 So good evening everyone and welcome to the November 7th, 2022 meeting of the Town of Arlington Redevelopment Board. I'll call this meeting to order. My name is Rachel Denberry. I'm the chair of the Redevelopment Board and I will now introduce the other members of the board starting with Steve Rebelak. Good evening Madam Chair. Eugene Benson. Good evening. Melissa Tentakalos. Good evening. Kim Lau. Here. And from the Department of Planning and Community Development, we have Director Claire Ricker and Kelly Linema, the assistant director. Great. So thank you all for joining us. I'll just note for the record that this meeting is being recorded by the folks at ACMI so that will be made available to the public following the meeting. The first agenda item on our docket this evening is Public Hearing Docket number 3722 141 Massachusetts Avenue, which is an application for signage by Leader Bank. And at this time, what I'd like to do first is turn it over to the Department of Planning and Community Development for an overview of the memorandum. Great. So this is a longtime business. Bank of approximately 2000 square feet has been in this location predating the zoning. The applicant is seeking to replace the existing signage with a wall sign that exceeds what's allowable in the property sign district. This business is in the B2, but it predates B2, which means it's in residential business sign. Applicant is removing the two existing wall signs, replacing the sign on the Mass Ave facade with an internally illuminated 40 square foot wall sign. So this will exceed what's allowed by right in the sign district, but it complies with what's allowed in the business sign district. And that's it. Thank you very much. I'll now turn it over to the applicant. Do we have a member of the team from Leader Bank here this evening? Great. So if you could introduce yourself. We'd love to provide you up to 10 minutes for an introductory presentation. With this one, I don't think you'll probably need the whole 10 minutes, but take whatever time you need. My name is Lauren Rosen and I own Artifex. We're located in Bloomfield, Connecticut, and we're here on behalf of Leader Bank. I'm here with Paul D. Prisantus, who is the rep from our company, and Brett Scofield with the Leader Bank. So our presentation is up on the screen, and we're replacing an existing sign. Our presentation, I believe, we meet 18 of 19 of the criteria. There's one left that we haven't quite met in this specific zoning, and that's the size. We've proposed a sign that's going to be a lot different than the existing sign. So the existing sign is a traditional set of channel letters. The channel letters are five inches deep. They're also 30% bigger than what we show now. The letters that we've proposed, although they come out to 39.75 square feet technically, that's based on the top and bottom of the star. If you were to draw a rectangle around the entire perimeter, so what happens, we're getting assessed for square footage. A lot of it is negative square footage, which means that it actually is not lettering or logo. It's white space, which I know happens. We can reduce the size of the star, and we could gain a good amount of square footage back to make the sign smaller, but that's the new logo. The bank's been around for over 20 years. They've come out with this nice, modern logo, and they want to present it in ratio to what it actually is, and the star is a little bit bigger than the copy. So we have reduced the square footage from the existing by 30%, and upon Kelly's request or suggestion, we eliminated an earlier proposal. We had another star at the diagonal facet above the entry, which we thought was attractive. Everybody liked it. It doesn't conform to zoning. We let that go. The other thing about the letters that we're proposing, they have a very thin profile. They're only two inches deep, as opposed to the five inches, which lightens the mass. So when you see the letters from an oak leaf, they appear to be a lot smaller, and I brought an example of a job we just finished for Leader Bank. This is at the Boston Seaport. So the lighting method is known as a halo light, except for the red, which lights forward and reverse. So it's all reverse lighting, except for the red, and the red is very toned down. It's done with a translucent film and opaque backers. So it's not very overwhelming at night. It's kind of laid back. So we put a lot of thought into the presentation. Along with it, we're going to put a nice new modern fascia panel at the soffit that goes around the entire building and take off what is kind of a clunky. We're not quite sure what it is, and we've surveyed it a few times, but we're going to lessen the load with that burgundy piece coming off and the metal striping coming off, and we're going to simplify this building. So aesthetically, I think we've jumped far into the future. I think if you think about the 39.75 square feet, I know we're in a mixed district which is partially residential. Zoning's changed. I think in the way we've used negative space, thinned out the letter and come out with a modern approach, a revamped building, we've improved this corner quite a bit, and that was our desire. So we're hoping you look at it and you say, well, they are over. It didn't meet one of the 19 criteria, but it's very tastefully done. A lot of thought went into it, and we hope you will accept it as is. And Brett, if you have anything to add about the bank, Brett's been with the bank for 18 years. Again, Brett Schofield, the facilities officer for Leader Bank, been there for 18 years, so quite a long time. I've seen a lot of changes for the bank and in Ireland. I think we're trying to accomplish a good looking sign for the area. As Lauren said, rules change and we understand that. Arguably we can keep our older, less attractive sign up in place. We prefer not to do that. We think it's better for us and better for the town, quite honestly, to do a more modern sign, something cleaner and neater. So we're just hoping for some consideration on this. We understand that this is a little bit of a variance, but really trying to meet in the middle on this and hoping that the committee will take that into consideration. Thank you very much. Thank you. All right, so at this time what I'd like to do is open it up to members of the Redevelopment Board for any questions or clarifications that you like to ask the applicant. Once we do that, we will open it up to any members of the public who would wish to address the board related to this docket. Once public comment period is over, we'll then put it back to the board for deliberation and if there may be some additional clarifying questions during that time. Great. So we'll start with Kim. Sorry, surprised you. I accept two questions and maybe a request. The white panel, what's that made of? I'll answer that. It's a composite, which is aluminum. It's four mil thick, so it's just under a quarter inch. It's aluminum, hard plastic, aluminum, and it's going to be an off white. A lukabon, I'd say. It's like a lukabon apollic, any of those brand names. It has this one's called vitrebon, very similar. Different name, that's all, yeah. What about the gray? Same. Okay. I have no problem with your sign and you're asking for relief on the size of the sign. I'm asking in return for this relief is to extend that sign, extend that white and gray area up another four courses of brick to cover the brick. So it aligns it with the bottom of the corners. So it looks, it's like part of the building because when I look at this real quick, I see the lukabon sign. That's the whole sign, the whole white area is the sign as opposed to just the letters. So if you bring it up to the other side of the corners, now it's part of the building facade. It's not longer a sign. If you're doing that, I have no problem with this and your request is fine. That's the only thing I have to say. Point well taken, good analysis. And we may hear other opinions, but we will, I appreciate that and we'll just let you know, we'll kind of wait until the end to give you final direction, not to say the default. Okay, that's just fine. Great. Alyssa? Yeah, I guess I just wanted to know, and maybe from looking to staff versus guidance on the Lukadestrian signage. So I know that even in this sample here, we have more kind of pedestrian. Was there thinking on that or is the by-law situated like written that we can? Can we do overhanging signs here? You can basically do two signs. So they could introduce like a pedestrian. So I guess to the proposers, did you have thinking on that or was there a reason that was not included? Well, I can tell you that you didn't have a compass where the 141 is, because that was a sign that was pointing to the corner. It's not necessarily on that side. But it added to the total square footage that we were using. So we thought instead of two smaller signs, the side facing us out where most of the traffic was, that was where we were going to have one. Oh, by adding it, you added to the square footage that you couldn't then use on the side of the building? Right. So on the leader bank, on the front of the building, we had to shrink even more to accommodate the total square footage department. Okay. That's kind of just some of my questions. Thanks. Gene. So this sign is about 39 square feet. 39.75. Like I said about, but thank you. Thank you for being precise. And the sign by-law limits the sign size to 20 square feet. So tell me why you can't do a 20 square foot sign. Just take this sign, which I like by the way, and reduce the size to 20 square feet. Sizes. And the smaller this got, the less in ratio with the structure, it started to look diminutive, like a business that wasn't too important. It just seemed that this was in perfect ratio. And you didn't have the ability to make a 20 square foot sign in good ratio by reducing the white band? I think it was so much the white band. I think one, it was a legibility factor. Two, it was the size of the letter, the height of the letter, and ratio to the length of the building and the height of the building. So, you know, we've been in business for 40 years, and out of the 60,000 signs that we've built, this seemed to be about in ratio conservatively without going over the top. Okay. Thank you. That's all I have. Great. Thank you. Steve. So, I have two other questions. This may be two other requirements that this doesn't quite meet. So, in the residential business sign district, which corresponds to the B2 business district, in addition to a 20 square foot maximum area, there's also a height limit of six feet. Now, I can understand, I mean, clearly on that facade, it doesn't leave you a lot of room. So, I can understand why you would want to go above. The other question I have is the white panel that says Leader Bank. How wide is the panel and how wide is the sign? So, the sign is 17 feet, 10 inches, thanking Mr. Benson for showing this. One of the other restrictions is that the sign is limited to 60% of the width of the architectural element, and it looks like you may be exceeding that there, but I can't tell without the dimension of the band itself. Okay. So, 60% of the architectural element, which would be the length of the facade, I would call the architectural element of this area. Now, to me, this section is separate from this, which is separate from this. Yes. So, I would say I don't have a scale rule and it didn't bring the original prints, but I would say the height is approximately three-foot-six as it stands now of the white band. Right. But it's the limit, the 60% constraint is on the width. Oh, I'm sorry. I have it here. It's four feet. Yep. Okay. There you go. Is that it? I'm talking about horizontal. Oh, as far as width-wise, it's the white band. The letters are 17, 10. The white band is approximately 20. Okay. All right. So, 17 for 20. So, greater. Yeah. You're above 60. Above 60. Right. Nothing further from me right now, Madam Chair. Great. Thank you. So, I agree with Steve. I think my bigger concern, I have no issue with approving the signage as if this was in the business district, rather than the business residential. I think it's more appropriate for this business. I think it's more in keeping with your neighboring properties. We know that we have a Swiss cheese of zoning along this street. So, I have no issue with that. My biggest issue is with the 60% piece. And I think that potentially we have an easy solve for that, which I think might be different than what Kim suggested. We'll get back to discussing that. And that's simply to extend the white band, which I'm calling. You've created an element by adding this gray piece here, which creates three separate distinct architectural elements in this facade. By continuing the white band across the length of this, you then have a singular architectural element and can keep the sign the same size if you wish. In my view, again, we'll discuss that, but I wanted to plant that seed before we open this up for public comment. You have one response. I think on the building we have existing columns of granite. And I think probably we keyed into the granite to cover the granite with probably a granite like color. I don't think it gets in the way of that white band that you mentioned. So we can do that. There would be a step in the band itself, but you could create, again, instead of the gray eluca bond, you could instead continue the white. So question for you. Would that be to the left solely, or are you considering to the right as well? The right only. The right only. Right. Okay. So that is a projecting piece of granite that comes out about eight inches. We could bring this out as a soffit that goes over. Right. So instead of the gray running to the same height as the white sign band that you're effectively creating, stopping that at the bottom of the area with the white sign band and basically creating a reveal and then continuing the white step. Okay. Great. So that's my only question for you. Any other questions before we open this up for public comment? Great. At this time I'll invite any member of the public who's joining us this evening to indicate whether or not you'd like to speak. If you'd like to speak, please raise your hand and I'll call on you in the order that hands are raised. Great. So please just before you begin speaking, if you could please identify yourself by first and last name and you'll have up to three minutes to address the board. Thank you. My name is Egonity Lenahan and I have been a customer of the East Arlington Ranch figure bank for many, many years now. I have to say I love this bank and very much appreciate the staff as often of almost exclusively women of color and I enjoy utilizing this red bank but also among other things a professional typographer and graphic designer and my rep design fingers are twitching. I wanted to move the lead bank flush left and extend the wreck up and then reduce the leader bank slightly. You have too much white space around the leader bank. It feels like extending the white in the unequal portion of this thing. If ever we're going to design it, that's what I'm going to do. