 Okay, so welcome to the Amherst Planning Board. It is Wednesday, September 18th, 7 p.m. And we have five of our seven members here. First thing we're gonna start with is minutes. And I think we have one old minute from August 8th, 2018. Now, Chris, only three of us are here that are, we're present, but can everybody vote? The people who were present that night can vote and the others will have to abstain, but I think you can just approve it based on the three of you. And three is enough. Yeah. Okay. So on these minutes. Is it date? No, it's their old. They were just sort of like lost. And then when we were doing something for tonight, we were like, oh, these never got approved. Maybe it was like summertime loss. Anyways, does anyone have any comments or issues about it? May I make a motion to approve the minutes? Please do. So making a motion to approve the minutes of August 8th, 2018. Second. Is there any other comments? If not, to approve, raise your hand. So the three that were there approve. No, or EBS, so we have two that abstain. Yeah, okay. Actually, that goes back in. Okay, so now we're going to change the order a bit. I've had a request that we jump to old business item 6B, which is the Applebrook cluster subdivision. And we have Mr. Tom Reedy here to explain this very small thing we need to do. Thank you very much, Madam Chair, members of the board. I'm Tom Reedy, an attorney with Bacon Wilson, here in Amherst, here on behalf of Applebrook West. So yeah, somewhat, I guess they're indipitously, we asked for something and hopefully those meeting minutes now that have been approved. Hopefully we can get a couple of things accomplished. This is relatively straightforward. So without going into too much background about the subdivision, we received the certificate of compliance, or performance rather, for the, we had signed a covenant saying that we won't sell any of the lots until certain infrastructure is done. And so this is typical with all subdivisions. We came back and we got that certificate releasing seven of the lots. We didn't release lot four, that's still under the covenant. What happened since that time, though, is we then came back in April and got of this year and had an ANR endorsed by the planning board. So we're actually going to closing on Friday, and so that's why it's the late date of this. And the buyer's attorney said, well, wait a second. The plan that your certificate of performance references is the old plan, because we have not done these changes yet. And technically part of lot three is the one that's getting purchased. What I've highlighted here in green was, especially the one towards the open space there in the south was part of the open space. And the open space was not released because ultimately that is either staying with the homeowners association or on the southerly side going to the town. And so the long and the short of it is those portions which at least here and here and over here are still technically under the covenant. So all we're asking you to do is to do what you did last year, but just to update the plan reference to be this plan so that when we say lot three is being released, it is all of lot three and it's exactly what is going to be conveyed. If I confuse you, I'm very sorry, is that what I meant? So lot four is still held. The town engineer has said that there's been enough infrastructure done that it's all good and just to hold for. And you have a closing on Friday and you just realized that the latest plan had not been tied to the certificate of performance which you signed and was recorded. So we're just re-releasing it and just updating it to make reference to this plan which is recorded at the registry of these. And oversight on my part, I should have caught it when I came in for the ANR, but I didn't need it. Is there any, yeah, Chris? There are just a few little pieces that weren't shown on Mr. Reedy's plan up here that have changed and I'm gonna pass around a drawing that shows everything that's changed just so you can have the full picture. But the things that I'm showing don't really relate to Mr. Reedy's need to sell lot three. Or the certificate of performance because what Chris will show you, she has it I think in darker green, those parts were already released because they were formerly part of like right here where my cursor is. You see where the hatched line is? That was where the former lot two line was. So when you released lot two, it included this area. But now that area is part of the open space. So I didn't include that as part of this presentation because there's no encumbrance on lot two over there. There is here because the line's moving in the other direction onto the open space. Next one. So I think what Chris has done is shown the additional changes, but they don't have any impact on the certificate of performance. But this is what we're approving and voting on that this is the latest and greatest and the most current part of our lives. Yes, that is the plan that you endorsed back in April of this year that this certificate of performance applies to that plan. Janet. I just have a quick question. The open space between lot three and lot two is open space for the homeowners? There's a lot of drainage infrastructure in there. And so as part of the cluster subdivision we have to provide a certain amount of open space and we can do a couple of things with it. We can give it to the homeowners association. We can give it to the conservation commission or we can give it to some conservation trust because this is really the drainage infrastructure for the site and I don't have that plan here but this is where like the detention basin is. And we've talked to the exonic about what he wants here and the town is going to get this. And if you drive by you'll see that there's some trees up here eventually the town is gonna get a trailhead right here to access. I think the trolley line I think is what it's called way in the back here. So this is just was determined not to be useful to the town and so it is being maintained and it is the responsibility of the homeowners association because it does provide that drainage infrastructure for the entire site. Anybody have any other questions? Does the public have any questions? Chris, anything else to add? You just need to make a motion to vote to release these lots and then I have the certificate and the one that you've got via email and in your packets has a date of September 17th on it but today is the 18th so we have a fresh copy with the correct date on it. So it's all ready for your signature if you vote to release these lots. So if I hear a motion. So I'm going to make a motion to approve the re-release of lots one, two, three, five, six, seven and eight of SUB 27006. Someone want to second that? Thank you, Jack. Any other questions, clarifications? Okay, if not for approval show a sign of hands. That looks unanimous. Thank you very much. Thanks for taking me out of order and for coming here at all. So I'm going to circulate this document here and I'd like you to sign it if you would and return it to me by the end of the meeting. Thank you. Chris, that needs to be notarized. Do you have somebody here notary? The town clerk has copies of your signatures or will have copies of your signatures and she can notarize this. Thank you, Mr. Reedy. Thank you very much. We're going to move on to our public hearings, site plan review and special permits. This was for 705, it's not about 715. So we're going to continue from July 24th, 2019, SPR 2019-08, Javier Campos of Adams and Ruckston for Bank of America 360 College Street. This is a request for site plan review approval to install new light posts and fixtures to provide better illumination, safety and security for the Bank of America ATM. Commercial zone district map 15A, parcel 28. So I assume we have somebody here to speak on that if you want to come forward and introduce yourself. My name is Dorothy Ostrowski from Adams and Ruckston. I did see the email that went out earlier in regards to one of the board members that is not here this evening. I believe that the requests that were made during the July hearing were answered by the engineer and sent to the board for review. So I believe that this evening we were going to receive comments on that. They did come and we looked at the plans and we had some issues and I did see a letter in our packet of comments back and some were clear, like that's great. The fixtures went to 30K, the Kelvin instead of the 40 and we understand why they can't be on motion sensor detectors but it was brought up that we had concerns about the posts that were put in about the location and the look and where the lights were and we had asked for the photovoltaic study to be redone to see if you could push the poles to the other side of the driveway instead of on the inner part, push them to the outer and it says in the letter that they were unable to do so. They were unable to meet the bank standard in compliance area because it's a whole strip mall but of course you're all just working for the Bank of America and trying to light the walkway there but we're looking at it holistically that it's an entire parking lot and we do have your reprint of the photovoltaic just curiosity wise what is the number that they're trying to reach for their area of compliance. I would have to go back and get that one. I'm not prepared to answer that based on what their number they're looking for. I will suggest we came across this issue also in other towns where there is not a very large area to place these lights. There are different options based on instead of the larger pole bases, we can do something where it's more of just a pole into the sidewalk that also allows for the illumination. I can send you and forward you that. I believe what is in here based on the engineer's drawings is what the bank requires. I'm not sure what Amherst is looking for particularly or what you would allow. I don't know if that's something that you can provide for us so we can take it back to the engineer that does the plans or what would be acceptable for the town. Well one thing you just said is putting them in the sidewalk but I think wouldn't that be problematic because that's public way. That would have to be in on your landlord's property. And the other problem with these bases or large ballards is there was only 20 feet between the property line and the 18 foot parking spaces. Correct. So that was 20 feet which is bare minimum for allowing two cars to pass and now with those in place it narrows it to 17 feet. So that's one issue why we're pushing back on the locations being undesirable. And it's only 17 feet then from the back of the space for a car to back up. Some cars are longer than 17 feet. It becomes difficult to maneuver around the base. So even if you reduce the base it's still. Not enough to pass. It's not enough to pass and it's still an issue for cars. It's a hazard. We're setting up a situation that cars could easily be hitting these poles which nobody wants. Does the members have any other issues? I know we all saw David's comments which I think a lot of us agree with. Jack. I'd be willing to, I mean it was a good email. I can read it. Yeah please. So everybody knows. This is from Dave Levenstein. He's not here. Send an email. He said I have given considerable thought to the request for those site plan review on behalf of Bank of America for approval to install the new light poles that fixtures the site at 360 College Street. I do not believe that the site plan review should be granted. In addition I believe that the two poles previously installed for this purpose should be removed and the parking restored to its previous condition parking lot. The applicant did not offer to my mind a strong rationale for its decision to proceed with installation of these light post bases. The area at this intersection is very well illuminated and no specific evidence of public safety was offered. The only rationale offered to my recollection was that the site and its illumination did not meet some corporate national standard. In fact Bank of America commenced construction contrary to the zoning bylaw. The applicant did not perform sufficient due diligence prior to its construction, further undermining its rationale for proceeding. The proposed installation seems solely for the benefit of one business at this site without any regard for the other businesses located there, for the public interest or for the town's interest in the site. More importantly the lights in their base as currently proposed, posed in my view an observation of the site and both the site plan review as well as the subject to the site to be a threat to public safety and parking. This is not adequately configured as Christine has said. I'm just moving on there. Finally I am highly concerned about the likely light pollution that this change in illumination will present at an intersection designated by the town as an emerging village center. Although the proposed lights may meet dark sky compliance there is nonetheless an intention to increase illumination that will undermine the town's desire to make this area more pedestrian friendly. David Levenstein. Any comment to that? I think the only comment going in retrospect of all of this is typically for electrical light packages or upgrades that we do for banks or any other projects. We don't pull building permits, it's always been electrical permits and we were issued an electrical permit for this with no question or anything. So we proceeded with this project based on electrical permit that we were approved by the town. So whatever suggestions are made I am more than happy to bring back to Bank of America but it was a town that issued us the permit to begin this and whatever happens going forward I will definitely bring back to Bank of America. It is ultimately not our decision what happens, it is yours and I will bring it back to our client. But the due diligence and things like that we did not undermine. I just want to put that on the record as we were not looking to undermine anybody in Amherst. We did come out, we did receive an electrical permit which we have done multiple times for other electrical light packages. We proceeded as we would with any other project. We were asked to cease and desist from our project of which we did and then we proceeded with this hearings and things. So I just want that on the record that this was not something that was done to undermine anything from the town of Amherst. Thank you for that. Yeah. Janet. I was at one of these businesses and I was leaving and the owner said be careful backing up because of this poll and I thought that was a good point. It was hard to go around and especially if there's like snow piled in the winter. I actually visited this site for the first time this evening. I recently took over Adams and Rexton this year and this is definitely a new change. I did visit this site earlier today and just looking at what we could do. So it's really ultimately bank standards versus towns and what towns want. So I get it. I was out there and I have an SUV and it was difficult to back up. So whatever I can only take back to our clients and go from there. I think where some of the conflict happens is we look at this as a town building, a town parking lot and your client is focused on entry to and from the bank. Correct. And we're looking at the rest and actually at our site visit there was evidence of homelessness on the side in the back of the bank to the point where there was actually a person living there. So when I look at the sides, it's great you're containing the light but it's also creating a very, very dark parking lot that affects