I mean blue laws have changed and everything else but you know it is in there we'll get that addressed any other questions from the board um oh I'm sorry thanks I'm half asleep here any comments from the public about this particular thing this is a public hearing public comments are welcome okay seeing none I'll entertain a motion if someone chooses to make it I will move to approve the proposed re-signing if that's the right word the new signage the developing oil station at 82 mid-state street do I have a second second all in favor aye okay thank you um I do think that's all the business for us this evening can I move into adjourn so moved second all in favor aye thank you