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak this evening? Okay. Seeing no other hands, we will close a public comment for this docket and I'll turn it back to the board for discussion and we'll start back at this side with Steve. So, um, Madam Chair, I think you offered a very workable solution to the 60 percent constraint and I would be, you know, happy with the changes proposed. Jean. The regulations only allow us to increase the size provided the architecture of the building, location of the building relative to the street or the nature of the use of the building is such that signs of larger size should be allowed. I don't think it meets any of those. I think stretching out the white band is aesthetically the wrong way to go, just having a longer band. So it's 60 percent. If they reduce the star in the leader bank to 20 feet, all of the problems are solved and they can have a permit. That's my feeling. Let me say a couple other things. It's ridiculous that this is in the B2 zone. Right. This should not be the B2 zone. It should be somewhere else where they can have the 40 foot sign. Unfortunately, it's in the B2 zone. The other thing I'll point out is the liquor store next door, which you can see in one of the pictures says Giles. It's no longer Giles and somehow they got to change their sign, which is too big and I don't know how that happened because now it says something like New England, whatever. And so I think we need to do something about their sign or we need to change this from the B2 district to another district when we go to town meeting. Meanwhile, even though I like the new sign, I think it's much better aesthetically pleasing than the old sign. I liked her idea about how to position it and not having an empty white band. I can't agree to go beyond 20 feet kind of building because obviously you're occupying the space where the green or the gray is right now. That's yeah, right. So it's not a separate walk up window or something like that, which appears to and under this design a little bit. So I think kind of extending it over makes sense to me. With regard to Ken's building, I kind of like the exposed brick. I feel like it brings the top part. I feel it brings a little bit more character to that building. So I think that's kind of my thinking on that, but I'd be comfortable where this is now. I guess I would want to hear from anyone else on this board about the pedestrian kind of blade signs or things like that because it does seem to me that we've been trying to work on creating more of a walkable environment and those things kind of create enough interest and add more texture to the walking experience. So I'd like to hear people on that. Can I say something? Wait till we go through. Yeah, you don't mind I'll go to Ken and then I'll offer some thoughts and then we'll go back to the blade sign. Yeah. Ken. I like your idea about continuing the white band across. I think that would balance it out a lot more. I know my opinion is different from Lisa, but I would prefer to have that both the gray and the white to extend up to the corners. I'm not sure what the rest of the board thinks, but either way, unfortunately, you know, we have this mixed up zoning on Mass Ave. This is Mass Ave. And we will be addressing this soon. So I don't want Luda Bank to be caught in this mixed up zoning we have here. That's really kind of hodgepodge right now on Long Mass Ave. And they shouldn't be punished for that. So I think if we bring that line across the gray window to the right, and I can go either way with the top, but I'd prefer to go up all the way to the corners, but if that's not the case, I'm not going to hold up this approval of this sign. So I'm for this approval of the sign. Great. Thank you, Ken. And I'll just mention two items. I actually agree with Melissa. I do actually like the brick above, and especially I think if we extend the white band, it kind of gives you a nice bookend of the brick around around the facade. I was struggling a bit with the gray piece and whether or not that was actually part of the bank or not without having that piece run across. I do think that, again, given the business type and the context that I feel that there's permission for the board to approve the larger sign as is, I feel comfortable with that. The one thing I forgot to mention prior is that you are also in the bylaws allowed two signs. That includes wall signs, any type of awning or projecting sign, and window signs. And so you're showing two window signs plus the sign in the sign band. So I'd like to see you limit the window signs to two to one. So I think, Melissa, that would be part of it as well. If they use that some of that is advertising, then that kind of precludes them from adding even more to show signage, I believe as well. But Gene, I'll ask you to weigh in on the blade sign. Well, a couple of things. One is because you're on the corner, you're entitled to a second wall sign facing the other street, which you haven't proposed, but you can do that if you like. So I think that's pretty clear. I think the blade sign, I haven't looked at this, but I think the blade sign is allowable in addition to the two wall signs because they're different sorts of signs. So I think they are allowable. And window signs, you can have window signs as long as they don't exceed 25% of the area of the window. Because I had actually looked at that, and it looked to me like they were okay. They may not want a blade sign. If you want a blade sign, you can get it approved administratively if it's not too big. So you don't have to deal with that with us now. If you want a second wall sign on the other street, and it's no bigger than 20 square feet, you can get it approved administratively without coming back to us. So it is the 25% is correct under 6.2.5d, but under 6.2.5c is the footnote where it says no more than two awning wall or window signs. So that's where they have to eliminate one of the two. There are two, you have three. So you have two window and a wall sign, and so it's two inclusive of the whole street on that facade. So is there further discussion to Melissa's point? It sounds like potentially adding a blade sign would be allowable in it as an additional sign. Should that be something that you have an interest in pursuing? If it's just I feel that I could go either way on that if that's something you're interested in pursuing, we could either make that a part of a motion or not. Okay, so that's something that again would be allowable as of right. And if you decided to add that, I think in the future you could do that directly with the department and you would not need to come in front of the redevelopment board. I would put it on Mass Ave because that's where the majority of your pedestrian traffic is coming. So is there a motion for approval? Do we feel like we have consensus or any particular items? I know the gene has some concerns but are there any other concerns that we feel like you need to address? I'm fine. I well withdraw my request about extending the sign up to cover the brick and just saying that we'll extend the white band across the debris. I'm not going to fight everybody here. Right, is there a motion to approve the signage with the size as proposed with the condition that the white signage band be extended to the far edge of the adjacent gray panel and that one of the two window signs be removed? Is there a second? All right, we'll take a vote starting with Steve. I. Gene? No. Melissa? Yes. Ken? Yes. And I'm a yes as well. Congratulations, your sign is approved. Thanks for the idea about the white band. Thank you. That closes our first agenda item. Thank you so much. Yes. So what you'll do is you'll follow directly up with Claire and Kelly at the department and they will work with you on approving the final rendering as we discussed this evening. Thank you so much for coming in this evening. Thank you. Thank you. All right. We'll now move to the second agenda item which is public hearing for document number three seven two three twenty two to twenty four on that street. I'll actually also invite any members of the public who wish to move forward at this time so you can hear better to please feel free to do so. And again, I will apologize for the acoustics in the room. Let's see. So as we move forward with this, what I'd like to do first is offer Claire from the Department of Planning and Community Development the opportunity to provide an overview of the memorandum that was prepared. Then we will ask the applicant to present their materials. You'll have up to 10 minutes to do that. We'll open this up to public comment and after the board asks you any clarifying questions and then we'll move back to the board's deliberation. So Claire. Sure. So this is a proposal for a large addition on an existing two family structure. The board has jurisdiction here because the property abuts the minimum bikeway. The use will not change. It will remain a two family. Essentially what they're doing is moving from a stacked two family to a side by side two family with the additional square footage. Okay, great. And question I have for you in terms of the report. There was no relief being requested. It's a simple special permit approval. Is that correct? Okay, great. Thank you, Claire. Lovely. So can I ask who will be presenting from the applicant? Great. If you could introduce yourself. Yes, my name is James Rusling of Power Designs 64 Alston Street. We are seeking, as you said, the special permit for a large addition to 2224 Belknath under section 5426. The addition all in will be a 1200 plus square foot addition, which allows us to reconfigure the building into a side by side into side by side dwellings. As was described, the rear lot or the rear lot line abuts the minimum bikeway and is separated by the vegetative slope of approximately 11 feet. The additions will be on each side of the building, maintaining the depth front to back of the building and increase the added. The lot is a rather large lot, 10,000 square feet, 10,440 square feet. And you feel that the addition, slightly larger units fit well on this site. Again, they're made to two family. It gives the homeowners flexibility in terms of the number of bedrooms. We're working from home now, so office space and dens are something that are sought after. And we think that the access to the bike trail from Linnwood and the view from the upper stories of SviCon will definitely be attractive to longtime homeowners. Thank you so much. I appreciate it. Before I turn it over to my colleagues, I'll just say that I really like what you've done with the architecture of the property. I think certainly greatly improved its presence on the street. And I know that this is in front of us because of the abutting the bikeway, but given that there are no requested levers that work for release, I'm definitely on the site plan. You show a garage. What's going to happen to it? So you're going to park two cars in that driveway and or you can still use that as a driveway and park two cars in the garage. So will the garage be used for cars? So there's actually six parking spaces. Okay. And is the curb cuts along the front of- This reflects the existing parking. There's both curb cut on the right and left of the property. Currently the driveway is paved edge of the house all the way to the back to the garage and it's shared with the neighboring property. We'll be reducing that paving. This will be the dedicated parking area for one of the units and then this will be the dedicated although this is enlarged, it's not as wide as what's there presently. All right. I just, I mean, like Rachel said, I think what you've done to the house looks nice. It's an improvement to the neighborhood. You're not asking for any relief. It's just asking for review because it's a large-scale project and normally we don't review this because it's a ZBA thing, not us. This happens to be on a bikeway, that's all. And I just would have liked, wish, I'm not saying I will make it mandatory for anything else but to have all the parking on one side and park in the garage. But I don't think that's maybe too much of an ask there. Just so you can have more front yard, fronting the neighbors and everything else that there's no, because one of the things I see as you go down the street is having curb cuts and driveways everywhere. You're having a front yard, so it's nice. I'm going to see what the rest of my colleagues think about that and that's all I had. I mean, there's nothing else to question. Everything else there seems to be okay as far as what you got there. But you can also look at it in a way of, well, this is my unit. I have a nice front yard. I'm not walking through a parking driveway to get to my unit. There's many ways of looking at it, okay, sir? Yeah. Great. Thank you, Ken. Melissa. I mean, I'm comfortable going to be sure on this. So this becomes, so this entire area here becomes, rather than stopping the paving here, bringing it all back to the driveway so that they can park in one space rather than also having a curb cut, closing this curb cut up over here. Oh, God. Yeah. I'm fine. I don't have further questions. Great. Thank you. Gene. So I had some of