safety. We read our bylaw and we're looking out for the safety of the public. There's also a new restaurant going in there. So there's gonna be people coming in in the dark in the evenings there and when I look at the photovoltaic it's just really dark. The other option is that the larger cars can't park in front to visit whether it be the bank or to go to the restaurant or whatever. So they're gonna try to, if they realize this, if they're a frequent bank customer and they keep coming there, they're gonna realize it's too tight for me to park there and they're gonna park on the outer edges of the parking lot. So maybe the bank does need to widen its thought on, as you were saying, your foot candles for the pathway right in front of their ATM but it really does have to maybe look at the whole building which maybe that does have to bring in discussion with the actual owner of the building because Bank of America is sort of getting trapped in the issue of the whole building. Chris? Is there a way that the bank and Adams-Ruckston could put the lights on the building and not have them out in the parking lot? That's definitely something we can bring back to the engineer who, from GMR, and ask them, because we have done that for other buildings. And just one other thought to that, going back to the last time you all came, you brought a light fixture, I think it's somewhere in here, it's fairly small. The pre-lights. And there's, you could have them more co-bred, you could have double head. So when you were running, re-running that photovoltaic study, I'm assuming you used the same light heads that you had originally proposed, but they could be changed. Or be mounted off the building. So anyways, that's as far as we'll engineer it, but does the members, anyone else have any other issues? Besides the fact, you know, it's really ugly too. But, you know, but that's extra points. Okay, so when would you all think you'd come back with? When is the next, how quickly? Yeah, Chris. So the planning board is meeting on October 2nd, and they're meeting on October 16th. October 2nd seems pretty soon. Maybe the 16th would be better. Yep, okay. That gives us time to have GMR revised drawings, look at different options of what they can do, get in touch with the landlord versus lighting more of the parking lot, versus just what they're looking at. So, yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Are you going to move to continue the public hearing to the 16th then? Someone want to mumble that? I'm going to make a motion to continue the public hearing. Until October 16th. Until October 16th, this project. Janet, thank you. All in favor, raise your hand. Unanimous until the 16th. Yes. Okay. So now we'll move to Southeast Street court housing if the representatives for that want to come forward and give us a second here to get organized. All right, so this, we will continue this. We're going to continue this public hearing that was started on July 24th, and continued to August 27th, and continues tonight. It's SPR 2019-07 and SPP 2019-04. Amir. Wow. Southeast Street. Oh, I haven't seen that before. Southeast Street court housing, 133 and 143 Southeast Street. Joint public hearing to request site plan review approval to construct a new three-story mixed use building with 62 apartments. 1,358 square feet of retail space and associated site improvements and work in the town right of way. Under section 3.325 of the zoning bylaw and request a special permit to modify the front and side setback requirements under footnote A of table three, section six of the zoning bylaw. B-VC zoning district map 15C parcels three and four. So thank you. Welcome back if you can all introduce yourself and thank you for your patience. These last couple of meetings, we've had really long meetings and I know you've been pushed back, bounced around and everything. So thank you. May I start to introduce myself? I'm Michael Liu with the Berkshire Design Group. I'm Amir Mikchi, the owner of the project. What a great architect. It's been a while, but I think I'm going to try to start with, I submitted this list of the changes to the plan. And I don't know if you want me to run through all of those or just maybe go through real quick and if you have questions on any of them. We did add wall packs on the building. There was concern about lighting that walk that's right in front of the building. I'll flip over to the photometric plan shortly. We did add, we could really only add one more parking space within this parking lot and that was, oops. Maybe it's this one. May I note that the list was contained in your packet for the 27th when you didn't hear testimony that night, but we asked you to hold onto your packet. So if you don't have the list, we can go make copies of it for you. Does anyone need the, is it the site management plan that we're looking at? No. It was just a summary to try to make things easier. I found it's single sheet. Yeah. It has 13 items on it. We have way too much paper with us. Yeah, there's always is too much paper. Oops, let me make a copy. I think Tim went to copy. I have it, do you guys want to share that? You guys can share. Okay. Okay, number one, I just talked about the wall packs and we'll look at the photometric plan shortly. Number two, there was comments about lack of parking. And obviously we're requesting a waiver, special permit for the parking, which is again, one space per unit, 62 units. And then we had the requirement was four spaces for the retail shop. So that would have made 66 spaces. Originally we had 67 spaces shown and we were able to add one space right here by making this island smaller. That's really the only place we could add any spaces within the back portion of this site. So there are 68 total spaces shown on the plan right now. We added bike racks or bike parking here at the front of the building. It seemed like a logical place because this was a major or one of the main entries from the street side. We moved the retail space. Previously the retail space was here in the center portion of this building that faces Southeast Street. It was moved down to this end. So the two retail spaces would be here, which will help facilitate a better loading and unloading sequence because the trucks can be able to pull in on the driveway and basically pull into this parking lot and unload versus potentially having to stop on Southeast Street and unload, which obviously we don't want to do. And if they pulled into the lot, it would have created more headaches to get goods out of the trucks and then walk them down the sidewalk and into the retail here. So we tried, Amir was agreeable and moved the retail there. That's the closest location to parking area. The walkways number five were all increased to be six feet wide within the town right of way. So this green space in the front. Again, number six, we have a revised lighting plan, which I'll flip to in a minute. We did submit trip generation numbers produced or prepared by our engineer in our office. We can talk about that if you want. It should be in your packet. Basically it says on a weekday period, 24 hour period, this project could be expected to generate around 466 total vehicle trips. On a weekday AM peak period, it's estimated that this project could generate 40 trips. In and out. And on a weekday PM peak, 42 trips in and out. Can I just ask a question to add on that? Yep. To put it in perspective, what is the vehicle trips per day on that road? I don't know the numbers on, you know, that's a good point. We should have checked with engineering here in town, but I can probably say that like route nine, which is the closest intersection, it's gotta be, I would imagine somewhere, you know, between 10 and 15,000 on that main road. Yeah, yeah. I know Southeast Street, you know, it's a pretty, a lot of people use it as a, maybe call it a shortcut if you will, to kind of move north, south on the east side of town. I mean, I do it, you know, I used to live in Echo Hill, and I kind of cut down this way to get to, you know, over the notch or even go to North Hampton sometimes, instead of driving on route nine. But Southeast Street's a pretty busy street in itself. We could check those numbers. You could, but we could probably conservatively be safe and say it could be four or 5,000 trips per day, and if this is gonna add 40. I'm just trying to get perspective on what that means. Yeah, I mean, I would think that would be a good number if we were pulling one out of a hat. It's, you know, 4,000, in a daytime period, I would imagine there's gotta be thousands of trips going, you know, up and down. Can I ask a question? Yeah. Go ahead. On the traffic report, on the first page, it says for the average daily traffic, the rate per dwelling is 6.6 vehicles per day. So that is each apartment, what does that mean? It's the last sentence of the first page. Oh yeah, okay. So does that mean that each unit will be going in and out of the apartment three times a day, or, you know, leaving and coming back six times? There's, during the, during that, let's see, this one says A and peak. So we're dealing with just the AM in one hour, one hour of the morning time at the peak traffic. That's what this paragraph is referring to. So there's, it's expected, this is what the I.T.E. manual tells us that this type of use will, or a apartment use, I think that's what we're talking about. Yeah, apartment will generate 6.65 vehicles per day. That's going in and out with, hold on, let me read this again, AM 20. So this is, oh, I apologize. I think what she's saying is correct. Yeah, that's for the entire day per dwelling. So every dwelling is expected to generate 6.65 trips in a 24-hour period. Three in and out, but it's a standard they get from their technical manual. So that's per dwelling unit? Yep, so if you multiply that by 62, you should get 200 and, well, is that right? But that's over the whole day. You should get 412 rounded up. And then on a, we're assuming it's a 50-50 split in and out, so there's the, on the back page, 206 going in, 206 going out every day. So are you assuming one person is going to be going in and out every day, or are there two people in the dwelling, and like, where does that come from? Because that seems like a lot of cars and people moving in and out. I'm not assuming it, it's what they tell us. I think that they're just going by a design book. It seems high to me, personally. It is, yeah. But better to over engineer than under. You'd be surprised. I mean, if you sit down and look at it, like somebody's gonna go to the store and then they're gonna come home and then they go, oh, I gotta run out to the post office. That's another two trips. So it's not unfathomable to think that somebody's gonna be in and out that many times in a day. But it's trying to capture an average for each unit. So some might go in and out seven times a day. And someone may have their car sit there for three days. And I will say that residential use is something that's not hard to study. There are a lot of case studies for residential use, whereas in some certain uses, like, I just throw out the new marijuana shops. We're having trouble generating numbers for those because there's no data yet for that type of thing. But for like a residence or residential use apartments, single family homes or whatever, there's lots of data out there, so. And it's set by this I.T.E., International Transportation Engineer? Yeah. I don't know what the I stands for, but it's for transportation. Maybe internationalists, or no, because it's Institute of Traffic Engineers. That's it. We say the acronym all the time, and you don't really think about it. Right. Any other questions on the traffic study or? Or traffic trip generation numbers? Yeah, right, the trip generation. Jack. Are the elevation views updated with those changes? The, you mean of the building? Yeah. Yes, yep, I'll flip to those too. Where were we? Okay, number eight, car charge station. It's hard to see on this plan, it's not shown, but we did add a car charge station here in this corner. What do you want? Oh, nine, did you do it? Yeah. Number nine, got it, got it. Number nine, we added, there was talk about seating, so we added permanent seats, two benches, and a trash receptacle in the circular plaza, which was also moved to be down outside the retail space. Number 10, we added a small yard space so people could come out and sit and or even grill something, maybe, but there's, granted there is not a lot of green space. We were envisioning that a lot of people would come out and potentially be using the plaza space at the residence as well as whoever might be using it from the unit association with the retail use. But again, the limited space on the site, this was the only corner in which we could add a small green space or usable space, so that would be a maintained lawn space. Could you give an estimate on the size of that area? It's probably, I'd say on average 15 feet wide by 60. How wide is the building? It's 60 plus, so maybe it's 65-ish in length. Number 11, we shifted this crosswalk here. I don't remember why we did it. I think it was shown originally to be a little bit closer to one of the bus stops, so we made it. I think it's equally distant between the bus stops. We revised the water connection. There was a comment from the DPW that we showed the water connection to the incorrect stub that's on Southeast Street. There was a couple of stubs coming in from the street that are in there. I think Mr. Migchi had one installed at one point for future development. And then the architectural plans have been revised, and I'll flip to the, I think that might be, oops. So the top is the view from the street. You can see where the awnings are shown that those are the retail. Could you use the clicker or the pointer? I think we have a pointer at all. Oh, sorry, I lost it, there we go. So these would be the retail spaces here. It's, again, total of 1,200 square feet. That's that main door at the northeast corner. This is the view from the other side. This should work. Looking east. Hold on. Yes, looking, yeah, looking east. And then these are the other elevations. The top one is basically looking south, as if you're standing at the Florence Bank Building, and then this is the opposite side on the bottom. There was a question about site distance, so I just went out and took some photos standing where the new driveway would be, and you can see looking south and north, there's almost, I can't use the word infinite, but the site distance is much more than 500 feet. So there's no real obstructions or anything at the southeast feet where the new driveway would be intersecting it. And then I just wanted to reinforce the idea. There was talk about the size of the building, and we have at Roy produced this cross section, which I have a slide of, but just in terms of the size of building, this would not be dissimilar to the Kendrick Place Building here on Triangles Street. And although this is a five-story building, and we have a three, it's still the tallest building in the area set in amongst a lot of other commercial type uses. That's the cross section there. You can see the, again, in relation to the Florence Bank Building, again, that's the short side of the building at Florence Bank, and then this is the proposed cross sectional view from Southeast Street. So it's about twice as long as the short side of the building, and not quite twice as tall. You know, it's a three-story building. Does that include the three-foot elevation or not? Is there, from the street? Did you, one more question? Is the building will be higher than the street? Is the relationship of the ground floor of the new building accurate