the same parking questions and I'm now confused. So when I went by the driveways on both sides, left side I think didn't have any paving. It was grass. Right side had some paving. When this is completed, will there be driveways on both sides? Yes. Yes, there will. Or will you be paving the part that is now grass on the left side? On the left side, yes. It's okay. That was a good drawing, because it was blown up a bit. Okay. But this is existing paved area on the left side. We'll be reducing it to the required width and then extending it. At the same time, we'll be removing the concrete walk up to the porch and removing that porch and second story addition. Right. So in a way, we're wiping everything out from here to here. We are increasing front yard technically by reducing the width of the drive, but we are extending the depth of it. And in the back is the required usable open space. So is there going to be some sort of barrier there? So your car is going in and drive onto the back open space. How do you propose to prevent that from happening? We usually put fences around the properties, so that fence would have to be taken down. So if my driveways on the left, what's going to stop me from driving all the way back here? Well, I can't say how a user is going to use their property. We will have a fence there. A fence? I'm thinking a fence here or some curb here so somebody can't drive onto the required usable area. That will be landscaped yard all the way from the edge of the driveway all the way through the back yard. Sorry. But again, what would stop me from, let's say I'm having some people visit me. Let me drive my car back here so my visitors can park in my driveway. I'm thinking there needs to be a curb here to prevent the cars from driving up onto the usable space. We can put a fence right at the end of the driveway, not out of the way in the back, because we're going to put a fence in the middle of the yard dividing both sides. Yes. And then we can, that driveway is going to end, no, forward to the front. So the driveway is going to... Is that a better drawing? Okay, there you go. The driveway is going to end right over here so we can see how we can put a fence right over here with a gate and then there's going to be another fence dividing. So the whole yard, each yard is going to be fence for privacy. So I'm pretty sure one of you can correct me that they're going to need buffers from the neighbor, neighboring yards, because it's parking or not. I don't believe so in a two-family. Steve, I'll ask Steve to weigh in on this when we get to... No, there is a buffer requirement. It is a requirement for a vegetated buffer. There is not a width specified. But this is a pre-existing non-conforming condition that... This is a pre-existing non-conforming condition, yes. On the left, there is an existing driveway as well. Well, I'd like to see a vegetated buffer on both sides of the driveways. The other issue I have is there should have been a lead checklist provided to us, which is a requirement when for environmental design review. So I always ask for a lead checklist, because we'd like to see that you've considered the environmental impacts of what you're going to do. And I was also concerned that... Jean, I know interrupting, but is that a requirement for a two-family house? Unfortunately, it's a requirement for the special permit. And the statement about sustainability was just pretty cursory, I thought, and I think we needed some more detail about those issues. So I agree with my colleagues that I think this is going to be a really nice improvement. I do think that I would like to see the lead checklist and a little bit more about sustainability and the other requirements for environmental design review, which I did have open till I threw the page, which is projects are encouraged to incorporate best practices related to sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy and atmosphere, materials and resources, and indoor environmental quality. So I'd like some understanding about what you're going to do for that, as well as the lead checklist. Thank you, Jean. Steve. So just circle back on your earlier question, Madam Chair, regarding buffers. The provision is in section 6-1-10-A, and it's a sentence long. Side yards used for parking shall have a vegetated buffer, one abutting a lot used for residential purposes to minimize visual impacts. So I could see that as being a practical ask on the eastern side of this property, as you look towards the front. For the west side, it looks like you're essentially sharing a driveway with the Sixplex, and I'm not really sure that, I don't know what kind of driveway arrangements you have, but I mean it seems less practical to ask one for there. I do have a couple of questions. So I see it looks like the sides are where they bump out towards the rear of the building, they're going out four and a quarter feet, and how far from the front? Or if to be more precise. What drawing would you like, Steve? This one is fine. So roughly how, what's this distance? Oh, yeah, go back to the front. That's a good shot. Oh, okay. No, there's, I mean, I took a visit this weekend, and one of the things I, you know, standing in the sidewalk in front of it, in front of the building, like you can't even, I notice that, you know, there are shed dormers on the third floor as it is, and you can't see them from the street. And I, you know, the, where the widening of the building kind of follows the, kind of follows the shape of the lot, I was basically questioning how far back one would have to be to even see the additions. And I'm not sure you'd even, you know, if you were standing on the sidewalk right in front, I don't think you would see them in the middle. I wanted to confirm that you are getting rid of the enclosed area above the front porch. Yeah, the front. The last question, at one other question, so typically, like if, you know, we have a set of residential design guidelines for single and two family homes, and I was wondering if you had it, you had a chance to, if those were made available to you, and what inspiration you might have taken from them? Well, I think in, since I've designed this, but it's, I think part of it was to have the entrances face the street. There's coverings to the entrances, so there's a signal that the entrances are there, even though they're 12 feet back from the edge of the house. I think the, the gambrel roof form is a traditional or historic form of residential architecture. That's fine, it's that's all you have. Those are good answers. I came up with this, I just as an exercise compared to them, and I would have come up with a slightly different set of answers, but yours are fine. Great. Any other questions before we move to the public comment period? Okay, so at this time we will open this docket up for public comment. Any member of the public joining us this evening who'd like to speak, please raise your hand. Great, so I'll remind everyone who's speaking to please introduce yourself with your first, last name and address, and you will have up to three minutes to speak, so please. Thank you for your consideration of this permit and the developer for responding to the neighborhood's initial outreach and making the commitment, which is so far of an honor, thank you, to make the construction process as neighborhood-friendly as possible. That said, me and other neighbors do have some concerns about the massing that natural increases as the efforts to map some of my square footage are undertaken. The Belmarland neighborhood is historically and primarily been made up of modest owner-occupied single and two-family homes, and the two-family homes have often provided an affordable rental option, allowing those who do not get afford to own an Arlington to make a puzzle. In the application, North America references three current buildings they suggest to establish precedent and support that the design and their proposal is in keeping with adjacent structures. We just want to address the ways in which each one of those is ill and quick to do that. Built in about 1910, 28 Belmatt predates the zoning bylaws. It's by far larger than any home in the neighborhood as well as larger than anything we believe will be permitted today. The height along is over 38 feet. 18 to 20 Belmatt, the project directly next door to 22-24, came before the ARB in July, and the board ultimately approved it with special considerations to reduce massing, ensure that the height of the building did not exceed 35 feet, ensure that the half-story ceiling heights were compliant to a building boat, and to decrease that they are. It would be important to consider similar special considerations for this project tonight. Lastly, 13 to 15 Belmatt, in addition to having significant structural defects that are currently being dealt with, has a height of over 38 feet, and having been built across the first year of COVID might be well out of compliance in other ways as well. Of note is that the developer of these last two buildings has had all of their other projects in Arlington shut down for the greatest violations, including the one next door. North America proposes to increase the overall height of 22-24 by two feet, and to widen the building over 12 feet, six plus feet on either side according to the addition diagram. I mean, I did notice that on the parking and dimension worksheet, the numbers seemed a little bit different than that. We are concerned about the visible impact of this is that when we reduce space between buildings in obscure sky, there is an attached image there that was not in these images, but one that we took. Belmatt is not a large foot thoroughfare like Massab. It does not afford a four-link road, a wide-swap of sky, and longitudinal view of Stannett's length. While having larger residential units on a road like Massab may help provide definition and structure, taller, wider, and more imposing units on a narrow street like Belmatt begin to feel oppressive. We would encourage members of the board to visit the site if you haven't yet done so, to consider our concerns relative to Massab and to permit a structure at 22-24 Belmatt that helps maintain Belmarland's character and limits overshadowing both figuratively and literally the community. Thank you. Are there other members of the public who wish to speak on this topic? Please. This is very unusual in a situation like this to two brands of the second parking space. Particularly, right now it's in front of the parking yard and the zone by-law system explicitly says that the parking is not heard from the policy of the town. So I do hope the board can recognize that part of the application of the park and it's a whole new drive plate, and I fully believe this is relevant by having two drive lanes side-by-side with adjacent properties. Thank you. Are there any other members of the public who wish to speak on this docket? Seeing none, we will close public comment and turn it back to the board. So I have a couple of notes for us to discuss before moving to a motion. The first is I'd like for us to talk a bit about the driveway. Whether or not two driveways are what we would like to approve or whether or not vegetation on one side of the driveway is something that we'd like to see added to the project. Jean also brought up the subject of a lead checklist. I personally would feel very comfortable with the owner working together with staff in terms of identifying any sustainability measures that they are intending to incorporate into the project. I think that that was written in again knowing the projects that we typically see for EDR with more mixed-use, large-scale residential and commercial in mind. I think it's a little bit more challenging for a two family. And personally again I think I would be comfortable moving forward and deferring that to staff personally, but again we should talk about what we all feel comfortable with there. So Kin, I'll turn it over to you first, and again those are the two topics I've identified if there are others. Let's just identify those now first and then we can go through and have a discussion. Are there any others that I missed? Nothing that you missed, but one thing I have and I don't know if you guys had ideas of what the fencing would be like because we did have other properties that you know put kind of fencing in that didn't really match the architecture that was put up and it looked you know to me it didn't seem to kind of be consistent so I don't know if you have images. And I think that was when we fencing in the front yard situation, and this is in the back, correct? Right. So there's no plans for the front? Well since you mentioned that you'd like to see a barrier then we could eventually put the front yard adjacent to the sidewalk you would not be installing fencing. Right. Yeah. Thank you for that clarification. Any other topics? I do want to continue. Same topic, but it's just a little off a little bit. Is there any cross easements between your neighbor and you? Because your garage, I would say a good couple feet is over the property line. So I mean and then if I look at it's really small, but I think it's like a nine foot driveway on their side. So they must drive on your driveway to get back there, don't they? I wasn't like when I drove by there this afternoon I didn't quite see that clearly enough, okay? That's why I sort of I saw that it was a shared driveway, and that's where it got to me where I say what if you if you put all the parking on one side because then you have you have the access of having all the cars and they won't be even intended with. There's a shared agreement with you guys saying. Not that I'm aware of at this point. So however, I know that it's a larger development on that outside and I don't know if it's all many owners or not. So for me to go into an agreement with them to use their driveway is not the ideal, you know, even though it's a shared driveway there's like they decided to put a fence there's nothing that I can do about it the same way before I decided to put a fence. Well when you bought the property it would have been on a site plan noting the easements. I mean your garage is clearly three four feet over the property line and I'm sure their driveway and your driveways is a shared driveway. So I respect Gene's comment about putting some sort of bushes there and I think you can do that on the left side. There's enough room if you shift us if you shift the driveway over a little bit you can't put some bushes there and give you some sort of coverage but on the right side it'd be next to impossible to do that because there's two driveways that are the same. When I look at it I can't tell where the property lines change because it's one driveway you know and I assume it looked like it was paved the same time it wasn't like there's a joint, there is none. So when I first looked at it I thought it was an easement where you guys shared a driveway. I don't know what you guys think about that. I can go either way right now. Okay. But that's the only thing I have for anything like that. And what is your feeling on the lead checklist? I think that could be worked out administratively. With a residential it's not as not as intense as the commercial one. Great thank you Melissa. Are we discussing what Ken said about the driveways in general? Driveways in general and number and buffer buffering? I mean where I see like there's potential more for buffering and I would think it up to you know kind of where the board stands. Okay. And then as you know as we go with this administratively you know kind of following up on the lead guidelines that's fine with me. Okay. So Gene be comfortable. They're they're both the lead checklist and what they're going to do for sustainability. I don't want to leave that to the staff. I think that's something that should come back to us to take a look at and to make the decision about. I don't want us to get in to the precedent where people don't file the lead checklist. They just say something very cursory about sustainability and then we send it back to the staff for administrative review. I think that's our responsibility and I don't want it to go to the staff. I think they should put a buffer just a little vegetated buffer really is all that's needed on the left. To the plan last point. Okay. On the side where it makes sense to put it to Mr. Loretta's point since they're only really required to have one car per unit I think there's enough space to park one car on each side so it's not in the front setback so I don't think that's really an issue that we have on Kim's concern about who owns the combined driveway. I really don't think that's our concern. I think it's something that they or whomever buys the condos are going to have to work out with the people next door and if you know if if I were going to be buying one of the condos I would certainly want to know that before I bought the condo if I were buying the condo that was on the left side so I'd like them to come back so that we have a chance to review the lead checklist and what they're going to do for the sustainability pieces to see if we're satisfied with them. That's where I am on. Okay. Thank you Gene. Steve. I would like to just a question for the design team. The height of the existing structure is 32 feet. Is that correct? So I'm looking on sheet. Looks like 32.4 and and the height of the with the proposed alterations. 34 feet 8 and a quarter. So less than less than a two foot change under 35. Okay. That was the main question I have for regarding the lead checklist. I mean I agree with Mr. Benson that it is something that we normally do and I understand is concerned about it. I'm wondering if we could for rather than bringing the applicant back in and having them wait a couple of weeks if we could like have to motion. Well just make a can make it do some sort of condition like it should be at least lead X or my concern with that is that we don't have a stipulation for other applicants in terms of what level of okay certification we require them. I think if we wanted to see it I agree that I don't think that we should hold them up for just for that document. I think that we could again craft a motion whereby that is reviewed administratively with again and it could be continued there could be input from you know members of the board who are interested in providing input at that at that time. But we'd have to crack that into a condition in the motion. Yes. Let me just say it's partially the lead checklist but it's also partially encouraged to incorporate best practices related to sustainable sites water efficiency energy and atmosphere materials and resources indoor environmental quality. I think those are especially important in these types of things separate than lead and I think it's our obligation not the staff's obligation to do that. I think it needs to come back to us. And I don't think that we hold other projects to that same standard when we review their projects especially when it comes to interior air quality etc personally. So I think that that would be onerous for this particular applicant. Steve your thoughts. Yeah and I mean I guess the question is the main question I have is if we're asking the applicants to come back I'd like to have a very concrete understanding what we're going to do with the results of the checklist and how that might influence our decision. Right. That is a great question and again when I feel that most of the applicants that we see for EDR give us a cursory look at the checklist and but honestly not much is done with it in their projects and I just I feel that it's onerous especially on a project that is not a commercial or large-scale project to to hold up this project or for that given that we don't typically hold other other projects with that to that same standard. Rachel. There's at least one project and I can't remember which one where we said you need to do better with lead. You need to come back with better and that could happen with this if it came to us. And the staff can't make that decision. I disagree. I mean I disagree. I believe that the staff they have they have team members who are more than exactly they were more than adequately trained to do that. Also Rachel I believe this is a gut rehab right. Yes sir. I mean what you're doing here is not you're down to the bones. Yes sir. So and then they put back in it's going to be higher efficiency it's going to meet the needs of the energy codes and so forth like that. They're not going to do that. And so so it's not only human development viewing that it's also going to be in special services viewing that because it's going to have to meet all the new energy codes. So it's going to have the low flow total. It's going to have the low flow shower heads. It's going to be all that stuff there. And is there going to be any fossil fuel? Is there going to be any fossil fuel use in the building? Well that's just one thing that you're imposing. But I'm just asking. As of right now I'm running to the gas furnace. But can I? I'm sorry I want to go back. Please go. I want to go back. I don't think I made myself clear enough okay but when if you get rid of one driveway on the left hand side and you park further down the driveway here you get you get rid of all the cars on the front the block. Right now you have when you go down the street you see all the cars right in the front yard and in front of the house. And I'm just trying to say you know and maybe you're right Jean who owns a property there and all that stuff maybe maybe you may be accurate you know it's not really our concern but it is because if you can park two cars in that garage and you park two cars over the side here you know it seems right okay it gets it gets all the cars out of the front yard you know no no you look at the look at this right here that's the one that's up on the screen that Kim's referring to. So the parking is plan north there's a significant parking field in front of the driveway and he's suggesting to get rid of the driveway plan east here. That image is as is right now so it doesn't show the addition. Yeah so once the additions are done you're not going to be able to have it's going to have to be tandem parking that you just create smaller parking. Right and tandem parking we know is not ideal. If you put on a proposal plan you're going to be able to see better there's not and I just checked with the attorney there's no easements the garage was built that way and it is on the literally on the on the on your neighbors property. I'm living there yeah planning out right now. Okay so if I look at this that's not the proposal I think the proposal would be better too. Yeah but it doesn't show all the way down the driveway that's see that's but you only have from there from the lot to line to this to the corner of the house when you have 16 feet and if that's not going to come there you're going to you know you won't be able to fit two cars side by side. Not at that point but if you go further down it is the site winds up. Oh it's page 11 there if you could go to page 11 of this over to the right. Sorry I'm getting too far but you're just well but that's that's what I was trying to get at because you know you see because you you see all these cars and we'll find out. So that includes the the additions on either side. Yes in this site plan right so I see what you're saying. Excuse me for a second. Could you park here? Yeah that's what I'm saying from here. Do you have a scale that you can look at? What I'm saying is to have two cars parked here I'm not sure that we have enough clearance for two parking spots right here. Well there's two parking spots that go into the garage. I'm going over the lot lines. You're counting going over the lot lines. Well how is she gonna get how is she gonna park in the garage? Even if you don't have to you might not have to if you don't want to. Is it garage split ownership or is it only assigned to one unit? I don't have that. I don't know. I really don't. I haven't talked about that yet. I would assume one the left the right side would be the owner of the garage because from the corner. Because there's no other access. And then you have to give the other people access. So I'm thinking about now I'm pretty sure just the right side is on the garage. I mean the goal on our team is to make this as close to as separate as possible. Also the parking is one thing because then you don't it's usually you there's no you know maintenance it's your driveway left side and like almost like two different. Like a townhouse situation. Exactly that's exactly what we're going for. Right no I understand what you're trying to get and and I'm not trying to fight you I'm just trying to say what I see on the street and if I can get some of the cars off the front lot push down the back that would be a desired from our partner. That's all if the board feels differently that I will say okay I will go with the board. Madam chair. I don't have any to show that Steve. So there I've seen other at least one other case I don't remember the address this was something that came before the ZBA but it started with a two-family home that had a similar arrangement to that where one side was a shared driveway between them and another property and everyone was parked everyone in the two family was parking on one side three or four cars like three cars deep and if someone needed to come out they would have to back you basically have to back a whole bunch of cars out onto the street and then move them back in and what they were appearing before the ZBA in order to get a second driveway to avoid the traffic congestion so in a sense I you know there might be you know you could you could make an aesthetic argument against having the second driveway but from a circulation standpoint sometimes it can make sense I would agree I personally don't feel that tandem parking is ideal but I appreciate what you're trying to do I think if there was more room and they could they didn't have a tandem parking situation it would be different I'm I'm always willing when we get along okay uh any other something yeah any other topics that we'd like uh to to bring up all right uh is there a motion to um approve this project as submitted what look before I do that I just want to confirm you are agreeable in terms of adding the vegetation to the driveway between a buffer uh plan east excuse me plan west yeah correct okay and then you mean just on the front on the frontage not all the way because there'll be fence just on the left side correct along the parking okay that's no problem the paved area yeah you guys probably tell us which what okay so is there a motion to approve the plans as submitted with the addition of a vegetated buffer strip on the driveway plan west and a request to follow up with a lead checklist with the staff of the department of planning and community development I'm not I'm sure yes um I believe we also discussed a fence and the addition of a fence at the rear of the driveway plan west they do show a fence there already oh okay but but yeah they go go to this go to this plan here and it shows a fence going across the end of the driveway we'll we'll just add that that that in so that with the um stipulation at the plan the the fence okay is there a uh a motion uh is there somebody who would like to move some motion considerate just so so moved by kin is there a second okay uh we'll take a vote starting with steve i gene no melissa yeah uh kin yes and i'm a yes as well congratulations been approved appreciate you coming forward and that closes uh docket number okay too many windows open docket number uh three seven two three uh so you'll be able to follow up um following this meeting with kelly and claire from the department who will take you through the next steps really appreciate it thank you so much for coming in this evening thank you thank you all right uh so we will now move on to our third agenda item public hearing for docket number three seven one seven eighty broadway so this is the proposal for a mixed use building containing retail commercial and residential units at eighty broadway and i will first turn it over to the department of planning and community development for an introduction based on their public hearing memorandum then we'll turn it over to the applicants