to the Florence Bank? So it's even with the road pretty close. Yeah, I think so too. That's why you have to bring in the fill to fill in the public way. Because the houses that exist now are high, and then it dips low, and then it comes back up to the road. So that's... The rest of the landscape of that site is the wall. Yes. And the houses that are currently being added back to the road. Right, the existing houses that are there are actually on little mounds. So they're already elevated. So if we're putting this kind of large building in there, in place of those two, we're basically having to fill that to that level of where the existing houses are. That's part of the reason for the fill. Yeah, I think, oh, and this is just an aerial view. So that's the Florence Bank building. This is the site with the two houses. You can kind of see more or less in footprint that there's a lot of commercial buildings in this area that are, you know, sizing much larger than a single family home here. So the new building would basically stretch, you know, from this fence back here, down to this driveway, and then, you know, reaching back. It stretches out to about here. So the length of it is about the same length as the Florence Bank building? Yeah, yeah. It's not, it's not, you know, a lot bigger in terms of its footprint. I think that was it. There was, oh, the photometric I wanted to flip to. That was a revision, right? So this, this photometric was redone using the fixture you see there on the left. It is the town standard. We got this information kind of late from DPW, but it's a holophane fixture. So I contacted the company and one of their reps and we got this put together. It doesn't have the foot candle contours, but all the numbers, and I know you can't maybe not be able to read them that well, but if you look at the plan, the foot candle levels around at the property are at zero or point one. And around the property, there's really, there aren't any butters. It's conservation land. And obviously we have bright spots. Whoops. I just realized this is not easy to see from a distance, but there's four lights in the back parking lot. One here, one here, one in this island, and then one here. There are two, no, there's only one light here in this parking lot right there on the end. There's four lights now. We used to only have three lights in the right of way, but there's four now. And could you point those out? Yep, one here at the, well, actually, it was located here at the corner of the walk. I was trying to get him to move it down to here, but he said, no, you're getting a better lighting level on the walkways is what, you know, that's more important than lighting the entry road where you've got headlights working for you. So there's one light here, there's one right there near the crosswalk. There's one here at the bus stop. And then there's one more here as you move north. And I think that'll create a nice pattern or rhythm on the street. But there's adequate lighting here all along the sidewalk and in the front of the building. There's wall packs. We purposely mounted these at a 10 foot height. You know, get them above your head and to create, you know, like a line of a building. These are all downcast. And then there's two other wall packs at the rear doors, but these are just at eight. And, you know, like a more of a typical porch light height, you know, eight feet at the entry doors. And again, you know, there, obviously, there's quite a bit of lighting along the street and sidewalk. Cress. Sorry. So the latest lighting plan I have, and I've been out of town is this one here. And I don't have the one that Mr. Lou is showing. And I wondered if he had submitted it to us and I've just missed it or has he maybe not submitted it? I thought I sent that through, but I could be wrong. It's been this kind of like back and forth all the paperwork. I might not have sent it to the planning staff if you don't have it. Do you guys have it in your past? I can't, that's what I've been digging here. Oh, okay. I apologize then. I thought I sent it through. I know I sent it to you. Because I don't believe we have pictures of these wall lights either that you're talking about. I don't have a copies of those. They're just, they're very basic, you know. Two copies of these. Yeah, those are the previous ones we had, but the wall lights. The SL2 and the SL1, which one do you use? They're still labeled the same on this plan, but the SL1s and SL2s are this style, which is the town standard used at Triangle Street. And which one are you using, one or two? They're both the same. It's just a different light distribution if you will for the one versus two. But it's the same style fixture. Same style, different bulb, or spray. Spray, yeah. So your photovoltaic, which did you use, one or two? Well, this plan uses both. I can't read, see. I'm sorry. So like for instance, this one down here is an SL1 and this one's an SL2. The SL2 probably has a more boxy distribution for coverage, whereas these have a more linear type of distribution. And then I think let's see on the street, we have SL1s pretty much so that they're more elongated to light up the sidewalk. So here, I guess here we've got in the park back. Yeah, that makes sense. There's two SL2 fixtures in the center of the parking lot to kind of throw light in all directions, whereas the SL1s would throw light mostly linearly this way and forward. And where are the four in the back again? I'm sorry. There's four in the park. Okay, there's one in the island here, one in this island, one on the end here, and then one on right there. So there's none near your entrance lobby? Entrance lobby? Where they go in the building? Well, this is the main entrance from the parking lot side. So there's a wall pack there at the door. Just one wall pack. The other thing to remember is if you have to mentally overlay the landscaping plan, because you've got a heck of a lot of trees back there, which trees are great, but they block the light. And in fact, I did look at that, and obviously the trees don't show, but we adjusted some of the locations here. I think the only one that was a real conflict was this one, because we had a tree like right here and right here. I think I might have moved, let me go back. Well, you didn't have one near the crosswalk before. So my concern was the closest one was the self-bound bus stop. And you had, right, you can see there were two trees in between where the light was and the crosswalk. I think I ended up moving this tree because that might be the fixture right there, you see that? Yeah, there's one, there's one, and then this one's hidden amongst the line work, but there's another one back here. So this tree was in conflict. We could even slide that up to the north, but I think that there's plenty of space for both elements to be there. And then this one certainly makes sense, I think, at the crosswalk intersection. Oh yeah, for mid-block, yeah. Yeah, and then this one is not in conflict with any trees in that location. Well, actually you said if they were trying to place it just to the north of that walk, it's not putting much light in the driveway. It's, there's enough light. I think the parking in that area is lighted up to, and I'm gonna, I might refer back here, but if we can read these numbers in the driveway, does that say 1.2? So we're still having much more than the minimum required, the minimum standard for parking is generally half of the traffic. So there's over one in that area. Only my thing to remind you is it is the public way. So I know you're thinking parking lot, but I'm thinking public way sidewalk with two bus stops. I wonder if he could even mark up this plan. Cause this is not, so we don't have a current light plan or planting plan right now, which is why we're sort of suffering here. Yeah, I guess that was, you know, I just, I thought I had sent it through and I apologize for not that you don't have it, or that you haven't been able to see it before tonight. Do you? So I just, I had mentioned at the last meeting also that, you know, if you put your pedestrian hat on and you think about where people walk to and if they got off the northbound bus and then they're gonna cross over on the crosswalk and they wanna head to your front door and the lobby on the top corner, they're not gonna wanna backtrack and then go through your half circle patio. I had mentioned shoving that up back up 15 feet so that the center of the walkway matches the crosswalk. I know it doesn't perfectly align with your businesses and I don't know architecturally if that's still desirable, but for flow of pedestrians, it would just make a lot more sense. All right, well, one thing. So right now, if you were taking the northbound bus and you got off and you cross, yeah, and you're walking, you cross at the crosswalk and then you wanna head to the front door. People don't like to backtrack and then come back and then head back up to the door. If they slide that half circle patio up about 15 feet, then you cross and it also for a public way, I think it makes more of a continuity and flow that walk right into the patio, do you see? And then they bear right up into the front door. I think an easy thing to do would even take this section of walk and move it up here. You could, right. I mean, and that to me, I kind of like that because I prefer that the walk didn't kind of cut through the middle of the space. So the space is a little bit more usable and sacred, if you will, and you can have more, you can do more with it if the walk but flow wasn't cutting right through the middle. So if you're amenable to that idea, we could move this walkway up here and just kind of like have it come straight across. And that way this person could either continue up this walk to the door or enter into the retail area. Or enter into the door again. Well, I thought they can't go in the one on the bottom because that's our only door. This one here, Roy. Is that gonna be controlled? A resident's gonna be able to get in? So this is different than Chris and I what we talked about. So they can't, it's not just the two lobby entrances. They can also at any time go in the south door and the west door. So the same, it would be the same residents, that would be the same access for all the four doors, for the private doors. And these are whatever controlled by the retail tenant. That's good to know. But I still think coming across the crosswalk and flowing right in, because then they have the option, depending on where they live in the building to go left or go right. I don't think you too, that's a downtown thing. So it's us. Yeah, I don't know if you wanna have some time to look at this. Yeah, I'd need to see, I think we need a drawing that shows where the street lights are, where all the lights are and where the trees are, just to make sure that the light is where it needs to be. Yeah, and right now I'm a little concerned about the driveway, the amount. I can't read the numbers. What are the numbers right where the road meets the driveway? It's public way, but. Oops, so let me go through the thing. And do they run the photovoltaic with the trees? Like do they? No, they don't. That's what I thought. You also have to consider, I know that there's an existing street light here on this side, right across from the bus stop. And is there a light, do you know, near this existing bus stop? I don't think so. If you pull up your photos, we might see it in the line of sight. Yeah, that's true. Hold on. This mouse is driving me crazy. So this doesn't capture it, but the top photo, you can just see the end of the bus stop. So there's a light down further at the next driveway. What's that business? The oil, but that's pretty far down. Yeah, it's far down. Yeah, I don't think that's gonna spray to the. I don't know if you can see where the light, oh yeah, you can see the light on the bottom photo, the Cobra head on that pole behind the 50 mile, or 30 mile an hour speed limit sign. That's right across from where the new bus stop is proposed. The north, right, the southbound bus to the north, yeah. Yes, the southbound. But there's not one around this driveway area. Let's go back to the photometric if you want. Does the old head show? So if we start, well, I don't know if you want me to read these to you, but this is 1.2. Oh, where is it with the mouse? Right there. Okay, thank you. As you move across, this says 1.2. Again, 1.2, so 1.2, that whole line right here is 1.2. The top line, 1.7, 1.7, 1.8. And on the bottom here, we're at 0.7, 0.7, and 0.6 right there at the corner. But you have to really, I mean, I always have to say, you have to, these photometric plans are generated as if there's no other light in the world like you were in a vacuum. So there is residual light from other sources. But like you said, it's surrounded by a lot of conservation land. Yeah, in the back. My concern is it'll be fine in the winter if they're deciduous trees, but in the summer, that could be very little light. Well, we could easily, I think, move that light, I think, and get more light at the intersection. I think the plan we had, it actually was down next to the driveway. He thought it was, that was a better location. The lighting designer for Hall of Fame had it at that, moved it to this corner, because I think he felt that the pedestrian flow was more important. Again, I can't. We have to see where the other lights are. I'm glad there is one at the crosswalk, but I think you just said it's to the north of the crosswalk. It's, right. Nope, it's almost dead center right there. Which now we're gonna have a walkway, so it's gotta budge north or south, maybe if it goes south. I think it moves south a little bit, and then the other one, we move to the island, if you will, between the driveway and the east-west sidewalk. All right, well, if you can make those changes and then get us the lighting plan. I would just, in terms of the use of the driveway, think about bikes coming in at night, too, that they have to see, so, I mean, usually a bike light is very weak, so. Okay, yep, that's a good point. Any other questions on the public way and the light placement? I have one other question on the landscaping, we talk about plants. So, yeah, you'll look at the trees and where the lights are placed. You have, you know, bushes and stuff planted on the north side, but as you showed with this, most of the southerly light is blocked, and then there's a white fence, that's, I don't know, is that six feet tall, at least. So, you know, they look to be the same bushes that were being planted all over. Would you, they have to be low light, obviously. Yeah, yeah, I'm pretty sure we picked, well, we haven't touched those, you know, changed those, but those were chosen because they're shade-type plants. But, you know, I think that we added, we wanted to keep some greenery back there so that the residents aren't just looking out and seeing the fence, and the fence is set back about five feet onto the bank's property. So, there is a, it's not just a five foot strip, it's more like a 10 foot, eight to 10 foot strip of grass there, but still I think that some shrubs would be, you know, a welcome for the, especially the residents on the first floor. So, it was right, I want to see them thrive and survive, and I agree, looking out your window if you're on first floor, it's nice to see some greenery. So, it goes along the strip, and then when you got to that, we'll call it the backyard area, the 15 by 65. I noticed there's not any bushes along that part of the fence there, and that might be an area that does want some greenery. And I know as you're moving around trees and such, maybe it could stick a tree back there, so. I