and the board will ask questions and ask for some clarifications we'll have public comment and then the board will deliberate on next steps great so i will turn it over to claire all right so uh the applicant proposes to replace an existing single story commercial building with a five-story mixed use building which would include a ground floor retail area of about 1500 square feet second floor office commercial space of roughly 900 square feet but all in all more than a thousand foot increase to the total commercial area which is great um they would also add nine residential units to the upper floors which will trigger our inclusionary zoning one of the units uh shall be deed restricted affordable the use is both allowed and encouraged in this area and is in compliance with the master plan great thank you so i'll ask whoever from your group is planning on doing the presentation to please introduce yourself then you'll have up to 10 minutes we did have the materials ahead of time so i think he wanted to give us an overview and then any specific features that you'd like to to call out that would be really helpful yeah thank you so my name is rob costello i'm one of the principals with my partner paul we've had the best communication with dr katt great to hear thank you it's satisfying as a as a resident too so yeah we we're interested i mean the site clearly needs redevelopment it's with the master plan um we're excited about the possibility and the privilege of developing this site one thing is that paul and i um are interested in holding this as apartments and it's not a it's not a common play so to speak i think particularly given that our limits need for housing but also just what fits our portfolio and so we're looking forward to the opportunity to try to increase the density and also be a key impact on broadway which from a personal perspective i know is is much needed to spend we're talking 20 years of discussions about what's going to happen on broadway so um that's what we're looking forward to trying to come together on a project um and uh i won't just say it as an aside uh mr o'connell is also he's he's his first project in our linkedin 17 years ago he recently completed the johnny project on holland street davis where he's experienced on the ground so we have been in david's experience developed a architects we feel you have a good team to present something for your input so i'll turn it over with that i'll tell you must follow his annuals to add oh you did a great thing thank you i'll turn it over to david thank you my name is david i'm an architect at shooting company um we cannot unfortunately i mentioned that at the beginning i know you weren't here at the beginning it unfortunately we weren't able to so chris thank you thank you i'll just ask that you could if you could project that would be helpful thank you so much mom we could go to the next slide please yes thank you so our proposed project is a new five-story building on the corner of broadway and winter street it is a site specific building it will have a new commercial space on two floors we'll have nine um apartments one of which will be affordable six parking spaces will be new street trees and site plantings and we're planning for our rooftop solar way next slide please so far pointer that helps right now our parcel is right here it's six thousand seven hundred seventy square feet the existing building is is set back in a far corner of the site it's surrounded by asphalt with two extensive curb cuts going on broadway winter street and so sort of on from the industrial street state street skating experience next slide please this bird's eye view shows shows the existing condition of our site and one thing that's interesting is the houses on winter street are parallel perpendicular to the street the houses along broadway are parallel perpendicular to the side plot lines and the rear lot lines but they have a sort of step back quality which is i think very interesting next slide please these are used on broadway used on winter street this is an existing condition site plan as you can see that the existing buildings are back corner and uh there are some small site plantings along the front dot lines next slide please thank you on the right is our architectural site plan and we're proposing to close the curb cut on winter street reduce the curb cut on broadway um the building is organized where there's a one-story building that is our commercial component the front to broadway and is parallel perpendicular to that and by doing so it kind of opens up the corner a little bit for a small closet and the upper four stories of this are the residential block of our parallel perpendicular to the buildings on winter street and our building on the upper stories aligns with the front faces of those buildings on winter street our parking will be below the building set back and then the rear on the side on the left is our first floor proposed plan there's 1500 square feet commercial space uh the front has two ventrances one on the dirt one on broadway we have a residential entrance set back on winter street it aligns with the other buildings uh we provide a long-term bike storage for the residents the elevators do use so the commercial space has dedicated accessible access to the second floor we have parking for six vehicles one of which will be deemed the handicap parking space the next slide please in general the the plans are organized with three units on each floor they're range of size from about 760 square feet to 800 square feet and then we go to the fifth floor we have a larger unit that's about 1100 square feet and we provide outdoor space for the the unit itself and the common roof deck the fronts winter and broadway so they would be away from the residential from the direct butters and then finally on the roof we would uh we have I think around 1600 square feet of solar proposed plan next slide please our building would be 55 feet tall the first floor is on 13th, 8th and then each residential floor is 10 from 6th next slide the broadway elevation on the left shows our commercial space right there the upper three stories would be set back and they have sort of the stepping quality to them finally on the fifth floor is is further set back the garage entrance is looking right here the building would be the materials would be fibers of panels for the commercial component and then fiber cement lap sliding panels for the upper stories then finally on the top we would have a standing seat first of all metal panels the elevation on the far right is our winter street elevation the the residential entrance would be signified by a small canopy along with a change in material something like a fiber cement would look more maybe would be enough next slide please that's a render view of our proposed project we're thinking that we would plan to be the two streets with color under gingot trees which would be a nice contrast color wise with good colors so next slide these are just views from Revit that we didn't fully render but just to show some of the massing of the experience and the scale of the project our signage would be we'd have a signboard and we're proposing either a little bit of letters or just letters between mountains directly to a signboard towards the side itself there'd be some lighting as well along with the cares of the building and the residential entrance next slide so these are shadow studies 9 a.m. is always on the left 3 p.m. is always on the right so I started with fall and you can see that our building casts some shadows to the director butters as we go to noon the orientation of the sun we don't really cast shadows on the director butters and then this would go to 3 p.m. the shadows would cast onto the Broadway itself that condition carries through for all the seasons it's really the worst in the fall on winter just at 9 a.m. and 12 a.m. next slide please very much anything else before we turn it over to the board okay great thank you so much I appreciate the thorough the thorough presentation and the thorough set of materials that were submitted so Ken I will let you kick it off with any questions or clarifications that you'd like to ask of the applicants and then again we'll save any deliberation for after public comment well stuff I like the project I think it's it fits it fits very well it's what we've been looking for I just I just do want to go down the list of relief you're looking for okay and I believe the first list of relief is the number of parking spaces right you're required nine and you're providing six in because the commercial space is below I believe 2,000 square feet you're not required provide any on-site parking for them so there's no parking required there so the only thing you're asking for is relief for the residential parking from nine to six but you and then you're also requiring relief for the open space or are you counting the open space as part of the roof deck up top for thermal space so even with that counting you're still insufficient if you add the square footages all together down below and I'm above excluding the requirement of having 20 by 20 do you still meet the requirements no it's a question I was I missed that part I thought I mean it might be wrong for their table they are under for the table they're showing that they meet those but I don't think they have the 20 by 20 see with open space the open space has to contain the square that's 20 by 20 and then part of that squares then then then you're able to say that is part of your open space and if aperture stick off from that you're okay I believe that's why I thought okay unless they're seeking relief from that that's why I'm asking okay I know we know we're under on the the open space so to address your first question put me on the parking the I understand initially it's one space for you we're dwelling in right now and then the Attorney General's office recently allowed from the from the board to go down to 25 which would be three part of that spaces so we felt six was appropriate needed it was to the usage of the space and when we've seen going on in the early years so I'm not yeah we're not questioning that we're just we're just running through the west yeah understand and I'm not saying I disagree with you or agree with you I'm just just want to understand we are looking for relief okay six sexes and I believe your setbacks are okay what I looked at I want to setbacks are the setbacks are not required for mixed use so it's so it's nothing no set so I just want to understand what we're proving here and what you're asking for that's all and I believe that there was one other the dry vial width dimension correct it's not 20 feet it's 18 feet right no it's not 24 it's 24 sorry I'm fine with this the only thing I do I want to ask is will you be willing to up on the upper level I mean up on the second level you potentially could maybe put a corridor out there and have a deck out there too for open space between your commercial space and your residential space couldn't be a little small quarter so you're separating your noise and everything else there too but it allows you to get some additional open space up top there so just so I follow you so on the can we go to the second floor the first floor there on that roof top is that what you're talking about yeah yeah we can certainly just look into that yeah I think it would come to about after some safety measures probably six seven hundred square feet something something up there that could be uh there's additional you know open space there that's that could be you know a garden or whatever you out there you know yeah to that point I kind of vision for this building to have something maybe a cafe or something there that really is more for the community along the street and more walkability so maybe seating upstairs some stairs you know open through the ceiling it goes up there I don't I don't know but to your point yeah would be with the wine shop be coming back possibly I have had discussions with them I know them well I've offered to them I don't know the realities of the finances of it okay that could be a nice little area up there where you can have more tastings and cheese and stuff reopen to the public you know just get a little okay so now I think of that I think that's all I had for you guys um I like the project I think this this is a kind of project we're looking to push ahead on you know Broadway and Mass Ave corridors there you know I think it's good scale and proportion so thank you Ken what was that um yeah I mean I think it's an exciting project for you know Broadway and so um I think I like him kind of like to try to carve out a little bit of the open space so above that building I was also looking at that in a no virtual or that would be separate from the residential right is that what you're talking about um so here you're saying above in this space above the above yeah right up there yes and then when you were thinking about it it would be some kind of open space connected for the rep the commercial not behind it for the residential there it could be either one but you just come out if you look at the second floor plan you can sort of go out like through a quarter there yeah can I just speak to that yeah so to that point the second floor would have about 900 I don't know I don't have it from me but uh there we go 891 square feet of commercial and we did that on purpose because we didn't want to lose that 3 000 square feet that you can do without parking and then in addition I just know a couple other properties in town that are filled with therapists in those upper level it's a great spaces yeah they really do do well as far as use and so we thought oh well I try to deal with the parking challenges on this a lot when we could capture some of that 3 000 square feet so that was the point so so to your to your question it would I believe if I can just step up yeah so that the this section would be some sort of roof deck if we did went that route it would tie into this area because your point and then the next unit presidential unit would be over on this side so yeah I mean I think you know if we could explore that that would be favorable to kind of I think Ken's thinking my thinking on that um and then I don't have a lot of questions on this I think for the essence of what you're complying with by you know for master plan and a lot of the other elements for this district seem fine and there's some things in terms of I know that we don't have this not the setback but the stepback is a little bit more challenging for this zone district correct yes Kelly please go ahead yeah I just I think one of the things the board may want to consider is whether so the stepback you could potentially interpret it as whether providing a stepback on that second thus it's it's they're already provided right because they're not going straight up so that would just be one thing to consider and then just understanding how that works dimensionally on both sides of the building because it seems like you're getting that on one side I don't know if you're getting it on the winter street side so that may be something that you would need to request a waiver for the board may want to ask the applicant to reconsider I'm good for now with all that thank you though Kelly great thank you Melissa Jean yeah I I agree with my colleagues it's a very exciting project to have on Broadway and a great replacement for that little building that is there now with all the asphalt around it and I have a few questions I don't know if you can go what number slide it was it's number seven on the ones that we got let me see it's not a couple questions sheet A11 that's it okay excellent so this is the residential lobby to get up to the elevator yes if this commercial unit is rented to someone one shop or someone else how do the second floor commercial folks get in do they go through the residential lobby or do they go how do they make their way to the elevator they would they would go to the the residential lobby so they don't need like a key for that limited access so it's not solely a residential lobby it's like residential and the second fuel commercial yes okay um is this supposed to be the handicap space yes if the handicap person comes around here there's a set of stairs to get to the elevator would they have to go around the front to get in no there are actually no stairs there that's just the dash line of the stairs above okay they would just wheel right in so they could wheel right in so that's okay great and um there was a comment from the staff about needing the sizing of the spaces which I see is on here but I'm not sure if it's on the ones that we got so we have yeah so yeah so we would similarly the shadow studies in the initial review for the four-story building and other than just now we're having seen the shadow studies for the five-story building so we would need to see those two I didn't I didn't see those either actually I don't think that those were in the packet no that was posted yeah I looked for them and the only one shadow studies I could find were the initial one for the four-story building so maybe I missed it but I couldn't I didn't see it either so that and again you heard me before there's no lead checklist which I would like to see no understand it's all around the roof terrific but it's be helpful to see the lead checklist and other things you're doing for sustainability um in addition to asking for reduction in parking which we do want to you know when it's appropriate and you've done it you're asking for about half the amount of long-term bicycle parking spaces that are required and there's a different standard for our determining whether to bicycle parking spaces as opposed to the car parking spaces and it seems to me if we're going to reduce the car parking spaces it'll be even more likely that people in this building will have and want to use bicycles so I would ask you to go back and figure out how you're going to get 16 internal long-term parking bicycle parking spaces because that's what's required and I don't think you'd meet the standard to get newer um than those at least I I don't think you'd meet the standard for those the um open space on the deck on top doesn't qualify as open space under the bylaw either has to be ground or wouldn't level up so I don't know what to do about that you need to think about it you know the suggestion about putting open space on top of the first full of commercial gets you partway there and we'll have to decide what to do with following unless you can figure out some more um what else did I want to ask you about um so um we usually ask the staff to work with the um project on which one of the units are units will be affordable but we usually have a better idea about what the units look like and what we've seen on this which are just like spaces so I think we probably need to see so what do you tell and can you elaborate on what a personal preference would be just so we have some guys in the rooms and you know yeah I guess are you talking floors or sides for example yeah all right yeah so one bedroom studios two bedrooms this should indicate with which one yes with a bath okay you want to make sure that they're there was a question that we got by email from a person who often comments to us on projects coming before he says that he thinks your declaration of 7,243 square feet of residential gross floor area under counts and he wondered whether you counted um is not only the interior size of the apartment but also hallways stairwells elevators etc so what did your gross floor area include uh I believe my gross floor area units not not always been off the stairs yeah so you need to go back yeah you could come back and say here's how I did it or not because counting knowing what the gross floor area has to do with what the open space requirements are so we need to have a better understanding of what the actual gross floor area is and it's yeah if you look at it I'm sure this can help you find in the regulations the zone by law I mean where we have what is gross floor area sorry gross floor area for the residential gross floor area for residential was was everything aside from that commercial space oh it was included stairways elevators to the outside face of walls okay yes great so we didn't do that okay great thank you I apologize no that's okay right um yeah those are my questions oh one other thing so I you know the regulation of zoning by law says step back on the fourth floor on all sides that face the street so the suggestion is well look you have the commercial building coming out on Broadway so effectively you've done the same thing with the commercial building but I don't think you have that on the side street so the question is could you put a seven what is it seven foot step back on the fourth floor on what's the name of the side street out for the winter street um if not we'll have to decide what to do if you could do it then we don't we're not faced with whether to say yes or no about that um the other thing I question I have about the shadow study is the residential buildings that will be in shadow part of the time be helpful when we see the shadow study if you could for each building indicate to me or to us what period of time will be in shadow and if any of the buildings have solar arrays on them to indicate that also thank you that's a great thank you gene steve okay I do have a couple of questions uh the first regarding open space um there were a few places in the application where I got a sense that open space was calculated as a percentage of six thousand seven hundred seventy square feet was that how it was calculated so there were um looking through the some of the dimensions and the plans like on sheet a zero um I and this is too small for me to read right now but I got the sense that some of I felt like some of the open space numbers might have been calculated as a percentage of six thousand seven hundred seventy square feet which is the area of the lot right and it's not that's not actually how the regulations work it's a percentage of the gross floor area that's used for residential um that that is how I calculate that is how you calculate yeah I just have to blow it up okay I'm just I'm just making sure okay all right so um so can we uh display sheet a 1.0 I'm sorry see if you were questioning whether it was based on six thousand yeah so the what which is what it's shown that it is of course six thousand oh seven hundred and seventy square feet yeah so let let me look at the zoning summary on the cover sheet usually was a update yeah so landscaped open space five hundred ninety six square feet divided by six thousand seven hundred seventy square feet yeah that's that's that needs to be corrected that doesn't match up with what I have in the second table yeah yes all right no it's just it the first step is agreeing what the what the numbers are then we could argue over them um now regarding sheet uh he does have the other number in the column next to it is seven thousand two hundred and forty three oh okay okay so regarding sheet number a 1.0 yep oh this is good I was just wondering if you could provide this dimension my guess this is about eight feet about 18 yeah I think there might be dimensions I didn't see a dimension yeah we'll just need to have that confirmed that was great that question wasn't I believe there's someone on the other side who's got a detached adu and was you know wrote having expressing concern about cars that might be parking right up against it but it sounds like you've got an eight foot buffer yes okay um so the upper story step back so if we could go to sheet a 1.3 so more dimensions um this is winter street yes um what's I'd like to know what this dimension is and also this one yeah the the roof deck width is 11 feet and then I believe I set back that face five feet from this this is five feet this is five feet from the edge of the wall okay and so there's I mean the requirement is seven and a half on you know on when it's facing the street so here if this is 11 you got it yeah um here if this is five then I mean it would be nice for us to know what all of these are yeah Steve actually that's not uh this is the fifth floor so they stepped it back oh oh two for he's giving us an extra step back it's not actually my all right thank you thank you for thank you absolutely please oh so I wait or is it on that does that speak to your question on the setback on the street okay so you were saying fourth story okay I heard fourth okay my I I write software for a living so off by one mistakes are just a a hazard of my profession um so uh can we look at sheet 811 yes yeah so like Mr. Benson I would also like to see um the full complement of required bicycle parking and this area is is difficult because you've got a lot going on with the stairs in the elevator in the residential lobby just as an idea for consideration um you know I thought perhaps you know if these mechanical rooms can come out a little in this way and possibly providing for a second closet there um it's just just an idea and um see uh finally um have you get any given any thought to a transportation demand management plan but the scale of the project we didn't see this something that didn't necessary but I'd like to see it I mean it's not a particularly large project so I'll just say that um we are we're happy to consider in order for us to be able to consider a reduction in your parking requirement to the 25 percent okay we are actually required to to review your transportation demand management plan okay so that is um if we review that and deem that it allows us to to accept the requested reduction that will be one of the things it triggers that right and that's pretty clearly spelled out in the zoning by law in terms of what your options are and there are many options for you to choose from okay yep I missed that that's okay so thank you I think I've taken up enough of everyone's time so nothing further I'll see most of my questions have been already covered by my colleagues I'll just mention a few things um aesthetically that I'd love for you to to take a look at here um I really appreciate the way that you have separately articulated the commercial space from the residential building above um one thing I'd love to see if you could actually Claire go to the the perspective that's kind of the corner one of the renderings that's perfect um the cornice on the the first floor commercial if that could have a bit more definition it feels a little flat to me right now and I think we're trying to move away from the aesthetic of some of the um more industrial looking spaces that that were there and again I really appreciate what you've done in the upper floor I think um too I really like the wood look um which which highlights the the residential entry I think I just like to to look at the cornice and some of the materiality at the commercial space again I like the store front windows um it's really just the materials and the cornice itself I'd like for you to take another the gray the gray area it's the flat it's the flatness of the fiber cement so whether it's another material or perhaps some more articulation there again I just um would love to again since that's the the the side that the public is going to interact with to have that more detailed that's that's all and again I really like what you've done with the with the rest of it there so I can project out again I I I ask you to take you know you have for example a little bit um more of um a cornice with some scale to it um above that may or may not be appropriate given again that it's it's the the first story but I'd like you to study that a little bit more and and just see what we come up with you know it could be that once you if you decide to look at incorporating one of the the questions about adding some outdoor space above that that when you add again a railing or some sort of protection that that plays into again making that feel more substantial that that may solve your your issue there but again I just would love to to have that studied a bit further um and then my other comment was that I would love the signage to be lit again whether that's externally lit or internally lit for the um for the uh commercial space I know that you had two options one