think we could, there's a pretty good tree line back there, and I know it's shown kind of, you know, you see this, this is the, more or less, approximately where the existing tree line is. So, there's, you know, there's woods back there, and not necessarily right next to the green space, or, you know, the lawn space. But you are gonna be refilling and re-grading, so whatever's there could be changed or not there. Add a couple of trees back there, if you'd like. We have to remember the lady who was here in July, who wanted to come out of her apartment in summer, so. And that's the only place you could put a chair in the sun yourself, you know what I'm saying? I think that was one of our board members was asking for an area that people could relax in the outdoors, I don't think it was so much about getting a tan, but, you know, it's a 15 by 65 foot area, I'm just saying you have these bushes along a, jam between a building and a fence that are gonna, I hope they really are shade loving, and I just happen to notice it ends at the end of the building, so all I was like, well maybe a few of those bushes could continue along the fence in that backyard area. We could add some more or, you know, take out a select, whatever, three or four moving here, if you'd like, we can add a flowering tree back there. What, I'm not, I'm, yeah. Maria. We'll enhance the area. So since we're on this landscaping against the building, it's kind of tied to the architecture, so I'm glad you're here. On the street side, the elevation you have there, I'm a little concerned about the first floor residents, and this has always been a case with a lot of our apartments that we have coming to town where they're on the first floor against the public side, and I'm just wondering if you had any thought about, you know, the elevations are very uniform from first to third floor, and it seems like on the first floor, I see there is landscaping there, in fact some of the, I can't see this because I'm old, but some of the species, I can't tell if they're gonna eventually help scream, you know, people looking in because your sidewalk looks like it's a link, like the width of the sidewalk from the building, is all the green space there is between, you know, where someone's walking by, and I imagine a lot of people be walking, there's 60 residents, and there's retail, so I'm just wondering if the first floor, you had any sort of idea for mitigating some of that privacy issue, whether it's with landscaping or architecture, but just, you know, thoughts about that. Two apartments, and then for the lobby, there's one apartment in the corner, the corner doesn't have any sidewalk directly in the corner, so that is okay, so what you say, I think it would be polite to do those apartments, I think that's a helpful thing. You could consider making the last somewhat of a school from the outside going in, I think, so that's a couple of the problems. Oh, God. So somewhere, somewhere in here. Right, I mean, I don't mean to like design here with you, I just wanted to know if you consider that, you know, because, yeah. Good point. Yeah, yeah. I don't think we're done with that much detail, everybody, but what point should you consider between that and the last? From the landscaping perspective, I mean, we do, you know, we, you see, you know, quite a few circles up there, so there are shrubs and some, a few ornamental grasses, but it's a five-foot strip and it's planted with shrubs. They're gonna need some maintenance, but if, you know, but these are, we've got things such as inkberry, it's an evergreen, the dafney, there's some dafney there, which is also an evergreen, but those can, you know, they're, I'm gonna say that they're known to be dense plants, so it's a pretty good buffer to keep people from kind of like walking up and, you know, kind of staring in their windows, if you will. So there's a kind of a landscaping buffer there to, you know, keep people from approaching the facade. And if there's anything that can be done, you know, with glazing or something, maybe, I don't know, to provide, you know, less transparency from the outside, maybe some, you know, glass treatment. Maria, you were talking about the inner court. And, right, the public way one, is that where you were talking about the glass? Sorry, yeah, mainly that one, but, you know, it's the same issue on the parking lot side, just not as many people, but, you know, just looking at the elevations, it looks like, you know, only the retail sort of differentiates itself, but then the first floor apartments, you know, have the same sill height as the upper story, so just something to consider, yeah. So what would be the ones here and the ones there? This one's all this, and this one doesn't have any side of the apartment. The one on the back, too. Yeah, and the ones in the back, too. The ones in the back, too. Right, the ones against the parking lot, right. What happened, same issue? Would the windows be higher, do you think, than the cars lights? Just wondering when the cars come in, this is an architect one. Oh, it just seems that, I'm just not gonna hazard that, you might be able to see inside, as it is, it doesn't seem that it's that particular in the case. I mean, they don't seem to be particularly raised, so it seems that people who park in the back, could actually look into it. So, you know, I don't think we'd be opposed to adding more plants on the parking lot side, either, to help with that aspect. Can I? Yeah, go ahead. I mean, I don't know if it's just a matter of plants, but maybe you could think about different kind of glazing, that is in two different sections, the lower part, that is maybe translucent, the upper part, because I don't think you want to completely make translucent first floor apartments, they'll be horrible, but I think there are ways that you could actually break it into something that is maybe more opaque or translucent in the bottom and then more transparent. So, I think that's probably what we're trying to help for. Then just landscape, because I don't think landscape enough will take care of this problem. Close to the parking lot, even in the back. So, another comment that goes to the elevations, that I would just like to talk about, because we've done that for other projects as well. This is a fairly substantial, I mean, this is a fairly substantial building, as you mentioned yourself, once it's built, it's gonna be pretty prominent. So, I just wonder if, as you are rethinking the elevations, you could also consider about somehow breaking down or articulating certain parts of the building so that you could give a rhythm to the building that is a little bit less homogeneous and can actually allow us to understand the building in smaller parts as well. So, this has been done in different places in town. I'm sure, good architect that you are, you could conceive of it, but it seems that it's too monotonous and too much in one piece as it is, and once it's gonna be built, it's gonna be very present. So, in the past, we have both gotten a lot of comments from the public, and also, we've been really attentive to this for every project that comes in front of us. So, this is my major comment about the elevations, I think, that I'd like you to consider. I don't understand them to be completely finished, so I think you still have time to. Some softening would be, I'm not an architect, so, it's a lot. Any other comments about any of the issues? Janet, do you have something? I have a big question about the parking, because it doesn't seem adequate, and the requirement is two spaces per unit, and only one is being provided, and the comment has come from Florence Bank that they're concerned that that parking isn't adequate and people will start using there a lot, especially in the winter. The public have mentioned that there's not enough parking, and it doesn't meet the bylaws requirement, and so I'm not sure why there is so little parking on the lot, and the only reason there's so little parking is because you want so many units, and the building is so big, so I don't really understand, and then one of the members of the public pointed out is there's no other place to park, and so it's not like you can put it into a neighborhood street or somewhere else, is that it seems very likely to me that one or two people will be living in the apartment, maybe more, if they had a child or something, and people will have visitors and parties, and there's just not enough parking, and it doesn't meet the bylaw, that's my, and then in terms of circulation on this design, I'm concerned that as trucks are unloading, people can't really drive in and out, and also people can't unload their groceries near the front, or if they're moving in, there's no place to put a, you know, any size truck to kind of, you know, unload near the front, and so there's not, there's just the poor movement here even with the very limited parking. This project was in the making as Christmas for a few years, and from the very beginning, that was the concern that we had about the parking, and they were encouraging us to basically consider this situation, and that's why I donated this bus station on that side of the road, and we talked to PVTA, and to basically, you know, the study had shown that the trend is that, you know, people usually don't have, they are using the ZIP card, they're not, you know, half-cards, and this is a small one-bedroom apartment, so that was the idea, that's why, you know, we put the bus station to basically, that was the idea, you know, contrary to what we have in the center of town, that there is no parking to begin with for those two giant buildings. Here we have a parking, and as Chris knows, we went back and forth, and the idea was that, you know, it should be accommodating, it should be okay, we thought about it, and I think it would be okay. And also, we increased, I believe, two feet. The driveways has been widened to feet extra so that it would create better room for the truck. Go ahead, Jack. Okay, I was wondering with regard to the lease agreement, is it something that would be possible to where you are keeping track of the vehicles, say, you know, license plates, whatever, but you're extending the permission through the lease agreement to the tenant with regard to a car or two or none sort of thing, just so you know what you're dealing with there. But I don't know, I'm not an expert on lease agreements, but I didn't see anything about vehicles in that. We would have that in the lease, that the tenant would have one parking space, and so the tenant would know if they would be comfortable with that or not. So the tenant that would be leasing this place, would rent in this place, would know that, you know, if there are the type of people that are gonna be having more car, obviously this is not the place for them. Just one question, would it tell them if they have guests or overnight guests? No, no, that they are gonna have one parking. So it's not gonna be like a puffed-in village where it's unlimited so that there is, you know, one parking space. And if they are comfortable with that, that would be, you know, so it would be in the lease, that you know. I'm asking if they, where do you tell them where they can have guests? If they have someone come visit them, where can they park? We have a few extra parking. Well, there's five extra spaces, not for, but you know, whether, how often they're gonna be. Can I just clarify and remind that four of them are handicapped? So only handicapped people can park there. So just take four off the, just when you're talking about that. Unless you have a lot of handicapped people moving in, they're not gonna be really utilized and guests can't use them. But I, are you, I don't know which one of you, I don't know. I would just wanna bring up, Chris sent an email that kind of addressed us that, you know, maybe you should go over the parking management plan. She was saying, your management plan doesn't have a parking management plan, which would basically address everything that was brought up, which is, you know, car and van pulling, bicycling, public transit. Just a documentation of how you're reducing vehicle trips or what the, you know, sort of projections and what the actual, you know, utilization ends up being so that we can kind of know that you're, you're managing this aspect because it is a concern. You're definitely below what's required. So it's just something at just the sort of, maybe include in your management plan. And I just think to, to this point that you raised, I agree that for a project that is this large, you need to figure somehow, some sort of a visitor parking or guest parking, because it's very difficult. Like I can imagine that some people might have a car and eventually also have a guest or a visitor. So I don't know how you're gonna pull that off, but maybe that means that some units don't have any parking spot, but I think you have, and I don't know exactly what the minimum number is, but I think that you need to factor in some guest or visitor parking, because otherwise it would be untenable. So my concern is that we can't waive the two car parking requirement without it meeting the criteria in the bylaw for a waiver. And so under section 7.9, it talks about waiving the parking requirements. So you have to meet one of these exemptions. And so if there is a parking management plan, it has to be sufficient to reduce the need. And so I just don't know how with 62 units, two people living there, they each need a car, they have a party, they have guests coming. I don't know how you get, I mean, we're not living in New York City where you can just jump on a subway or take a bus everywhere. I don't know where a parking management plan is that people are gonna be carpooling to the same workplace and back. It has to be a realistic one, not just an idea one. It is realistic because I hope Chris can inject his, the meeting that we had, he actually came to the planning board with, and somebody was suggesting that you know, forgive that parking, there was a gentleman that you know that, but we did came, the reason we developed this building with the 62 unit was because this is how we went back and forth with the town that basically, to make sure that how many spaces we can have. And that's what we were told that that's why we donated the time when this project goes to the time when the South East Street was being paved. That's why we put the infrastructure. That's why I donated the land for the bus stop and I talked to Jason, so this has been, it's not something that we just came with the 62 unit. The 62 unit were based on that projection and what we were told. Chris. Mr. Michi did come to the planning board and I think it was in June of 2018. The building though had fewer units in it at that time. I think it had 47 units. 