which was unlit and and one potentially lit um I do think it's important to have this lit but I'm open to again whether that's through external lighting or internal hiding great those are the only questions and comments um that I had at this time any other questions before we move to public comment well you please well you mentioned in that if we just turned uh you know the driveway side oh yep actually that something there that felt really unresolved that that that wait there it's it's not you never built that it's going to be a little lower down because you have the structure there but then you have the floor level you need to soften there for like plumbing and whatever else so it's it's actually going to be a little more deeper and it'll look proper now too great and now it looks like it's uh a giraffe with little legs sticking up and it doesn't look quite um but you know what I'm saying just so you're going to have to look at another band or something that that particularly set the area a little bit more yeah I would say that actually that that whole corner there um where it wraps around the commercial space into the parking area that that felt a bit unresolved um and it would be great to take another look at that corner as well and again that will be fairly prominent as you come down Broadway so I really think that's important to take a look at too yeah great thanks Ken I've forgotten that on my list all right um any other questions or comments before we move um just one comment please in terms of I was not on the board them not that I want to see this but I just have to explore because it is a corner building on Mass App we had those two buildings across from one another and then one was kind of facing the quarter of Mass App on the corner um and the other one wasn't do you know apart like right after the high school yes do you recall like what was the impetus to get the other building with that corner facing because I think that looks good and maybe it's only because it's on Mass have we actually wanted them to move that off of the corner because we wanted the residential entrance to be on the side street not the primary so it's just an aesthetic thing it wasn't anything uh in the design correct I actually really like the way that they've I think this one's much nicer than both those buildings there as far as architecture um yeah no in terms of the fit in the what you've done with this parcel and on the corner I'm just curious because um I don't know if you guys know the the area I'm talking about right yeah I just passed the high school and I think there's you know you can critique both on either side but at least the way it appears more welcoming the one on the left that's still being developed because it's face kind of facing that corner versus the other one if you remember they put a picket fence there right so are you talking are you speaking specifically to the entrance to the commercial space and perhaps looking at um I was just curious I was just kind of curious about how that design came on the other one and if there was any standard or is there any thinking with corner design buildings please I mean I just might take on it is that the building you're talking about is being developed across the stop right I think I could be wrong but they don't have a step back like we do about the commercial to the residential it just runs straight up and so their step back is higher it's at the uh it's at the fourth floor fourth and fourth floors but on the ground between the first one that's not on the side street between for the first and second floor there's nothing and so the angle here's an angle for the entrance area that's nicer um out of the options that we have I prefer this well I think you've done a good job of creating an entryway on each corner I mean on either side I guess I should say versus the other one you know at least the one I'm thinking of has a picket that's in a tree and it kind of blocks off the I don't know the gatewayness to that building in that commercial I don't think this one does so that's why I'm not trying to kind of belabor this but I was just curious on the thinking of the board how that one evolved a little bit and if there was any intentionality on corner design in the past I guess there wasn't but what's specifically on on I don't think there was a specific point of view other than actually trying to get them to move off of that corner and move the residential entrance to the side street but what I like about this one is that we don't have a monolithic building running up but there is um an offset in the um in the due to the lot in terms of the way that the building is is skewed which is which creates a more dynamic facade which I think is what you're reacting to with the corner entrance it creates again it breaks the the rectangular mass which is is nice to incorporate and I think again the um the way that the the lot allows us to do this here is kind of interesting yeah okay thank you great great uh so at this time we will um open the floor to public comment again please raise your hand if you'd like to address the board um and when you're called on you will have up to three minutes to speak please address uh please begin by stating your name first and last and um your address please I appreciate So I think it might affect the natural sunlight. And we appreciate why there needs to be changes to the building, but I think something more that can be snowy building, something more concrete, and much more. Thank you. Please, go ahead, James. This is why I ask them to do the shadow studies and let us know sort of how it's shadowed the next door residences and whether it's shadowed any solar. So I'm really interested in what you had to say. And I'm interested in your telling us about how we want our solar panels to be shadowed or sleep well surrounded. I will say that one thing we're careful of anytime we, you know, even with people where we request that they put solar panels on their roof, we, nobody can predict the future. And obviously, there is the opportunity for development really in many places in town. So we do try and take that into account, but at the same time, that unfortunately can't be one of us all. But we will certainly... There are also other places in Michigan by these folks, but there are other places in that they might be more appropriate to have the time. I hear your opinion, and it's been needed and we will definitely request the studies to be provided to the board. So thank you. Sure. I did go out and look at that based on the letter you provided us. And I looked at the sites. Your house is actually two houses away. Yes. And at that corner, there are some very large trees already flanking the backside of the property and also at the corner. That is, I don't believe, that much higher than this proposed building. So we will look at the shadows today. I'm not saying we're not going to, okay? But I'm just saying that there's already stuff there that are high already with the trees there during the summertime. That's what I'm trying to say. Excuse me. We're not going to do a back and forth. No, I'm just saying that we did look at it, okay? We did not just not, you know... All right. From other members of public wishing to speak. Yes. My name is Terry Chu. I'm actually the tenant on the second floor. And I'm currently working from home and I can confirm you this time of year. I do not get a lot of sunlight. The sun is just slightly over 84, 86 Broadway. So come December, it's just going to bear past that. So I can confirm that this building is still, like, our building being hit the shot. I hear what Ken's saying. I can understand about the trees. The tree that he's mentioning, however, is set behind 84, 86 Broadway and doesn't cover 88 Broadway until about 11 or 12 or maybe half. And then the sun has made past that tree. So I don't think it's really accurate to compare the two lines. So I am very concerned about the amount of sunlight that I'm getting again on this. It's a beautiful building. I'm just not sure that it fits with our blocks. It's so small. It's just, you know, it's three residential properties that are sandwiched in one store. So I just, I do feel like it's not the best. Any other members of the public wishing to speak? Please. Matthew, 164 Fourth Street. I just like to express my support for the project as it currently stands, or at least thus far. I really like the fact that the net commercial space on the property is going to increase from previously there. There's not a lot of consent about the commercial space and that's used for other projects that are nice to see that it can be increasing in this space. I like the additional residential. I think the size of the units is actually something that's notable in this project. A lot of multi-family development in Ireland seems to be, like, the goals tend to be like small one-bedrooms and studio size, whereas these seem like they're larger units. And I think it's nice to get a variety in multi-family because there are different types of families with different means. So that's very nice to see. I did want to make a note about the shadow studies, and I think this is noted in public comment as well. It does look like the shadow studies that were shown today, as well as what I saw online were sort of interpreting Winter Street as being running east to west, which it doesn't. So I think that the ones that have been performed this far might not be accurate to what the actual shadow studies would be passed, so I think it would be good to sort of revisit that going forward. Great. Thank you very much. Anyone else? Thank you, manager. It's already 80. 80 Broadway is a small lot. Not much to do with that required for a two-family home. It is surrounded by a lot of zone 4 in use for low-density residential development. And post-development is completely out of character with its surroundings. It vibrates ATR standard, too. While it's close to 55 feet tall, all the neighboring properties are limited to 35 feet. And what's the last thing that... This development will stick out like a sore thumb towering over the neighborhood. High buffer regulations apply to protect people like these. There is no way that ARB who finds that the body of two-family homes will not be adversely affected by the additional floor and the additional entity of height. I want to thank the planning director for pointing out the zoning violations regarding the Bureau, Rear-Nord setback, and the complete lack in these local districts. And I want to thank Mr. Seltzer for his written testimony for pointing out the setback violations of the two-to-five yards in section 513.8. As a former ARB member myself, I don't think I even saw a proposal from the federal board that seemed egregiously violated. This proposal should not have even come before you without first having received variants from the CDN. Native variants that could want to violate the dimension required to provide them. I submitted written testimony to the board who suggested that any issue of court case can be called a BOOFRA or supported by the field of civil duty which explicitly states that only the CDN can write variants. Given that code of BOOFRA demonstrates the kind of counts explained in the way a BOOFRA method is completely wrong. Through you, Madam Chair, I would like to ask you to allow this attorney to explain by what legal authority the ARB can overrule the Massachusetts claims issue of court and the zoning model. And given what I heard tonight, I would also like to ask you and the board members, if any of you have been meeting ex-card cake with any of the development teams on this proposal. Thank you. Thank you. I will just state that you have been told time and time again by town council that you are understanding of the ability of the development board to work together with developers to make decisions on behalf of the town to ensure that these projects can move forward in accordance with our master plan and our bylaws beyond what you have just stated. And several memos have been provided as such and they do not need to go in front of the zoning board of appeals before meeting with us. Thank you. Any other public comment before we move back to deliberation by the board? Okay. This point will close public comment and I will move to what I'd like to do first is identify the lists that I have kept of some of the questions that the board's had for you of items that we would like to see further reviewed and developed I don't think that we will be able to move to a potion to approve or not this evening I think that we have several open items that does anyone feel differently? I don't think we're ready to vote on this project as it is today. Great. So what I'd like to do is read the list that I have and if other members of the board can identify anything that I may have missed that would be great as a starting point and then we'll continue our discussion if anything else comes up and then offer you an opportunity to ask us any questions as well. Great. So I have to review the shadow studies again and provide those again I apologize that they were submitted in the night but we didn't have a chance to see them again if you could please confirm the siting of the building in terms of the cardinal directions that would be great. We'd like for you to provide a lead checklist transportation demand management plan in accordance with your request for reduction in parking to look at the number of long-term bicycle parking spaces provided to see if those can increase or if not provide some reasoning for the request for reduction in those to look again at the calculation of the open space presented and whether or not that is something that can be addressed or again a specific request on the reduction of the relief that you're requesting there more details on the units in terms of number of bedrooms again so that we can understand the types of units that you're planning specifically for the placement of the affordable unit looking at winter street and whether or not you can include the 7 foot 6 step back similar to what you have provided again on Broadway knowing that you have stepped back at 2 at the second story and continued up which we've approved previously in other cases we'll have to review that together as a board update to the table on A0 one of them you used the gross floor area one used the lot area to make that consistent dimension the buffer area that's been provided for parking you identified it but we just need to see the dimensions in your plans similarly the dimension on the step back at Broadway and for what you've provided on winter street as well dimensions for the roof deck and we're looking at that first floor facade with additional detail at the area where where the public interacts with that facade and in particular the area around by the parking what else do I have? the parking the top garden on the first floor yep thank you looking at that okay roof top garden on the first floor that was one of the first no no but a patio or something open space you know but I wouldn't mind having vegetation up there this was mentioned in one of the comments before the facade of the building was right up to the sidewalk and people in the right of the driveway had mirrors or horns or lights to warn the pedestrians and the drivers so there's not an impact so I think it would be helpful to see what you would be proposing for that I don't know if you mentioned the buffer for parking at the back yep lighting plan we usually like to see a lighting plan a sight lighting plan let's let Jean finish and then you can add let's go below the lighting oh I'm sorry I'm looking at this okay go ahead we're going to lighting show us the lighting levels underneath the parking where it overhangs just give us a light spectrum foot candles phone matching plans they'll be perfect that was great that's what I've got nothing to add any other discussion that the board would like to have at this time before we take a motion to continue let's ask them when they'd like to come back but any other any other questions do you have any questions for the board before we make a motion to continue great thank you so much for your accommodation and taking a look at those items let's see so we'd like to make a motion to continue this hearing to one of our future meeting dates Holly I think that we have another meeting in two weeks we're meeting on the 21st and then December 5th and 19th we want to obviously make sure you have enough time we need the materials about a week before so no later than the Wednesday before the meeting right the 19th December 19th so is there a motion to continue is there a motion to continue the public hearing for document number 3717 to December 19th so moved take the world call vote starting with Steve yes yes thank you so much thank you thank you alright so that closes agenda item number three we will now move to agenda item number four which are modifications to the ARB rules and regulations and these include several items that we here really so from town meeting and through the work that we've been doing with the SketchUp model so the two items are on page seven anyone need me to pull these up this is no we're good yeah so we previously reviewed these and I believe finalized the wording and if there are no comments we would just need to take a vote to do a task for public comment but I just wanted to see if there's any discussion before we do that okay great so seeing no board discussion are there any members of the public who would like to speak regarding the proposed changes to the ARB rules and regulations seeing none we'll close public comment and I'll see if there is a motion to approve the modifications to the ARB rules and regulations as submitted so moved second we'll take a roll call vote starting with Steve yes Jean yes Melissa yes Ken yes and I'm a yes as well those have been approved thank you very much right that closes agenda item number four and we'll now move to agenda item number five which is the hybrid meeting protocol so with reference to this item we have discussed previously that the town's remote participation study committee that was put in place by town meeting has created a hybrid pilot program that they have requested that the ARB participate in and as part of that they created a document by which they created a series of decision points for us to weigh in on related to how we would run a hybrid meeting that memo has been provided actually I see their memo I don't see my memo to the board I just see their memo I don't think I saw your memo no and to see it your memo I apologize so that's okay so we can either defer this to our next meeting so that you have time to review the memo or I can take you through what my recommendations were you've had a chance to review what their decision points are I'm happy to do that and see if you're in agreement or have any changes to that unless you'd like to see that ahead of time I think fine with me I prefer that the first we can go home so what we will do is make sure that you have this memo we can actually send it out following this meeting so you have plenty of time to review it and then we'll put this back on the agenda for our 21st meeting great alright so we will now move to agenda item number 6 which is the MBTA community's working group I'll hand it over to Claire great thank you so in our work towards passing our work towards passing policy related to MBTA communities one of the things we've been talking about in this group is establishing a working group that can work together to do a few things conduct outreach to the community analyze the feedback suggest ways the zoning proposals may or could achieve the goals and then serve as preliminary advisors and reviewers of zoning amendments as they are developed by our technical consultant we had talked about which members of this board or other boards and committees and town staff and stuff may be may be appropriate to sit on the board I had a conversation with Doug Heim about how many of you could potentially serve in this working group no more than two or else we would have to follow public meeting law also Teresa Marzelli has agreed to be on this working group who's the community engagement coordinator for the town we're looking for a resident with experience in PR or communications and then one or two additional resident representatives preferably with planning our zoning experience we had talked a bit about the community outreach piece of this and how important it was going to be and the community education piece as well as the technical side and how we were going to need a consultant to work more on the technical terms of whatever policy, bylaw, amendment, whatever we decide to adopt and so we're really looking for folks who can do both who can sort of look at a document with some technical expertise successful outreach to the community so we're asking the board to vote to establish this working group this evening with the membership pending I think and then I also wanted to talk a little bit about a public meeting that we were going to have on November 17th related to MBTA communities and we think we should have the committee in place by that time that's quick that's great I'll see if anyone has any questions for you that works for you Ken I know I would like to put my head in in there for to be part of that group but if there's two other members of this board that feels strongly I will relinquish that request okay, thank you Melissa no, I mean I think that sounds great we'll have two folks from our board and we want that in place before the 7th that's what I'm hoping that I just noticed that it's the 7th it's very close oh it's the 17th of this month yeah that's that's aspirational great, thanks Gene this is fine Steve this is for getting Marzilli yes, I've been working with her in a different capacity on something else and she's she would be a very useful resource and participate in the effort she's excellent, she's very excited to join great fantastic great would you like to finalize the members of the redevelopment board this evening or if the board is prepared to do that so Ken has put his hand up I will not because I'm sure that there are other I think we had several other members putting my hand up I seem to remember I seem to remember it was Ken, Gene and myself I was going to say I would step back you sure? Gene Gene won't be the batter back and forth I'll just wait to bring things back to the full board we did speak about the fact that we would love to from the initial proposal that you put forward in terms of engagement have some additional opportunity for the board to weigh in during process as opposed to just during the final so I think Gene hopefully will make sure there is plenty of opportunity for you to provide you always provide really wonderful feedback great so is there a motion to approve the recommended composition of the MBTA community's working group that's what you need our approval and do we need to commit to Ken and Steve? I don't believe that we're committing to the entire composition but we can so with the two designated ARB members being Ken Lyle and Steve Robleck so great we'll take a vote starting with Steve? Yes Gene? Yes Melissa? Yes Ken? Yes and I'm a yes as well that's great thank you so much for putting that together so quickly everything's happening so quickly great that concludes agenda item number six and we'll now move to agenda item number seven which is open forum so at this point any members of the public who are still with us this evening are invited to speak if you so wish I think I will okay great so we would just need you to state your first last name and address and then you'll have up to three minutes to address the board Matthew Owen 164 Forest Creek so wasn't planning on saying anything but after the 80 Broadway thing I did sort of notice an issue that I had kind of noted theoretically before which is that the open space requirements useable open space requirements for mixed use development seem to be having a similar effect to the sort of FAR requirements that we changed this last time meeting in the spring whereas on most lots most commercial lots in Arlington it would be very difficult to sort of meet that requirement while also getting anywhere close to sort of like the allow that the mixed use zoning by law allows and so there's definitely attention there and so just as the board goes forward thinking about potential articles for future time meetings I think that would be something worth continuing discussion on as a time meeting member I would definitely appreciate that issue coming up but I think it would probably very more weight coming from the ARP rather than being a citizen petition so just yeah please take that into account thank you very much and you'll be happy to know that that is number one on our list of potential zoning by law modifications that we have identified for this year and it's something that just so that you know as well we try and work with the applicants for in terms of tradeoffs and opportunities to grant relief because you're absolutely right that really can pose some challenges to projects thank you seeing no other members of the public here we'll go ahead and close open forum I'm not sure what I want to say along some open formal new business you still want to make a statement yes I've been serving on this board about maybe seven or eight years now getting very tired being accused of being partay to any developers or anything else here that we've been working on this board is a volunteer board we spent a lot of time working on this and be accused of or just being mentioned that way is I believe is slanderous try a reputation is it insult to us and I want to see what we can do to vent this going forward any more thank you Kim I don't think it's right I appreciate you saying that under new business yes Steve this is a new business for the board but I think it will be new business from the public I just wanted to say something about 464 Massachusetts avenue this was the Fort Portango spot where we had approved a restaurant in brew pub in the midst of all the negotiations that happened and when doing these sort of ventures they have decided to take another space and so we will unfortunately that will not be the first brewery in Arlington thank you for letting the public know that I appreciate that that was a disappointment I know to all of us we were looking forward to that project and Kim I think you brought up some good points and that is something that we should discuss and continue to discuss with town council and others in terms of the way that not only the redevelopment board but other boards in town are valued or perhaps devalued by members who we serve it's also my understanding there's nothing wrong with one member of this board talking to someone who's going to put in an application correct but it didn't happen no it didn't happen but they'll be accused of that in that form in that tone like we're colluding something and there isn't none and if there is some prove it I mean I take the ethics class every two years yes so do we all I think that's an important point and I appreciate you bringing it up thank you Kelly please thank you so regarding we had discussed the last meeting it's only a moment I just wanted to give you a quick summary of how the board is going through each part of the zoning and collecting information regarding those amendments so just to know that we are working on that we will work on that and if you have a number of citizen musicians normal meetings are working for us working sessions so those will be on the 21st great okay I haven't seen many of them but there have been some people starting to reach out which is great we've invited and encouraged people anyone who has much like you this evening anyone who has an idea for a potential petition whether it's something you'd like the board to take up or whether you'd like to propose it yourself we would love for anyone to come to the board please contact us and we'd love to get you on the agenda to speak about your thoughts on what you'd like to propose for zoning modifications any other new business with that we will close our new business section and I will see if there is a motion to adjourn so motioned second starting with Steve yes Kenny thank you so much