47 we think. I don't remember what the distribution of bedrooms was but there were fewer units in the building so I just wanted to mention that. We do often talk to developers about trying to explain why they need fewer parking spaces and I think Mr. Roblesky last time gave you a pretty good rendition of why he needed fewer parking spaces. He had an example of a building that was right next door to where he was developing his new building and he gave you numbers that showed that people in his existing building didn't all have cars. And so, and you've already heard from Ron LaBertie or with regard to that, that many of his tenants don't have cars or they only have one car. So I think the point is that you're looking for some hard information written down from Mr. Michi explaining exactly why it's appropriate for him to have fewer parking spaces here and that would include there's bus service there and he should talk about does the bus service serve the property all year long or is it just seasonal bus service? He's got bicycle parking. Well, how many bicycle parking spaces does he have and is he planning to provide any covered spaces so perhaps the bicycles could be used in the winter? Is there any parking for bicycles inside? That's something that the developers in the downtown area have been providing and it seems to be satisfying the needs of their tenants and that type of thing is gonna be helpful for the planning board to understand. And if he can do any sort of survey of developments around town to find out how many people do have cars, how many people don't, I think UMass has some data that shows that many of their tenants don't have cars but you want some hard information to help you to understand why 62 parking spaces or 68 parking spaces is gonna work here not just kind of off the top of someone's head. So I think it's a question of writing it down, writing down the parking management plan and Ms. McGowan gave good guidelines because there is a section of the zoning bylaw that kind of spells out what that parking management plan should be. I think, well said Chris and I think they're all trying to just say they wanna see that you have thought this out. You're asking for half of the spaces that are required. So where are those, that half of cars or those people who are living there and how are they? So it could be, you know, supplemental lot. Like how you're gonna tell your tenants you can't just say there's no guest parking because they're gonna go park somewhere else and then you're gonna be blamed for cars that are parked in places they shouldn't be. The idea was that, you know, we were encouraged that that was the thing that, you know, they said that the trend is that people don't have cars they're using Uber and they're using other things. So that is the, and that was the idea. That is the idea. So let me just give you like an intention. So when I look at this building and I, again, we go to pedestrian put our pedestrian hats on and we walk. If you're parked on the outer parts of this how do you get in the building? Let's say you're parked in that, in that, it like, you know, nine o'clock in that strip. How are you, you get out of your car and how are you going into the building? Well, just if you take the clicker and just so the far, the far western side of the parking lot, anyway, right there, great. You're parked right there. How do you get, walk into the building? Show me what the, you can go here? No, no, no, but how did you get there? If the lot is full with cars, there's nowhere to walk on a sidewalk and enter your building. Look, that there's no, you've got dumpsters, then you have curbing and you have a tree there. People shouldn't have to be walking through the mulch under a tree. If all those spots are full at seven o'clock at night, there's no, how are they gonna walk in? So where you'd normally have a place, a drop-off spot, you've got a bike rack, you've got a tree, which I assume doesn't just grow out of the sidewalk, it's got a four, nope, where your lobby is, where your main door into this establishment. No, not that one, that's where everyone, right there. So there's no drop-off area. If you want to incur a shared ride, say, right? These people are gonna be going out, they don't need a car, they're gonna take Uber, right? Where is the Uber dropping them off safely to get into the building? There's no drop-off spot and I know what the pinch has been. You've been trying to jam as many parking spots in as possible, but to the point, you've lost the cohesive flow of how people are even gonna get into your building and there's a welcoming space. The only way to walk in is you've literally left the handicapped loading zone is your entrance to your building. That's not an entrance. And then your center, where you do have a space, you have a bike rack jammed in there and trees and bushes. This is not a pedestrian-friendly building. Do you follow what I'm saying? And then when you've got the first row at the top, they're all compact cars. I'll tell you, I got a lady handbag that's so big. I can't squeeze between two compact cars. So how are they gonna get in? So you've sort of lost in this fight, I get it. We used to have 47 units, now we have 62. But with that, you have 128 spots you're supposed to have. We don't see a true intention of making it pedestrian-friendly. But the 62, the event back and forth, it wasn't just, you know, I don't know who told you this, but it wasn't us. Okay, but the idea was that, you know, how many parking spaces do those buildings have in the town? Apples and oranges. So that's a good question. So it's a no parking zone, and as of May of this year, over 175 parking permits were asked for by people in those buildings. That wasn't even to June. And so, I mean, I like the idea that no parking zone in sort of a fantasy, but it hasn't worked in Boston. It's not working downtown. And so I think the thing is is that I understand you've had conversations and things like that, but this building's gonna be here for 100 years. And people, you know, maybe we hit a point in time where I could get on a bus and go to the big Y and come back with my four bags, and it'll be convenient or that people don't, you know, would somehow bike through a New England winter. But it's, you know, like this isn't Manhattan. This is, you know, a village center in a town that is mostly people get around by cars. And so I think that, you know, as a member of the planning board, I'm looking at this building thinking there's a lot of units and there's not enough parking and people aren't gonna be able to, you know, they just, they won't have space to park. And then if they have guests or a party and 10 people come over, there's no, and you know, when Florence Banks said that, you know it's gonna go into their parking lot, you know, and, you know, that's just how humans behave. So I think that, you know, to me, there's just too many units and not enough parking. And so to, you know, if you added 20 extra units and then there's, you know, it's just not, I don't know how you're gonna find parking spaces when they're just aren't enough. But these units were not, you know, arbitrary. We had the consultation, we went through this, and you know, we can reduce the number of the unit and increase the size of the unit. That is, you know, we can do that. But it wasn't just arbitrary, it wasn't just, of course, you know, there is economics behind it. You know, as a landlord, you know, I would like to have more unit to basically make this cost benefit with the project that costs millions of dollars. But at the same time, this number, this 62 unit, wasn't just arbitrary to just, you know, come up with 62 and jam it, you know, as much as possible. Even though that was, you know, we were trying to take, you know, advantage to be the most efficient as far as the land use was concerned. But we had consultation. But if that is, if you think, and whatever works is in my benefit as well. So it is not, I don't take it as your comment as adversarial, you know, comment. I understand it. And, you know, the, even, you know, I ask Mike, if it was possible to have more, seven more parking space by the wall. And that was- I don't say that again. On that curved portion of the driveway. Okay. And- Where is it? Here. But we were thinking about having no parking here. And then we were suggested that, no, let's not do it. So, but I wish that, you know, there was better communication from those people who we seeked, you know, the advisement that, you know, we went through a lot of, and you know, every little changes caused so much from all anger. I wish there was, you know, better communication for next project because this is the phase one. I'm gonna have the across the street. And I don't want to say, oh, and even in our meeting, we had a two hours meeting here in that room that, you know, I talked to the building inspector and said, how about I cross the street? That, you know, we would be having, you know, another development there and we would have a joint, you know, thing and he said, no, let's concentrate on this, you know, on this side. And we would just, you know, concentrate to make sure that parking lot would be adequate. And we were told that, you know, even though the bylaw is two to one for each unit, one would be okay and planning would have no problem. That's why we came here. And if there was that, you know, better communicated to us, obviously I would have had designed it that way. So, but we are not a stock, you know, it's not too late. We can do whatever it's necessary to make it work. And if it basically means that, you know, to reduce the number of the unit and make the unit a little bit, you know, bigger, so be it, that would be it, you know. But it was an arbitrary, it wasn't just, you know. We don't think that and we hear you and we understand the economics and it's a balance. It's a compromise. You're trying to balance how big of a building you can build and yet meet all the requirements and be realistic about parking. And it's not arbitrary, but what we're saying is you're cutting the parking in half and so what is being done to supplement or encourage or fix that way. So when you talk about downtown, one of those buildings has a zip car in it. They have parking, bike parking inside their building so that it's year round shelter. They have shared ride drop offs that are very clear and easy. So there are things that if you want to have that reduced parking, you have to show in your drawing that that is there. There is no drop off area right now. You know, it's not pedestrian friendly. So you need to go back and look at those things and right, I don't know, maybe a few, maybe the building does have to shrink a little. I don't know, but you have to try to work with your designers and see how you can show that you're addressing and encouraging your tenants to take alternative modes of transportation. Sure, people, they certainly use those alternative that are being used in the other building. But as I said, I wish it was because we had not numerous but good number of back and forth. But this plan, this building was developed by the consulting, the town. So, but definitely we would come up with a better management plan and see whether it is a matter of having a zip card there, having the inside bike. Drop off areas. And just remember, four of the spots are handicapped. So it's kind of a lucy area to cover. And realistically, you do have to put in some for guest spots. I mean, it's just, we're just trying to play with reality here too. We don't want this to end up being a problem. Then it's all of our problems. There's no value point. We have a couple of letters from Jason Schiele. It doesn't really speak to the parking. So I don't, you know, I understand. We weren't a part of that, but I think the town is pretty helpful in terms of guidance. So I, but I don't see feedback from them speaking to your parking and any letters that we have or any communications. Jason doesn't deal with the parking. What happened was that in the course of developing this, we were told that, you know, if you would have a bus stop, that basically would be convincing as a part of the parking management. So that's why, you know, when they were building, when they were paving southeast, Jason came to me and said, Amir, are you willing to donate the land? And that's what I donated the land across the street so that, you know, we would have that. So that's what I was saying that, you know, I think we could have a better guidance, you know. We have a better suggestion. But for sure, we are here and I understand that and that you are here to basically making sure that we have a building that is reviving that is not problematic. And especially that we will have another development across the street. So I appreciate your point. And I would definitely try to address that. Cress, I think it's mainly a question of describing how it is you're gonna manage your parking. If you are going to have 68 parking spaces and you think it's adequate, then how are you going to enforce? How are you going to make sure that only your tenants are parking here? How are you gonna make sure that your tenants aren't parking on other people's property? Are you gonna have parking placards? Are you gonna have stickers? You need to connect your lease to your parking plan. You need to describe to the planning board the fact that you are on a bus route, you are providing bicycle parking. So it's part of a narrative. And you may need some help. Perhaps Mr. Liu could list some people in his firm to put together a narrative about how you're going to manage your parking. It is possible to do this. And it is probably possible to convince the planning board that you know what you're doing and you're going to follow through on it. But we have to have something in writing. It can't just all be conversation. And I would start with the, and then your next part. I would start with the redesign to fix something. Make it pedestrian friendly, drop off space, rethink maybe where you have the trees. Start with that and then you have to see if you can fit your 68 spots in there. And maybe you can. I mean, this is more than us. It's just we're asking for certain things to be there. But so if you're coming back with a lighting plan, you're coming back with a landscaping plan, we would like to see a parking management plan. And yeah, and then up. And so these are the expectations we have for coming back. And then I think Pahri's next with question. And then you're on that part. It's good. You said all the things that I wanted to say. Excellent. Okay. Just trying to get deliverables, but go ahead. So I just, I just want to reiterate is that I just, you know, we have the bylaw, it has a requirement. It's based on, you know, we have six trips a day for each unit. It's because people use cars. And so, you know, I know your target audience is sort of millennials in their 20s, but people become 30 and they have children. And we don't know how this building is going to be used. And, you know, we don't know who your tenants are. We don't know who your tenants will be in 10 or 15 or 20 years. But we know if we don't have enough parking, that's going to be a problem that goes forward. And so, and we don't have a grade bus system here. You know, and he's like, if everybody worked at UMass and got on the bus and came back, but most people I know who work at UMass even down off of route nine drive in. And so I don't need just a plan. I need a realistic plan with information that shows that people don't, you know, a couple only has one car, you know, in this area. Buses would come every 20 minutes. The same bus that goes through Colonial Village, that's the same bus route that basically comes every 20 minutes during the school. Yeah. So just to note to make sure you check summer schedules too, because that same bus goes by my house and it could be an hour in the summer. Just, this is what you have to have, you know, research. No, I did talk to PBTA. This is, you know, yeah, it is the same route. And they were very happy that, you know, they would have this extra stuff. Chris? I just wanted to make one more suggestion. It could be that some of these units don't have any parking. That there's no parking attached to that particular unit and that frees up parking spaces for guests or whatever else might be needed. So it could be that there are people out there who don't need parking spaces. I've seen evidence of that in other projects. And that may be a choice that Mr. Rikchi makes with regard to some of these units. Yeah, that sounds very reasonable, because then in that case, we could say we have, let's say, 60 parking, 60 units can have one parking. And then we have X number of visitor, X number of handicap, and then a much better layout for the parking lot. I think that makes more sense than trying to force and match each unit and pretend that they have a parking, but that the space is really untenable. Yes, I appreciate that. And please, I really appreciate your advice, you know. So if I, I hope I didn't get emotional, but if I did, I didn't mean to get upset. It was just, so I appreciate your points. Well taken, it's very valid. And sure, we try to look into it more. We were more busy with trying to get the three resolved. And then, you know, get this done because to not lose the winter. So sure, now that I have more time, we would spend more time to come up with the parking management to make sure it is realistic and it is trouble free. That's good. I just wanna say, does the board have any more questions? I was gonna open up to the public just in case they have any questions on this. Okay, does the public have any questions I'd like to ask on these? Okay, it looks good. So, oh, there is one. So if one of you can switch out, maybe Mike wanna, and then just say your name and if you're an Amherst resident. Thank you. My name is Mark Cavanaugh. I'm with Florence Bank, actually the one who sent the letter in and spoke with Chris a few weeks back. So thank you very much, number one, for addressing the parking issue or working to address the parking issue. As you can see on the letter, there was three concerns we had. Again, the main thing to take away is that we're actually very much in favor of this project, so that's not the issue. It's just a matter of how we're gonna design it so it doesn't have any, and we mitigate any impact it has on everybody around us. So the second question or one of the other three items was the setback that we're looking at between the north side of the building and the proper line. I believe it was five at one point, now it might be six and a half feet. I'm not exactly sure what's on the print right at the moment. Oh, it's five for the setback. Yeah, on the sides, yeah. The last time there was testimony, it was six feet, four inches, or six point four feet or something like that on the north side. Right, I'm sorry, it is six feet and a half. Really, it's five on the street side. Thank you for. It's five on the street side. I'm sorry, I just read that. I can verify, but right now we're showing six on both. That's what I think it is. Yeah, yeah. But not like six point four, so I think there's a flat number. No, it was six point two before, and it was just because the building slightly changed by a couple of inches in one direction, but we didn't shift the building, for instance, it just stayed the same, but the width or something. I think there was some minor changes of inches. But right now we think six on front, six on north. I'm reading six, yep. Okay, thanks. So the concern was, I believe the setback is 10, and then I was just thinking logistically, how are they gonna actually build a three story building six feet off a property line without just to put up a ladder or whatever, it goes out more than six feet. So since that issue had not yet been addressed, I just wanted to make everyone aware that we're concerned how that's actually gonna happen. And they will have to submit a construction plan, and some of that gets addressed in that. And if you have any other questions, say them, it looks like the owner is willing to come back up and answer some of that. Okay, so Rukic, those were the only two questions. The third comment was with regards to the drainage, but they responded that the town checks the drainage out, or I think that's what the comment was, and what the response was. So again, just wanted to reiterate, we're 100% in favor of the project in and of itself. Just wanna make sure it fits in as best as possible. And concerns about construction. And concerns about those two things that brought up. To your property line, and the fence, which, because it's your fence. Right, I'm not really worried about the fence. I mean, there's only six feet to actually build a three-story building. I was just, in my mind, that seems extremely tight. But again, we're not in Manhattan, like somebody said. You wanna ask that, okay. In terms of the setback, it's six feet forever. Once the building goes in, would you like to see it at 10 feet going on? Just in terms of the use of your lot or building. What's your primary, is that another concern? No, it's just, it's the concern of the, how overwhelmed the construction period is. And the impact of all the equipment that's gonna take to build a three-story building in a reasonably tight lot. And not being able to do it within six feet. I mean, staging it in and of itself is four feet. It doesn't actually touch the building when you put it up. So, there's just certain dimensions that the average contractor may need to actually build a building that's at that large. Just wanted to, just wanted to bring it up, that's all. No, don't have any other concern about, the fact that it's a three-story building overlooking our lot, it's a business, it doesn't really. It's not like I had a house, a single-story house, I might have a problem, but. Yeah, that's it. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Michi. The general contractor for this project is Solumi Contract. And they're putting something together to submit to the Florence Saving about how they wanna stage and about the fence, about everything. So, that's what they're doing. So, that will be addressed as the construction plan and controls? Yes. And just, we're a country living here, but in the city, they build 30-story buildings within a butter right there. So, it's can be done, they just have to know what they're doing. Submitting everything. Great. Thanks. Any other public questions? Okay. Does the board have any more questions? And, Chris, did we forget anything? So, there's gonna be a lighting plan and a landscaping plan and a parking plan, parking management plan. And you're gonna look into the glass, some of the architectural issues of that first floor. I did, yeah, thank you. Just about the, in the town right of way, there needs to be town and owner language about defining the maintenance and repair of that area. Jason wanted, he said they have so much in their head, so I accepted to take care of it. Well, I don't know if you're looking for a written document. Well, it might come from the town, but it would have to be agreed upon with you, especially if this is a condition, right? Chris, defining what is maintenance of this public space and what that would include and delineation of the area, and then also repair. I mean, you have a lovely patio or street furniture, that has to sort of be ironed out, who replacement or how long or if there's a pothole in the patio, who's gotta fix it, right? Yeah. So does, yeah, Chris. So I think there's a list of conditions, possible conditions floating around. I think the planning board has a copy and perhaps we should give copies to you all if you don't have them already. And one of the conditions is that the applicant would be expected to maintain that right of way from the curb line back to his property line. And it would be the expectation that that would be part of the work of the applicant through the life of the building. So whether it's Mr. McChie or whether it's a new owner, they would be responsible until that building is no longer there and something else goes in and then we'll figure it out in the future. This project for the work in the town right of way is going to go before the town council. The town council will have to approve it. And so they I'm sure will be putting some language on when they grant Mr. McChie the ability to do the work saying, how are you going to maintain it? And we've suggested that he come up with a maintenance plan. Actually that was a suggestion of the town engineer and I think it was in the town engineer's most recent letter that he would like to have a maintenance plan in writing, describing how that property is going to be maintained. So there's another one. And I think that's all you have to bring to us now. There'll be other things when you want to get your building permit that will be due, but do we want to see a new lease agreement with parking in it? That would be part of the parking management anyway. It could be, they're tied together, right? But that would put the verbiage of how you're actually communicating to your tenants. Anything else that we're adding on this list, Janet? This is also from a public comment made this summer about the lack of recreational space and that's one of the requirements for the special permit, there'd be adequate recreational space. And so because the building is big and takes up a lot and there's, I just kept on looking at that strip of land thinking, is that enough for people to put some chairs out or barbecue in 60, maybe 90 people living there. It seems kind of a tight fit. And I just wanted to, it's been on my mind. I know there's that public space up front. I just find it really hard to imagine that people are gonna hang out there. I mean, if it's a coffee shop, yeah, but what if it's not or, I don't know if people are gonna say, oh, invite their friends over and hang out on Southeast Street. It's hard for me to see. And so I wondered, is there some way of getting more space or making it more bigger and a little more something? Again, when you're reconfiguring, I'm looking at that backyard area. Yeah, North Square had some spots put together. There was something that, while you were in one of the meeting, correct me if I'm wrong, that you asked that, I could, we could ask for the zero setback for the street front. Yeah, I don't know. Was it one of the? No. Not the back side, but the front side on the street side. That we could have zero setback or less than five feet setback. Am I right? Chris. Initially, when Mr. Ricci came and spoke with us, he was proposing a zero setback in the front. And then he pulled the building back. So that would be up to him and his designer to decide what they wanna ask for. With meaning? Yeah. So would there be 30 feet in front and not 35? Is that right? If you have zero setback. No, no, no, not going to the drive right away. Basically, there is a six feet from the border line. And if you make it to zero, basically we are gonna have more land for the parking and more land for the, that's what I mean. Are you open to that? Would you still have the landscaping in front of the building? Yes, of course. Are we, sorry. Right now, the front of the building gets pushed back six. They're saying, what if they bring it back up to the property line? That gives them another six feet in the back to play with as you're reconsidering. Chris, I wasn't part of these beginning discussions they had. I mean, to me, whether it's zero or six, was there a town right of way issue with this or? I think, no, there wasn't a town right of way issue. I think what we would be concerned about is that they are able to build the building on their property. And then we don't want any of their building, the footings or anything in the town right of way. And we want the building to be completely contained on the private property. And if they can do that with the zero setback, that's probably okay. And I also think that for a building of this size, having zero setback and immediately starting at the property line. Say that again, Pari, a little longer. I just think that maybe for a building of that size, to have it at zero setback and have it immediately next to the road might become like almost too much. So I don't know, I mean, maybe there's a middle ground to be reached, but I just feel that the zero setback visually in terms of the presence of the building on the street is just. I just, may I just say something? I think there's a little confusion here about what the zero setback means. And the property line, just for those of you who haven't participated in the previous discussions, the property line is actually set back a fair distance from the edge of the road. And perhaps Mr. Liu could show on this plan where the actual property line is and note the fact that the town actually owns that whole area in front of the building, between the front of the building and the street, the town owns that. And Mr. McChie is proposing to build within that area. And so now he's talking about just lessening the setback from where his building now is moving at six feet closer to the street rather than moving it right up to the edge of the sidewalk. Does that make sense? So I think you just have to consider, I don't know, maybe it does have to be a foot back or something. I remember with Spring Street, they had, if you have an overhang over your lobby door, they had, oops, are any of these architectural like window sills or whatever, I don't, you know, like what Chris was saying, it all has to be on your property. I'm aware of the condition that the footing should not be on the right of way. So we have that, you know, that's why we put six, but I'm asking that, you know, if we could make something better, are you, is it okay if you make the setback, having the no intrusion to the right of way and having the hang of, you know, any of these, you know, right on my property if you are gonna be open to that, that's what I mean. So we were looking to it. I think so. Yeah, I. Okay, thank you so much. So when do you think, I just wanted to note that the awnings over the retail space should be on the private property also, yeah. Yeah. The door openings and such. I mean, we have that downtown because we have buildings right on the zero. So there is some, yeah. So when could they come back or how much time do you need, Mr. Michi? This next meeting would be. October 2nd would be your choice. No, okay. You don't want to do the overtime, Mike. That's would be fine. I can talk to Peter and see if we can do something. So October 2nd, please. All right, we will set it for October 2nd, but let us or let Chris Bester up now if this is not gonna work and you need the 16th and we'll reschedule you for that. So at this point, I would need a motion of someone saying we're continuing this public hearing to October 2nd. My first motion. I'd like to make a motion to continue this hearing to October 2nd at 7 0 5. Is that good? 7. I'll second that. Excellent. All right, any discussion? Okay, all in favor, raise your hand, and that's unanimous. So hopefully we'll see you on the second. If not, we'll see you on the 16th. Thank you so much. Thanks for all the comments. So we should hold on to all this paperwork again. I ask Mr. Liu to make sure that we get the latest lighting plan and all that. The next iteration. With the reiterate, yeah. Yeah, landscaping, lighting, and yeah, and then parking and lease and that's the homework. Okay, great. So people are, are you here for something specific? I just wanna make sure you don't get forgotten. Great, welcome. All right, so we will move now to item four, planning and zoning, item A, zoning subcommittee report. Y'all, you got, I didn't meet, but are we, are there any discussion about what's happening with that since we've lost a member and. I think that the zoning subcommittee needs a new member, and we'll probably look to the board members to volunteer to be on the zoning subcommittee. Looks like Ms. McGowan is raising her hand. That would be great. At the same time, is the Amherst Municipal Affordable Housing Trust also empty? We have vacant on our list on the back. I was just wondering if we were. Yes, and I, I should check on that. Okay. Just making sure, great if we fill the slot, want to just, so great, Janet, so you'd be up for joining the zoning subcommittee. Yes. Okay, that would be great. And yes. When you get around to last, well, no, to the reorganization, the next item on your agenda, and you would nominate and elect Janet to be on that subcommittee, right? Yep. Item five, I guess. And once the next time there, they'll probably meet, will that be October 2nd? Okay, no public comment. So let's move to item five, election of officers and planning board reorganization. So, which, do we start from, do we start at chair and move to clerk, or, okay. So, someone want to be chair. I nominate Christine Gray Mullen to be the chair. Okay. Do I have to vote? Okay. So, oh yeah, I have to say that. Okay, so any discussion, oh, discussion. Any, so all in favor, raise your hand. Okay, unanimous. So now, to join the fund, we need a vice chair, someone to replace me, and I would like to nominate Jack Gempsick. Groovy? But you guys have to vote. All right, does someone want to say second? Second, yes. Any discussion? All right, raise your hand, all in favor. Say, yeah, wave your hand. We have unanimous, great. And to complete the trifecta, we need a clerk. Gee, Maria, would you be up for being the clerk? I would. Does someone want to second my suggestion? Oh, look at, everybody wants to second. Any discussion? Everybody. I just saw a hand shoot up. So all in favor, raise your hand. And again, unanimous. So we also need to have our new member voted in on the zoning subcommittee. So we'll all nominate Janet McGowan to be on the zoning subcommittee, which he accepts. And second, by Jack. Any discussion? No. All in favor, please. Hands up. Great, unanimous. Wow, that was fairly painless. Thank you, everyone. Fun together. All right. May I just note that you did previously nominate and elect Jack to be the representative to Pioneer Valley Planning Commission. And then you did have a vote on that. And then you nominated Christine Graham Mullen to be the alternative. But I don't know if anybody ever followed through on that. Did the town council ever get in touch with you and say that you actually are the alternate member? We voted, but is it a town manager thing? Maybe it's a town manager thing. I think it was the town manager. And did he actually give you any paperwork so we need to follow up on that? Because Pioneer Valley Planning Commission, their attitude is we are the members until they hear differently. Yes. So we're just sort of continuing, but if the town wants to make it official, then yes, the town manager needs to do something. So I think the town manager's on a roll now, and he's getting into his appointment. So I'm gonna follow up on that with him. And Michael Burtwistle, are you going to, we've already agreed that he would like to be the Community Preservation Act Committee person. Do you want to re-nominate him for that and elect him? Just run through the whole roster of things that you normally do and make sure that you've got everybody all set. Okay, so should I nominate Michael is the CPAC person and then anyone wanna second that? Pahri, thank you. Any discussion? Okay, all in favor? Hands up, that looks unanimous. And Agricultural Commission, Pahri, so do we need to re-do these? Yeah. You don't need to re-nominate Pahri, you already nominated her in December and I've forwarded that information to the town manager. I think he's planning to act on that soon because he just contacted me about that. He's still waiting? And I just, because Mr. Zomick was, I actually attended an Act Commission meeting in July and Mr. Zomick said that he didn't think that I needed any form of approval. So he said to check back with you anyhow. Back at you. I've heard it both ways and today the town manager asked me about who was the AgCom rep. So I told him you had been nominated. Yes, and I've already attended meetings. Lim, you have attended meetings and I'm hoping that you will do something. But we don't need to do anything right now. Good. And Design Review Board, is Michael up to? Okay, sure. So I'll nominate Michael for Design Review Board. Pahri, seconds, any discussion? All in favor? Unanimous, okay. So the Amherst Municipal Housing Trust, this was Greg, is that what it was? Yeah, so yeah. I don't really know what they do. So I think I've gotten them confused with the different housing committees of that. They've taken over from all the previous housing committees including housing and sheltering and all the other committees that have been there in the past. And they handle really all of the issues related to housing that the town gets involved in. Is John Hornick the chair? John Hornick is the chair. Oh, I'm just looking at the list here. So not trying to put extra pressure on certain people but I do see some people's names on there twice. If no one's bought, do you want to do it? How many meetings a month? I don't know, I can find out. You can put it off till next time if you want. And then on the next one, well, okay. Because we usually do have that. I'm a little bit interested but I think there's a bandwidth issue for me. And we could have two people. I mean, you know, a few people want to go. So why don't we get the information of when they're meeting or whatever and then, and actually I'll even ask Greg, what did entail? And then the next meeting we can move on that. Is that all right, Chris, cause all right. Zoning subcommittee, we now have three members which is fantastic and I will try to attend more often. And downtown parking working group, I don't think you need to, we're hoping, we're trying to die, but you know, it's been a long, ugly death. And there'll be a new parking committee hopefully that will rise from the ashes. I just want to say that. All right, so now we'll go. So we'll go to agenda item six now, old business item A is signing of decision. This is 462 Main Street LLC Center East Commons, which we did, was that the last meeting? It's all a blur, but you just sent that out today, right? The final. Yes, I sent it out this afternoon and you may not have had a chance to read it. So you might want to take a chance to read it and then sign it on October 2nd. Could we do that because also Michael and David will be there. Yes, that's right. And they still need to sign it anyway. Putting your PAM, could one of you send it out? Maybe again with a reminder to everyone to read it that it will be voted on on the second. Yes, Jack. Can you remind me what? Because on this theme of parking, how many spaces did we yet approve? 32 parking spaces. And how many units? And there are 16 units. And they have office space as well as residential. But they contend two things. One is that not all of their tenants will have cars, which is true of their building that's right behind. And the other one is that the office space and the residential won't be using parking at the same time. So they're gonna have seven or eight offices, I think seven in the existing building and one in the new building. And those people will be there, you know, nine to five and the residential will be there in the evening. And probably many of them will also be there during the day. But they feel like 32 is adequate. But that was 32 spaces for 16 units. But do you remember how many bedrooms there were? Because that's really where you, you know, because meaning just to compare to Southeast Street Commons, they're all one bedroom. Where, right? No, it's for dwelling units. It's based on parking spaces per unit. But for offices, it is based on square footage. But to get a good idea of the parking demand, you have to, you should look at the build, right? So it's just to keep it to apples to apples a little bit. I was wondering how many bedrooms were in the Southeast. So I don't have the total, but I can give you the numbers. There are four one bedroom units, 10 two bedroom units, and two three bedroom units. So I don't know what that adds up to. Two, three bedroom. So that's six, 20, and four. That's 30, 30 bedrooms. So just interesting. So I felt that the exemption that said, you know, if you have, you know, empty spaces, and you know, at different times of the day, that took care of it under the waiver provision. So you have to figure out where in the bylaw it fits. So it seemed to me that worked out really well. Explain again. So, you know, the requirement is two parking spaces per unit. And so he had 16, and so he had 32 parking spaces, right? And then there were seven other parking spaces that would be used during the day. And I was just assuming that people are gonna be out and about on their six trips per person or whatever. And so that made sense that it fit that exemption. But if the idea is like, well, I don't think everyone's gonna have a car, that's not in the bylaw. And so I think that, you know, there's, I mean, there's some people who might have more than, you know, they might have three cars and stuff like that. So, you know, if you had three bedrooms and, you know, one teenager, you could have seven cars, you know, or, you know, whatever. So I think we had, when doing the waiver, we had to look at the bylaw and say, does it fit? And I think that's what we've been doing. And that's why we've been making so many exceptions. Because we also look at the trends of what's happening. And we look at other buildings. And like we said, with the Main Street, he had a building right next door. So he had fresh data that he's been tracking for years on, you know, how the parking is decreasing over the 10 years and use. So it's right, there is no set number. Right, you know, like what he, Mr. Michi was saying, you know, oh, but there was this number, you know, it's not just arbitrary. But in a way, it is a little arbitrary because there's lots of factors we have to consider. And it isn't always, if we go back to how, I mean, this bylaw for two spots, for two cars, for every dwelling, I mean, that's a, it's a really old bylaw. And it probably does need to be re-looked at. But is it a 50% cut? I don't know. You know, and this is where we're trying to sort of cut. Perhaps that could be a task for the zoning subcommittee because I think that we have to follow the bylaw and follow the exemptions that allows us with the waivers. But if the trend is a way from, you know, people don't need two cars per unit, then, you know, we could look at the data on that and maybe suggest that as a change for the town council. You know, I mean, you might find it not true, you know. Add it to the zoning subcommittee. This might be a good zoning subcommittee. Yeah. I agree. I definitely agree. So we'll sign that on the second. We already did, so we're all done with B, right? Apple, Brooke, that's all good. That came back to you, right? Did we sign? Okay. We have item C here, which is downtown planning, brief discussion. I know, has the town or the planning department been, I know that you've been rolling around some different ideas of, you know, I hear all kinds of things. Recently, we haven't done anything with downtown planning and someone, maybe it was Janet or maybe it was Miss Gremolyn, Miss McGowan or Miss Gremolyn, asked me to put together notes on our last downtown planning forum, which was December of 2017, I think. Anyway, I haven't done that yet, but that's something that I plan to do. And I think that we do have $40,000 to get going with some sort of planning effort in the downtown. It's just a question of someone deciding, yes, we're gonna do this. Yes, this is the right time to do it. Yes, let's go ahead. So is this something that you want to pursue or is it something that you wanna wait for a while? How do you feel about it? Maybe the zoning subcommittee could meet once or twice. I know they started on prioritizations and it was a pretty big chart. We should probably revisit that. I don't know if you've seen that. And I'm hearing things about master planning and some of the town councils wants to look at with zoning. And I think it's really important to be looking at downtown zoning, but we also have to prioritize and figure out what are we, what directions are we moving in in the next year or two? I don't know, do you think that makes sense? The zoning subcommittee, we put together that chart to kind of throw the ball into the town council's court and we're kind of waiting to hear about where they're prioritizing. So yeah, we haven't done anything beyond putting together that list. Did that get sent to town council, Chris? It hasn't really been sent to town council yet, although town council members have attended the zoning subcommittee meetings and have copies of this. I've been attending the community resources committee meetings of the town council and going over the master plan with them kind of line by line and explaining what we've done and what we haven't done. And Ms. McGowan's attended some of those meetings. So they're getting into that and I'm not sure how big their appetite is for jumping into a big planning effort right now. So that's something that I'm trying to get a sense of. I think that's critical because before we put our time into something, even if we think it's important, we have to make sure that it's gonna be received and timely for what they're thinking this year. Yeah. The other thing is that the, who is it? It's the Amherst Municipal Housing, Affordable Housing Trust has hired a consultant with some money that they've received from the state to look at 40R districts. And so they are focusing on the downtown with regard to 40R and have a pretty expansive area that they're thinking of asking to have a 40R district overlaying on. And so that will affect downtown zoning and potentially affect what kinds of developments might come into the downtown. And there's another forum on that that's gonna be scheduled probably for early October at this point. So that's coming up fairly soon maybe when we see what comes out of that. And that's actually gonna be presented to town council to make a change in the zoning bylaw. That would of course come to the planning board for their recommendation before it goes to town council. But so that's something that's kind of in the works that's pretty far along. So if that is in the works, I know next to nothing about 40R and I don't know about the rest of you all but could we have some training or point it even to a video about 40R or should we go to this meeting? But I mean if we're gonna be asked to weigh in on it I think we need to know what it means or where it's being used in other places and such. Yeah, Chris. So I can send you links to some of the materials that have been circulated so far and that have been presented at previous 40R meetings. There have been two meetings so far. I think there was one last spring and one early this summer. But those have slideshows, power points that have explained a lot of this business about 40R and why it would be beneficial for embers. So I'll send those out to you and you can have a look at them. Were those meetings videotaped? Sorry, I see. No. And who's holding those? Like if I was to try to find them, like who's- Embers Municipal Housing Trust. It is. It's one of their- The four front of this. They're the ones who actually got the technical assistance grant from the state. Thank you. Janet? In the downtown planning meetings, I went to the second one which was about like what do you want to see downtown? What was the first one about? The first one was general information about what would you like to have happen downtown or what's wrong with our downtown? It was actually a really good discussion. I think there were maybe almost 100 people there. That was a really big show. And it was in the Jones Library and people really got engaged. And there's a lot of material on that, on the planning, a little too engaged show. That was the second one. No, the second one that was the bank center one that was- Oh, that was the second one. That started with a bank. That was not fun. I think when there was small groups, a lot of good information was good. So that information is- The information about the first one is online. Information about the second one, no. Because I remember at the end of that meeting I was thinking that maybe the third form or third, a third form could be just on the look of buildings because that is a very hot issue. And I've always thought people, it's not as critical in a way what goes on in the building to people as how it looks. And so that seems like a hot issue. Maybe people could do that, talk about that. And then kind of, I think a question about who do you want to live downtown? Because I think there's a fear that it's just going to become filled with students. And so we'll have like sort of elderly people and wailing surrounded by students. And so maybe that's what kind of mix do we want to have to when I've condos downtown, more of that kind of thing. But people are super engaged in that. And I think, I'm sure people would really come to a thing. And I sort of fear waiting for the town council because I think they're actually from the CRC meetings looking to the planning board for some direction too, because they're getting their feet wet. And I think we're supposed to be revising the master plan as a planning board the next year or so. So I hear what you're saying on what people want, but what I would want, because we have to keep it to what the planning board can do and their jurisdiction. So it's more about, I think at first, what can we build? Part of the problem is we're limited by the existing zoning we have, whether it be the BL or we don't have form-based code. So like look and feel, we have no controls over, which is, and who lives there? Well, I don't know if we ever have control over that, but maybe part of the form can be with the existing zoning we have now, these are the options we can build. If you changed this or this or this, these are other options that you can have. Like you said condos, that would be great, but it's nobody can really build condos right now, downtown, so that's why it doesn't happen. So it's great for people to want things that we want to hear that, but then we have to, as the planning board realize, and tell them like we hear you, but you can't build that right now, but this is what we would have to do, because maybe that jump starts the conversations to get people realizing, oh, you do have to change the BL in this way to get that, go ahead Jack. I think from history, we were presented in a pretty detailed manner how you cannot build. If there were an empty lot in the BL district, you would not be able to construct a building and meet the bylaw requirements. So it, pardon me. With residential use. Right, with residential use. We can build, that's why the Hallock building is there. Well, the Hallock building combined two lots to make it happen. I'm pretty sure that John Coon mentioned that. But it doesn't have residential in it. So the question is, number of dwelling units per acre or lot area required per dwelling unit, that's what really is screwed up about the BL district, because you can't really even build one dwelling unit on that lot that, on Hallock Street. Right, never mind condos. Yeah, that's a problem. Yeah, it's a limitation. So it sounds like, so we'll hear more from you and the zoning subcommittee, I think that can be a good discussion to sort of regroup on what needs to be done, which is massive. D, topics non-anticipated in 48 hours. Do we have any of those? Jack. I just, I'm scared. But I just have this issue rattling around in my head with the town and where we're going in terms of sustainability, where we have the four large municipal projects on the table. And the only way to pay for it is from our tax revenue, which is based on our residents. And I'm hearing so many people grumbling about moving out of town if the taxes go up and we are already really high. So I'm wondering from a zoning perspective, is there something that we're missing in terms of looking at a commercial industrial area? I wanna make sure we're not missing out on a business friendly type thing, other than this mixed use project that we see quite often. But I think we should keep our eye on the potential to develop a zoning where we're facilitating a commercial industrial area within town, which we really don't have. I guess University Drive used to be there. Chris, could we have a map for the next meeting on just showing where the industrial commercial zones are left in town? That would probably be the first step. And then, and we can look at those because it's not that many of them and sort of take inventory. And then I don't know if you have any input then you could add on areas that maybe could be here. Yeah. So we do have PRP, we have professional research park and a lot of the PRP has been used to date for housing, Greenleaves is the prime example. And now we're having Aspen Heights coming along and Aspen Heights is gonna take up some PRP land. The PRP land we have on Belcher Town Road is primarily wetland. And so it's hard to find enough land to actually build something on. I think Ronald Lavertia has some property on Largsford Drive that could be built on. And then we have PRP in North Amherst and some of it is not served by sewer and water. So although someone might wanna build something there, they or the town are gonna have to put in the infrastructure to make it possible for someone to build something there. So we could have a discussion about those things as well as the commercial and industrially zoned properties and it might be revealing. But I do wanna say two things I guess. One is that the residential development that we're seeing now is actually producing a lot of taxes in terms of hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. And two is we haven't seen the benefit yet of our marijuana. So we have a very, we have some in North Amherst. We're going to have two or three more on a university drive. So they may produce some income that will alleviate some of our taxes. So I just wanted to mention those things. Jenna. I'd be interested in talking about that especially like what kind of commercial businesses and industry and like how big can it doesn't need to be? And we do have commercial districts. Are you thinking about larger kind of businesses? So that'd be a good discussion to have. I think we can use a lot more flexibility in our zoning areas too. Like the incubator, what's that thing called? Yeah, that's going in up the earth it does in North Amherst. Is that PRP? That is PRP. Yeah. We discussed in an area that is north of the center of downtown North Amherst. The village, yeah. Particular development wouldn't, but that kind of business could go into, it's probably more apt to go into the profession, to the research and development zone on the west side of university drive. And you know, we'd have to look at the uses, but some of the uses won't fit into the commercial district because they're more suited to restaurants and shops and hairdressers and things like that. So if you add the PRP and the commercial, if we could have some kind of from the GIS, that would be great. Yeah, Jack? And just, I'm just curious the situation where UMass is going to redevelop the apartment, the two apartment complexes on the north end of campus, that's just out of our purview, because it's the university-owned land. Though it might be a P3, which I don't know what that does then, but it's their land, but it might be with a private investment. That's why it's a P3. But it hasn't even gone out for RFP yet. It does sound like that's getting closer, but I don't think there's a whole lot on it yet. Janet was just wondering, does that part of the campus pay taxes, whereas if it's... If it's run by, if it's run by... That is a question, and we are exploring that. We've gotten some indication that if something is run by a private entity that it could be taxable, but it's not clear. And we've asked our town council that a couple of times. He's got experience in Cambridge where Harvard has a lot of property there and they have some public-private things going on and it's hard to assess them for taxes. So it's an open question, but it's certainly something that's worth pursuing. Speaking of universities, Harvard and MIT, they pay payments in lieu of taxes to Cambridge. And so I know, I wonder about that. Are those discussions ongoing or? We do have payment in lieu of taxes from Amherst College and UMass, and I'm not sure about Hampshire College. How much is it? I don't know what the numbers are. And there's different, there's lots of overlay areas, but just remember Harvard and MIT, they're private, just like Amherst. So they would have more ability than say a state university. Well, UMass Low is paying a million dollars to Lowell. So, and I think that's smaller than UMass, Amherst. So I think that's an interesting idea. And the university does pay and they pay for water, they pay for sewer, they pay for a lot of things. But you'd have to get exact numbers, but yeah, you know, right. I'm sure that's always being, in fact, the town is working on their strategic agreement with the future partnership with UMass. Every few years you have to redo it and I know they're working on that right now. So that would be higher powers or re-examining the relationship. Yes. I understand there was a breakfast recently, which I did not attend, the community breakfast with UMass and Chancellor Subswami spoke a lot about the things that UMass does for the town and the amounts of money that UMass pays to the town for various things. So if you have a friend or someone who might have gone to that breakfast, you could talk to them about what they gleaned from that. I unfortunately wasn't able to go, but it's worth finding that out. And just less, I think with the P3s, it depends on the use. Like if they had restaurants in there, that'd probably be restaurant tax. If it's a conference center, well the town maybe could have conference center fees like you know when you pay all of that. So I think they're not even at that point, so it will depend on the usage. But there's no tax, I don't think of the building itself because that's the whole point, it's on university land. So there's so much about to happen. All right, so we'll continue Jack's comment with investigating the industrial, commercial and PRP. Okay, so I'm hoping you'll say no, but for new business, A, anything, 48 hours, new, okay, good. Section eight, form A, ANR, subdivision applications. We have one form A, and I'll show it to you. It's a property on Ball Lane. You're probably familiar with it. It's actually, this particular property is between Ball Lane and Puppet Hill Road. But someone is finally wanting to develop a piece of property there and potentially build a house. So Pam created this wonderful map here which shows the property between Ball Lane and Puppet Hill Road on the far northeast corner is where someone wants to carve out a piece of property. And I'll come around with the ANR plan and show you that. But meanwhile you can pass this map around. So this is the property that's been for sale for a long time. Did it finally get broken up? And are you saying one of the lots got sold? They haven't completely broken it up. They've just carved out this one property just for one house. So my senses, they may continue to do this, carve off frontage lots, potentially eventually carve off a flag lot or two. But they're going at this piecemeal right now. That's a great question. Our end zone district, so this is a little property that's 20,000 square feet. And it doesn't really need to be a frontage. And it's a little bit square property. You can build a single family house there. That's pretty normal. Nice spot. And it's just enough for the building circle I see. Yeah. Yeah. And here's the plan. The essential question is, does this require subdivision control? And the answer is no, because there's no roadway when you create it. It's just to see what's being created as a frontage line. Number nine, upcoming ZBA applications. Anything, Pam? Thanks. 10 upcoming SPP, SPR, SUB's applications. We have one that we just received at some Emmerst College, which is preparing to redo some of its fields along North Hampton Road. There's one particular field that they're really going to upgrade into a tournament level soccer field. Soccer field. I think that's right. Anyway, we just received the package today, and we haven't completely reviewed it. But you'll be seeing that probably October 16. This is around the stadium area? Where the? It's just sort of opposite Blue Hills and Dana Street. It is that area. Right there, that area. OK. So 11, Planning Board Committee and Liaison Reports. We'll just stop PVPC. Jack. The next meeting is October 10th, Thursday. And I don't know about the new director, whether she's officially on board as of yet, because Tim Brennan's signature was on this last email. I don't think they've made an announcement. So CPAC, Michael's not here. Ag Commission? Yeah, so I attended the meeting in July and the meeting for September got canceled, because there was not a quorum. So the next one will be in October. Thank you. Design Review Board, Michael's not here. Don't have the Housing Trust Zoning Subcommittee. They'll meet the next meeting on the second downtown parking working group. The consultant is in final draft of their recommendations and implementation, and they'll actually be coming to the town council on Monday to present the draft final plan to start the education process with the town council and also hear questions from the town council to hear what they're thinking. And that should be done in the next month. The final report should come out. Number 12, Report of the Chair. Yikes. Nothing. 13, Report of Staff. I have two things to say. One is congratulations to all of you who have been elected officers of the Planning Board. And I will extend my help to you in any way I can. This will my staff. Thank you, Pam. We're looking forward to working with you. The second thing is that John Hornick would like to come and speak with you about the Amherst Housing Policy on October 2. So I just realized that you have scheduled a mere to be at 7.05. Is that right? So I'm wondering if we can squeeze John Hornick in first. Do you want to meet at 6.30, or just squeeze John Hornick in in the beginning, or how can we do this? It sounded like there was a pretty high chance that the owner wants October 2, but the actual workers were like, ugh. So if you reach out to them, I mean, you can tell them, can we bump you? But they might even be going to the 16th. Right. We'll work it out. Because they want to come first, the housing committee. They would like to come first. I mean, they could come later in the evening. That would be OK. How long do you think they want? I think they want a half hour. They want to be able to present the policy to you, and then they want you to be able to have a discussion with them about what your take on it is. And we did send it out to you about a month ago. You did. Right? So you can look for an email from late August from me sending that to you. I printed it, but I. We'll send it again. I didn't read it yet. Yeah. And we'll copy it and put it in your pack. OK. Great. Thank you. Anyone else have anything else? Thank you, everyone. Adjournment, do I hear a motion? Move to adjourn. And I think Janet, I saw her hand second it. So all hands up. Yep, unanimous. Thank you.